User talk:Cryptic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


rollback script[edit]

Hi Cryptic, just saw your message about this. I'm not sure where to put it. I put it in my common.css but it didn't seem to do anything. I don't know of my .js stuff can interfere - that's a bit of a mess but I just put up with the error messages now. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 15:01, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

I don't see anything in your common.js that would interfere. The css will only affect rollback links added by Mediawiki itself, so it won't do anything about ones added by Twinkle. Twinkle might interfere with the Mediawiki ones, too - I don't use it, so can't be sure. —Cryptic 15:16, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
I misunderstood the discussion. I like having the rollback link in my watchlist as it shows me if an edit is the latest edit. Unless there's something else that will do the same thing, which wouldn't surprise me, I'd rather take the risk of accidental rollback. Thanks for the quick reply. Doug Weller talk 15:38, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Klassroom.[edit]

Dear Cryptic, you have deleted the page Klassroom citing no reliable source and not of importance (A.7)

However the wiki page has multiple sources including news articles and is also a affiliated educational institute which is exempt from section A.7

Requesting you to kindly republish the page or provide guidance as to how can it be restored. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nadude (talkcontribs) 10:03, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

It had routine announcements that it was seeking funding. Those are not news articles in any reasonable sense, and they verified almost nothing in the article. It's also not an educational institution in any sense. See WP:CORP for our inclusion criteria. —Cryptic 11:01, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Dear Cryptic,

All the given links are of news portals, and facts auch as number of centers, financial holding structure of the company, list of investors has bene provided in those articles. While the headline of the news article suggests about fund raising, the same wasn't mentioned anywhere in the wiki article. In fact all the facts and figures quoted on the wiki page have been memtioned clearly in the news articles, which were used as citations.

Kindly assist in page restoration.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nadude (talkcontribs) 18:18, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm not going to restore this. Your avenue of appeal is WP:Deletion review. —Cryptic 13:45, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Polyisobutene listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Polyisobutene. Since you had some involvement with the Polyisobutene redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Thryduulf (talk) 14:43, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

your assistance please...[edit]

Erica Procunier is an alumnus of the Canadian Film Centre's prestigious residency program.

I request userification of Erica Procunier, an expired {{prod}} you deleted. If, after an examination I don't think an article is likely, I'll speedy delete the userified version.

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 19:28, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Entire content was '''Erica Procunier''' is a [[Canada|Canadian]] film and television composer.<ref>{{Cite web|url = http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2421501/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1}}</ref> She has composed for [[And Now a Word from Our Sponsor]]. External links to www.ericaprocunier.com, IMDB again, and cfccreates.com/alumni/658. Want the categories? —Cryptic 20:33, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Ah. Okay. Don't need userification. Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 01:35, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Jq_(programming_language)[edit]

I can't understand this deletion. Wikipedia has lost the page for the open source language JQ. Jordinas (talk) 07:11, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

@Jordinas: (talk page stalker) FYI the reason was Expired PROD, concern was: The only reference is primary, as are all external links. No indication that this is more than a personal project. Article was created by Jordinas, whose contributions all involve adding links to jq from other pages; COI likely.. ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&logid=96412147 deletion log). If you do indeed have a COI, I suggest declaring it. If you intend to recreate the page, I would also suggest submitting it to AfC rather than creating it in mainspace. Just my 2 cents. If you are just someone who codes in Jq and wanted to right about it, then feel free to disregard. --DannyS712 (talk) 07:15, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi, the jq language was, indeed, at one time very much a personal project of [[1]|Stephen Dolan], however, it isn't just a personal project any longer, and I don't see why it should matter if it was anyways, as jq is a very popular language. jq has two current maintainers not the original author, and has had quite a few [[2]|contributors]. jq is ranked at #46 on the [[3]|Rosetta Code rankings], for whatever that is worth. The fact that jq continues to be hosted at a personal repository on GitHub is hardly important, as it is trivial to create an organization for a personal project -- the complaint here appears to be purely about style, that the homepage being on a personal GitHub is somehow bad. As to COI, I don't see it. Was it Stephen Dolan who created it? I don't know who [[User:Jordinas]|Jordinas] is, but, if it is the GitHub user [[4]|fadado], then that is just a fan of the language. FWIW, [[User:Cryptonector]|I] am one of the current maintainers of jq, which you can see by looking at the commit history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cryptonector (talkcontribs) 23:41, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Vitruvian Barnstar Hires.png The Technical Barnstar
For this answer. Not a hard thing to answer if you know it, but that's something that's going to be super, super helpful to me in the future. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:47, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

90.224.198.15[edit]

Could you please revoke talkpage access from user:90.224.198.15 . CLCStudent (talk) 20:13, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom[edit]

Yes, bingo, many thanks! GiantSnowman 11:40, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

NPP Query[edit]

Can you kindly write a query about retrieving the following data:-

  • I would wish to see the the date of flag-removal and the reason behind it, (as indicated in the log).
  • I would be also interested in knowing the date of perm-grant and the reason; for doing so.
  • All the users who are currently indefinitely blocked and/or globally locked but have the NPP flag. Additionally, the date and the block-reasons or lock-reasons.

Thanks! WBGconverse 19:02, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

quarry:query/33247 for the first three bullets. This is only accurate for grants/revocations in November 2012 or later, when the log format changed; I don't remember offhand when the patroller group was added, but I think it was well after that. Also doesn't account for promotions to sysop, so there's probably false positives.
I haven't looked into how locked users are represented in the db before, so that'll be later. —Cryptic 02:37, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Blocked patrollers are at quarry:query/33250. quarry:query/33249 shows there's no globally-locked users with NPP on enwiki. If there were, you could get the lock log with something like

SELECT /*...other stuff...*/, log_timestamp, log_user_text, log_params, comment_text
/*...*/
JOIN metawiki_p.logging_logindex
	ON log_title = CONCAT(/* user_name from user_groups join user query */, '@global');
JOIN metawiki_p.comment
	ON log_comment_id = comment_id
WHERE log_type='globalauth'
	AND log_action='setstatus'
	AND log_params LIKE '%lock%'

though, really, there's never going to be more than one at a time, and that only if someone were really remiss, and it'd be easier to go to meta and search the logs directly. —Cryptic 04:33, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for being so fast and so efficient:-) Your help is appreciated! WBGconverse 12:39, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Arbitration[edit]

Hi Cryptic, Can you please advise me how to close the arbitration case for Future.perf? Thanks in advance - Stevepeterson (talk) 02:26, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

@Stevepeterson: Better that you don't try yourself; the arbitrators are a bit territorial. Just add something like "I withdraw this request." to the end of your statement. —Cryptic 02:47, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Never mind, I see you've already done so. Just give it some time. —Cryptic 02:51, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Great , thank you so much. Stevepeterson (talk) 03:08, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Mike Bailey (wrestler)[edit]

Hi,

I contacted Kurykh on 02/14 and he is not active. Can you help me please (if not just say : NO but I just want an answer).

--Sismarinho (talk) 15:10, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

No, I can't; admins don't have the authority to just undelete articles deleted at AFD on their own say-so. You need to take this to WP:Deletion review. —Cryptic 22:11, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
I'll consider that you don't want to help me. I'm french, I dont don't know what I must do and your answer will not help me. I stop thixs message now because I'm anger against you.--Sismarinho (talk) 09:20, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Restoration of wiki page Matthew Tee Kai Woon[edit]

Dear Cryptic, I want to help fix the page for 'Matthew Tee Kai Woon' it seems like it had citation, reference, copy paste issues. I believe I can fix these issues and resubmit it to you for your consideration. Hoping for a positive reply from your side. Regards, Mansoor Mansooriqbalnagori (talk) 07:52, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

The article was deleted as a copyright violation. It can't be restored and fixed iteratively; you have to start a new article from scratch (for which you don't need my permission). —Cryptic 08:58, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for prompt reply. Mansooriqbalnagori (talk) 09:03, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Deletion log Mehbooba (2018 film)[edit]

why do you think this page should be deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dudeboy7 (talkcontribs) 08:46, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

The previous version I deleted a year ago, or the revisions I hid today? —Cryptic 11:04, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Tyler Rogers[edit]

Thank you. 2601:188:180:1481:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 15:47, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

User:Saad_Ahmed2983/sandbox[edit]

Flagging a sandbox that may be of interest to you, related to your deletion of Zcode. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:45, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Love You Two[edit]

Hi, there's already a draft for this article. Please check if it passes AFC. Thanks. Draft:Love You Two

Rama Arbitration Case[edit]

You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 10, 2019, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:41, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:41, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Previous listing as a party[edit]

My apologies for the above section stating that you are a party. You are not, I made a mistake with the template. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:51, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular[edit]

Icon of a white exclamation mark within a black triangle
Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 03:02, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


Jay Shetty[edit]

Is it possible for me to get a userspace copy of this deleted article? This subject came up in dinner conversation recently and I was surprised that he did not have an article. A quick news search leads me to believe there's a strong case for notability. ~Kvng (talk) 18:26, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

No better than the draft version. Full text (by Studs88) was: —Cryptic 02:36, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Jay Shetty is a public speaker who gives motivational speeches to several corporate, educational and charity institutions.He lives in London,work for Accenture company as Digital Strategy, Innovation & Social Branding + Meditation/Lifestyle Coach.He is an active member of his local temple and organizes festivals attended by over 60,000 people.He also coaches corporate individuals in mindfulness and was invited to coach 1000 consultants at Twickenham Rugby Stadium in 2014.He had organised food distribution programs and Sewa Day initiatives[1].
  1. ^ "Jay Shetty | Asian Professional Awards". www.theprofessionalawards.com. Retrieved 2016-03-31.

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)[edit]

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


BLP counts[edit]

Hi Cryptic. I forked your queries [5] [6] and I was wondering if you had a moment to look them over and let me know if I'm "doing it right", or missing anything, and whether you think these numbers are "real" (accurate)?

Thanks! Levivich 06:01, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Nothing wrong with the queries per se (the ones I spot-checked, anyway). Checking for infoboxes happens to work very well for footballers, since both players and managers use the same infobox, and the infobox is very consistently used. I have no idea how consistently the other infoboxes you're checking for are used, though - you may be better off looking for category intersections, for which Petscan is the tool of choice. If nothing else, it should provide a useful crosscheck. —Cryptic 10:06, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the response and spot-checking. Petscan seems to crap out for Category:Living people (large categories?), and I can't figure out how to do category intersections on Quarry, or how to search for categories and subcategories. E.g., Living people+Office-holders. The quarry documentation and example scripts don't seem to have the answer. Is there's a help file somewhere I should RTFM? Should I post on RAQ? Thanks again. Levivich 22:14, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Direct category intersections are easy - you'd do something like
SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM page
JOIN categorylinks c1
    ON c1.cl_from = page_id
JOIN categorylinks c2
    ON c2.cl_from = page_id
WHERE c1.cl_to = 'Living_people'
    AND c2.cl_to = 'Office_holders';
(and maybe add a "AND page_namespace = 0" to limit it to mainspace pages, though there should only be mainspace pages in Category:Living people anyway).
Subcategories are less straightforward, and if there's an efficient way to do it besides either enumerating the subcategories manually (like "AND c2.cl_to IN ('Subcategory_name_1', 'Subcategory_name_2', 'Subcategory_name_3')") or doing a text match on them (like "AND c2.cl_to LIKE '%_politicians'"), then I don't know it.
The quarry documentation and other query examples on meta mostly assume that you already know SQL and just aren't familiar with the Mediawiki database schema, so there's no FM I'm aware of for you to R to get better specifically at Wikipedia queries. WP:RAQ is reasonably well-watched by knowledgeable folks despite being underutilized; posting there's a good idea. —Cryptic 01:49, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, that's very helpful! --Levivich 02:02, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Ayman Zakaria Jomaa[edit]

Hi, just wondering if you could take a look at the move request that's been opened at Talk:Ayman Joumaa (disambiguation). I see you were involved with the AfD and subsequent protection for Ayman Zakaria Jomaa a few years ago. A new article has been created with the incorrect spelling Ayman Zakaria Joumaa, I don't know how this differs from the version that was deleted so WP:G4 may or may not apply, but if it looks good perhaps you could lift protection and move it to the correct title? Regards. PC78 (talk) 16:13, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

The text is very different. The references aren't the same, but are of the same character - they're namedrops, PR releases, and an interview. Probably needs a new AFD, though another admin might be willing to G4 it (I'm very cautious with G4 and G11 specifically because I think we should use them much, much more often than we do). I'll unprotect, though. —Cryptic 16:59, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. I've moved the article but will leave it to others to determine notability. Appreciate the help. PC78 (talk) 17:18, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

A cupcake for you![edit]

Choco-Nut Bake with Meringue Top cropped.jpg Happy first edit day! Oshawott 12 ==()== Talk to me! 04:54, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Congratulations!![edit]

Balloons-aj.svg Hey, Cryptic. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day!
Mjs1991 (talk) 12:50, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Face-smile.svg


Curious about a stat[edit]

Can you be kind enough to write a quarry-code, that outputs the gender-values of all users, who participated over Wikipedia:Community response to the Wikimedia Foundation's ban of Fram? Regards, WBGconverse 18:06, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

@Winged Blades of Godric: I'm not Cryptic, but see quarry:query/36641 (although that excludes users who only participated before the page was moved from BN). * Pppery * it has begun... 18:31, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
quarry:query/36843 has the aggregate values. Want the pre-BN split data too? Actually, it doesn't change that much; I just folded it into the same query. —Cryptic 21:05, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Many thanks to both of you. WBGconverse 15:19, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
These results confirms my impression of the AN discussion about blocking WMFOffice, too. I had a comment to make about this disparity but I don't think it would be welcome right now. But it would be interesting if it was noted in any coverage by the Signpost. It is like a blaring siren to some of us. Liz Read! Talk! 04:03, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
It's been a depressingly long time since my sole undergraduate-level course in statistics, but I don't think this shows much of anything. Even setting aside that barely half of the editors there set the preferences value to anything, the ratio isn't all that far off from declared users overall (115941:576106 female:male, or about one sixth). Trying to count the number of undeclared users overall is problematic for a couple reasons - the way the db is set up makes it several orders of magnitude slower, and the overwhelming majority of registered user accounts never edit at all, let alone set preferences. —Cryptic 04:52, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Careful about daring to combat the biases of an agenda-driven admin. You might find yourself sent to the loony bin if you continue to exhibit wrongthink supported by facts. 205.175.106.196 (talk) 19:53, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Sissy Spacek (band)[edit]

Hello Cryptic. I hope you're well. You deleted the page Sissy Spacek (band) back in May 2008 and I was wondering if it could be brought back to life please? I believe the band is significant in the noise scene and I would like to try and expand and add sources to what was there before. Many thanks. --Ichosethisusername (talk) 19:22, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Besides maintenance tags, the entire content (written by MrBook; please attribute if you actually use any of this) was "Sissy Spacek is an experimental grindcore band comprised of John Wiese and Cory Ronnau. Their music typically consists of Ronnau on vocals and Wiese on bass/drum machine, with the results often cut up at a very fast tempo using a computer. [[Category:Experimental musical groups]]". —Cryptic 20:04, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the quick response. I think I will start from scratch if I may? --Ichosethisusername (talk) 20:30, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
Seems for the best. (Though it's not like you need my permission.) —Cryptic 20:39, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

You posted the same diff twice ....[edit]

In your last edit to the RfA, you posted the same diff twice. Letting you know because I agree and I'd like to respond once you supply the second diff. Softlavender (talk) 10:42, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Ack. Thanks. Tried to swap the order at the last minute, and apparently the second paste didn't go through. —Cryptic 10:45, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Question about NFCC#3[edit]

Hi Cryptic. Your last post in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive310#User:Marchjuly on Arsenal W.F.C. was quite interesting and I meant to follow up a bit more on it. Do you have an opinion on File:Ireland Football Team Badge.png and File:Football Association of Ireland logo.svg? These both seem to be essentially the same file with the only difference being the names added to the badges themselves. This photo seems to the teams do use the "Ireland" version, not the "FAI" one. Moreover, there is quite a low TOO in the UK which might also be the standard for Ireland as well. This is not a question about whether national association's are "parent entities" and individual teams are "child entities"; only about how (or if) you think that NFCC#3 would apply to files such as these. I'm not going to run of and request that one of these be deleted based upon your response, but rather am more interested in it from an overall NFCC interpretation/application standpoint because it's something which has come up with respect to other files over the years and there does appear to be some different opinions on this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:45, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Well, first of all, I've always been of the opinion that no svg file that's above the threshold of originality and that's an exact representation of it's subject matter can meet NFCC#3b - they're inherently of infinite resolution. In particular, the edits to them to reduce their default sizes that are typically done, nominally to make them comply with 3b, accomplish nothing whatsoever. But no attempt to make sane policy about nonfree vector imagery has gotten anywhere between the fair-use maximalists and the technically ignorant, and it's not what you're asking about anyway. So for the rest of this I'm going to assume the images were both the same (raster) format, and pixel-for-pixel identical except for the text.
For use on Wikipedia, the country of origin's TOO doesn't matter; we treat images as public domain if they're below the US's threshold. The only difference it's going to make is whether we can move the image to Commons. I don't know what the TOO in Ireland is, and neither does Commons, apparently; but even if it's similar to the UK's, and just the "FAI" and "Ireland" texts are copyrightable in their country of origin by themselves without the surrounding artwork, that's not going to make any difference to which image we use, or whether we can justify using both.
Let's assume the "Ireland" image is already in use on FC Example Iota, and you're trying to decide whether to use the "Ireland" or "FAI" image to use on FC Example Phi. In both cases, Wikipedia would be displaying two different pages, each showing one copyrighted image on it. If you reused the "Ireland" image, though, Wikipedia would then be hosting only one fair-use image, instead of the two it would have to host if you were to use the "FAI" image. That's more in keeping with both the intent and wording of NFCC#3a.
However, that's not enough of a reason to display the "Ireland" logo on FC Example Phi if the "FAI" image is the one that the team actually uses. Even if both teams occasionally used a third version of the image without any text, but usually used versions with text specific to the individual team, I don't think it would justify using the textless one for both solely to eliminate an image. Our purpose isn't just to build a free encyclopedia, it's to build a free encyclopedia too, and the balance enwiki's chosen has fallen pretty far toward the encyclopedia side when these goals have conflicted. (At least for images. Don't get me started about album articles.)
The NFCC argument's only going to make a difference when there isn't any reason external to Wikipedia to choose one image or the other. That's the scenario I thought I saw in the AN thread you linked above - it looked very much like you were switching to the Ladies version of the logo, despite its inaccuracy, solely because the textless one had already been found to be inappropriate on that page. —Cryptic 03:56, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the detailed reply. First, I think I'm in agreement with you about svgs; there's been alot of converting of non-free files to svg lately and it is something which has come up for discussion based upon what's written in FREER, but as you post there's quite a bit of disagreement about it and is probably going to be something which will continue to be disagreed upon. (FWIW, the last time I asked about this was Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 69#WP:FREER and svg files)
I probably shouldn't have just mentioned TOO like I did without better explaining the reasons why. I'm just curious about cases where the copyrightable elements of two files are pretty much identical, with the only real difference being non-copyrightable elements; so, essentially the files are the same from a NFCC standpoint, which means other factors might need to be considered to determine which should be used. I did take that as to be part of what you were trying to get at about the two files discussed in that AN discussion, and wanted to see if it might apply to the two Ireland files. Maybe the files discussed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2018 June 10#File:Florida Gators men's basketball logo.svg are a better example. All of these files are basically the same except for the team names; they were added as a result of Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2015 December 15#File:Florida Gators logo.svg. (I did mention the "team" Twitter logos as a possibility, but wasn't sure; someone else uploaded them all and then added them to the various articles). Anyway, this kind of thing is something I've wondered about ever since, and did previously ask about it with respect to the two AN files, but started wondering about it again after reading your post.
Another reason I'm asking about this is because of Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2019 June 20#File:Confederação Brasileira de Futebol (escudo).svg with respect to the noon-free use in the women's national team. I get the meaning of the stars, but they seem to be pretty much non-copyrightable elements and the crest/badge is the essentially same without them; as you point out though, this might not matter as much what the team is actually using. I did a bit of digging to try see how national federations officially brands their teams; as I pointed out at WT:FOOTY#Determining the official branding of national teams, this appears to vary quite a bit so it's hard to find one rule to fit all situations. In the case of Brazil, the women also actually do seem to use the logo with the five stars on their uniforms even though they clearly haven't won the Women's World Cup five times. I get the reasons why some may feel that the star-logo shouldn't be used on the women's team and I felt the same way; now, however, I'm not so sure now.
The original reason some of these files were being removed had to do with the relationship between parent and child entities, and not really anything to do with gender. Individual teams were being seen as child entities of their parent organization or they were seen as using the branding of "another" team (i.e. they didn't seem to have their own branding identity, organization, official websites, etc. but basically seemed to be part of Sports clubs around the world|another larger team/organization); so, using non-free files that weren't individual team specific in the "child" team articles was interpreted as not complying with the NFCC. Of course, this interpretation might have been wrong and there is currently an ongoing discussion to try and sort this part out
Beyond the parent/child entity thing though is sort of what you've mentioned about Wikipedia being a free "encyclopedia". Assuming there are no non-free issues to worry about, I'm trying to figure out whether the logo/badge the team has choosen for itself or has had chosen for it by its national federation should be the one used in the article, even if it might not seem "correct" contextually to do so. Germany national football team uses File:DFBEagle.svg, while Germany women's national football team uses File:DFBWomen.svg and photographs of players from both teams show this to be the case. There's not really an issue with that since the men have won four World Cups and the women have won two; the only issue I thought there might be is whether the stars (most likely non-copyrightable) elements were a problem per NFCC#3, but you clarified this pretty well for me. So, as I posted here, if photographs are going to be used to determine whether a non-free file should be used for official branding, then maybe the second FFD about the Brazillian team badge also got it just as wrong about the non-free use in the women's team article as the first FFD discussion did, but only for different reasons. Sorting out how and when the NFCC applies to this type of logo use might resolve the "free" part, but the "encylopedic" part might also need some clarification too. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:39, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Category:Anarchist writers[edit]

I went ahead and repopulated Category:Anarchist writers. Thanks for providing the link on the talk page showing the prior contents of that category! Jd4v15 (talk) 05:41, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Remove full protection RCA Inspiration[edit]

Hi, can we trial removing the full protection of RCA Inspiration? {{ping|waddie96}} {talk} 14:51, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

@Waddie96: OMG. I'd meant to semi, not full - the indef and "remove at discretion" note in the log was so that the (unusually persistent) sock who'd been plaguing it for years wouldn't be given a date to check back on. —Cryptic 15:50, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
Thank you {{ping|waddie96}} {talk} 10:24, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Notice[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Topic Ban Request: TakuyaMurata. Hasteur (talk) 23:54, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

For your ongoing efforts[edit]

Vitruvian Barnstar.png The da Vinci Barnstar
For your ongoing efforts providing query assistance at WP:RAQ, especially your ability to see beyond the requesting text to capture the spirit of the request. –xenotalk 23:34, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

wrongability???[edit]

I believe you nounified incorrectly. The word you're looking for is wrongitude. Or, perhaps, wrongitudinosity. But not wrongability. -- RoySmith (talk) 02:02, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Not my misnounification! It's a direct quote from Red Dwarf. —Cryptic 02:07, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
Ah, transferal of blame. Nice. -- RoySmith (talk) 02:11, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary![edit]

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process[edit]

Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:44, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

TY[edit]

Thank you for building a quarry query! -- GreenC 16:35, 16 November 2019 (UTC)