Jump to content

User talk:Djm-leighpark/Archives/2021 1

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


An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cork, Blackrock and Passage Railway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spike Island.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Your oppose of Hog Farm's RfA

Your oppose of Hog Farm's RfA doesn't appear to make sense, would you mind clarifying it? Not saying it's not a good reason to oppose, I'm saying I can't figure out whether it's a good reason because I don't know what it is. Sorry for any inconvenience. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 19:16, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

It's a perfectly good reason for me personally to weak oppose but this does not necessarily apply to others.Djm-leighpark (talk) 19:37, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
What I'm saying is that it didn't make any semantic sense and seemed like word salad, but given that it's really no big deal (especially since the RfA's probably going to pass anyway) I won't push it. Have a great day! – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 04:19, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited DWWR 4, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CIE.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:19, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Brantham TMD

For the record I have no conflict of interest with any of the parties connected to Brantham TMD. Wishful thinking on your behalf it would appear. Yumosumo (talk) 08:16, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

No problems. Fair enough. You've not contributed to much else. When people start disruptively interferring with closed discussions I'm going to start looking and asking. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 08:18, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

French

If you've got a O level in French, I'd say you were at fr-2. Of course, it's probably gone rusty with lack of use (Isn't Google Translate wonderful?). I had to drop French from my exams because of a clash with other subjects, which is why I only claim fr-1. Mjroots (talk) 07:03, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

  • I would probably say I've people failed to teach me french over 7 years ... but I have a smattering of vocab. and grammar ... and maybe know just enough to have scraped through a written O-level at that point in time. While my single contribution to French Wikipedia may look impressive I'm quite frankly not really at fr-1 as while I might be able to read parts of some pieces at level of fr-3 I would have deficiencies and gaps at a level of fr-2. In a lot of ways I'd really have a gap at fr-1 as I've only groccled over to France maybe 3/4 times on day trips and a couple of times of 3 day trips. So very rusty. Djm-leighpark (talk) 08:18, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Principles of Adenovirus vector vaccines

Hi, do you have any clues about Adenovirus vector vaccines ? I guess not, so please read any text about it before editing. 2A01:E0A:852:9590:1010:5716:8D8A:456 (talk) 15:55, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Keeping guessing, but I'd suggest asking at the WP:TEAHOUSE about this rather than fruitlessly littering my talk page. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:41, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@Alexbrn: What are you doing ??? This is the basic principle of Adenovirus vector, why do you remove it ? Please read the introduction of https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4507798/ 2A01:E0A:852:9590:1010:5716:8D8A:456 (talk) 16:00, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@Djm-leighpark I don't see what you mean, it is you who decided to revert my edits. I am asking to explain. Anything you don't like in the source I gave ? This is the first google result for 'Adenovirus vector vaccine'. So I'll have to guess what you don't like here, that in the Covid AZD1222 papers they are not explaining the underlying mechanism? I am not responsible for it, that's the same with every vaccines.

You can search for 'how adenovirus vaccine works' you'll find https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/health/oxford-astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine.html, same as what I was explaining in the article, but more lengthy. 2A01:E0A:852:9590:1010:5716:8D8A:456 (talk) 22:56, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@2A01:E0A:852:9590:1010:5716:8D8A:456: Content needs to be cited with WP:MEDRS in the source, trying to explain in the summary is pointless. Its pretty pointless discussing with me - I'd suggest to ask at WikiProject Medicine or the WP:TEAHOUSE. for directions. Thankyou. 23:23, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
I don't understand anything of what you are writing. Asking about what to who? Can you be more friendly please? 2A01:E0A:852:9590:1010:5716:8D8A:456 (talk) 23:28, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
@2A01:E0A:852:9590:1010:5716:8D8A:456: If you don't understand me the surely obvious thing is to seek help elsewhere, and I have directed you where to get advice. WP:TEAHOUSE is meant to friendly, I'd suggest there. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:38, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
It is you who reverted my edit. You won't explain why? Why should I ask for help anywhere, and which kind of help, about what? 2A01:E0A:852:9590:1010:5716:8D8A:456 (talk) 23:46, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Pointless Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:54, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

User talk:Dinoboyaz

English Wikipedia users are allowed to remove almost anything from their own talk pages. See WP:OWNTALK. There's nothing in the level 4 warnings or in the comment from the admin that the user isn't allowed to remove [1], so please don't restore it again. The user is mistaken to state that Calling somebody a hypocrite isn’t a personal attack and that there ISN'T a warning, and I’ve done nothing wrong and that it means the warning doesn’t exist. It does not matter if the user accepts that they have done anything wrong or that the warning was valid. The blanked talk page content is still visible in the page history. They can still be reported and blocked if the behaviour starts again. Meters (talk) 04:56, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@Meters It was removed this time without the snipy summary which was the problem so I'm happy with that. If your not happy and wish to escalate take me to WP:ANI. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 06:53, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Why would I take you to ANI? I didn't even give you a warning. This was just a polite note informing you that you should not restore user talk page comments that have been removed by the user. It does not matter whether you like their edit summary or not. Don't do it. If the edit summary itself is a violation of something then deal with the issue (and a "snippy" comment is not something that needs to be dealt with), but don't restore the blanked content. Meters (talk) 07:00, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
@Meters: Why not? I sat up their at the top in September for quite a number of days because I defended Robert Coey, though I now have reference in deference to part of my defence? per 9781527270282 at Dewrance & Co. Ltd. Djm-leighpark (talk) 07:14, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
I have no idea what you are talking about. I have had nothing to do with either of those articles, and neither has Dinoboyaz. As far as I know I have never had any previous interaction with you anywhere. Please don't ping me about this again. Meters (talk) 07:36, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Ah well. Peoples are always trying to pawn me off with meters that can cut me off remotely.Djm-leighpark (talk) 07:58, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Mike Satow.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Mike Satow.png. 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) 03:35, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Platform 5

Information icon Hello, Djm-leighpark. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Platform 5, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:02, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:SAOImage DS9

Information icon Hello, Djm-leighpark. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:SAOImage DS9, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:03, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:William Creuze

Information icon Hello, Djm-leighpark. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:William Creuze, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:04, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Crop of Film poster for MY Feral Heart showing protagonist Steven Brandon.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Crop of Film poster for MY Feral Heart showing protagonist Steven Brandon.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) 17:16, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Post-vaccination embolic and thrombotic events

I highly doubt this is independently notable - especially if it remains connected to only one vaccine - and I think it may be best if you move this to user/draft space for now until if/when it becomes independently notable from the vaccine. I also think it's way too soon for an independent article even if it's independently notable already because the amount of fully peer-reviewed information on the condition itself is virtually none. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 05:44, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

@Berchanhimez: Several people have considered otherwise and I respectfully disagree. I think think its best if you move it. There is the AfD mechanism if you wish. A controversial merge may also be suggested. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 06:18, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
I think a merge would be best at this point and will propose one. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 18:52, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Given the press coverage and the impact on national vaccination programmes I think this article is notable. JFW | T@lk 12:09, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Gonna use this section in lieu of creating a new one, but I think this edit by you very succinctly and accurately (to the source) describes the fact that while a link still hasn't been proven it is being listed as a side effect because of the increasing chance one is proven. I also wanted to personally apologize if you thought any of my "POV pushing" etc. comments were directed at you - I was directing those comments at editors with few or no edits outside the COVID topic, or those whose only edits within the topic were solely focused on pushing a "this is dangerous ZOMG" conclusion into our articles - neither of which describes you. I am sorry if I didn't make that clear and I hope you'll continue to contribute - I do still greatly value your opinions and viewpoints in the discussions, even if I get a bit terse with you because of some single-purpose people that get me overly frustrated in a discussion, and if I've ever taken that frustration out on you personally I am truly sorry. I also think that your one sentence edit should be used as a guide on how to add this to the AZ vaccine article itself, as well as considered for addition to the main COVID-19 vaccine article, though I'm not certain it would be in line with summary style on that article quite yet (but the main article is a mess to begin with so). -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 23:56, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

I'd just like to second that overall sentiment - Djm-leighpark seems to me to be dealing impressively well with this topic. Sometimes Wikipedia works Alexbrn (talk) 04:55, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Excellent work of yours indeed! - I'm not sure if the precautionary measures in Denmark should go into the article. So I posted it on TP and leave that to your discretion. - Of course one wonders if it all is kicked off by sloppy injection technique in the first place ... --89.15.236.166 (talk) 16:06, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

AZ/JJ thrombosis events

The work you've been doing on that article has given me some reserved hope that maybe there's enough information out there that it would be a good thing to split per WP:ARTICLESIZE. I am going to not start any discussions on merging, deleting, etc. for that article for the near future and see how it goes, but I'll still be trying to ensure that it is in perspective. While I still am of the opinion that it likely will end up either merged into the vaccine articles or turn into an article on "safety pauses" for all of the vaccines (covering everything from clinical trial pauses through the yet-to-happen-but-almost-certain future pauses), I think your work on it is making it more likely that it be the second of those, meaning there's no real reason to merge it. It may turn out to be something like what's going on with a few of the police officers who lied in state after being KIA at the Capitol (which now, 10+ years later, are finding consensuses to delete as not independently notable), but the article is in a much better place now than it was when I proposed the merge and it's NPOV enough that it's not such a pressing concern as to be a POVFORK right now - and there's no deadline to determine the future state. Thanks for bearing with it and improving it continuously. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 21:16, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Section ordering

Is there any justification within WP:MEDSECTION as to why the sections are ordered the way they are? You'd think Pharmacology and medical usage would be first. The ordering does not make sense to me. ViperSnake151  Talk  22:53, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@ViperSnake151: That is a matter for the discussion for change at the WP:MEDSECTIONS talk page if necessary and raising an RFC if justified. I presume the great and good had their reasons; and perhaps I get a hint of their logic. I must admit I initially felt it is not the order I would originally myself would have chosen, especially as "Adverse effects" would have been the top section unless "Medical uses" was also introduced. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 00:57, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Limerick Junction railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tipperary.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

European Commission–AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine dispute

It is difficult to keep up with the changes being made to the article European Commission–AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine dispute. On the whole, I think they are OK, but I was just going to add the word "option" to the 21st April sentence when I found you had already done so. Because I am from the UK and am rather pleased by the success of our vaccine rollout programme, I am aware that I am potentially biased. So it is probably a good thing that a European perspective is being added to the article, as long as it relies on, and follows reliable sources. I wasn't sure whether the La Stampa statement should be included; it may be, probably is, malicious speculation rather than factual reporting. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:43, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

To state the obvious I also am also UK based (with the same potential biases), and agree an EU view needs to be taken, and have the same difficulty as keeping up as Cwmhiraeth, and some concerns at time as to the content added. Source selection may edge towards WP:RECENTISM and there may be a lack of background leading to subtle bias into why decisions cessions are being taken in the context of individual risk/benefit; public health risk/benefit; vaccine global supply chains; manufacturing difficulty; regulatory requirements, etc. Certainly this is too much for me to examine in depth. Djm-leighpark (talk) 10:25, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
@Rominator: Your recent isolation of the section with the title British right-wing media allegations of unused stockpiles and response based on a restricted URL that I can't access and your personal WP:SYNTHESIS of the results based on one region of Germany seems highly WP:POINTy and non-neutral. To state the obvious I don't have (easy free) access to at least one source but this seems yet another example of very selective editing. It's unclear if you are actually turning the article into an unverifiable mess orientated towards your POV. Comments welcome from @Cwmhiraeth welcome. Perhaps you are better to do this on your own web page or something? Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 15:49, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Which URL are you unable to access? I can of course come up with more evidence that no AstraZeneca dose has so far been stockpiled unused because of safety concerns or other reasons (other than as a "buffer" for scheduled appointments) - obviously, this is an unfounded allegation by the likes of Daily Mail/Daily Telegraph and so on (anti-EU propaganda). This should not be part of a neutral, and truthful, Wikipedia article, at least not without regard to the truth. This is obviously not my POV, just facts. As for Germany, if you are looking for exact figures you can only provide figures for states as it is their responsibility to distribute, but these are all very similar, and I picked Germany's largest state. Rominator (talk) 16:01, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Btw, do you not think there would be some contradiction if the EU, on the one hand, was trying everything they can to speed up AZ deliveries, including the current lawsuit, and on the other hand, there were unused stockpiles...? I mean how crazy can this debate get... Rominator (talk) 16:14, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) You have all day to look at this. The situation in Denmark is a particular AZ hoard example, albeit that was more Circa April 10 from memory. And just how important is what the Daily Mail says? Its very reliable when its says there will by a Hurricane next week as it gives some probability it is likely to be windy. The puzzles are quite reliable if I can snitch a free copy. You seem to be making original conclusions from the results. WHO are equally going mental from failures to deploy vaccines. You're missing over 50% of the stuff and going unbalanced and nobody can really keep up. Have a last word but be aware at some point the shite will have to be cleared up. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 16:19, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Denmark is one the countries that has completely banned AZ, but they are not keeping their doses, but give them to other EU states: [2] (in the end, some doses might end up in Ukraine). WHO criticised slow rollout but the reason for this was that the EU did not receive enough doses from AZ, they did not criticise stockpiling of second shots. While it is true that some member states do stockpile second doses, they don't do this with AZ doses (as the article used to insinuate) because the two shots are three months apart. Certainly this has nothing to do with safety concerns or something similar. It's a bit strange that you are accusing me of missing something when your view is obviously biased by deeply dishonest British journalism. I'm entirely happy with a review but reserve the right to defend the truth as Wikipedia should be based on just that. I have now deleted the one conclusion that you have criticised - let the facts stand for themselves, fine. Rominator (talk) 16:35, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
@Rominator: Gotcha: PROVE YOUR ALLEGATION: "when your view is obviously biased by deeply dishonest British journalism". You simply can't OBVIOUSLY PROVE my view is "biased by deeply dishonest British journalism". You may have the opinion it is ... but you don't for certain it is. My view could be biased by my "Spiritual Advisor". My view could be biased by Boris Johnson briefings. My view could be biased by my wife. But when you definitively state "when your view is obviously biased by deeply dishonest British journalism" you've really destroyed you're own credibility. You could have said "I believe your view is biased by deeply dishonest British journalism" and it wouldn't have been a problem. But that is not what you've said. And you've likely used the same process throughout the article. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 16:49, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
The word "obviously" is generally meant to point not to a fact but to perception. OTOH, you are accusing me of "the same process throughout the article" OBVIOUSLY without even having read it. You couldn't make it up... May I suggest we stay with the facts though. Thanks. Rominator (talk) 16:56, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
@Rominator: Suggest what you like, but it is good if people own their perceptions. It is good if I dont have to read tripe or get directed to shite URLs whihc is my wont today it seems. Djm-leighpark (talk) 17:16, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Again, you haven't clarified which URL you perceive to be "shite", so I feel unable to comment further. And again, may I suggest that we talk about specific queries on the talk page of that article for transparency. Rominator (talk) 19:42, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

National Restaurant Association of India

Like you said, I analysed the sources. It also took some time for me to analyse some of the sources I found on doing WP:Before. The results were not disappointing so I had nominated it for AFD. Regards Kichu🐘 Need any help? 17:58, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Follow_Your_Heart_(book)

Could you please help me with the sources and language? Sonofstar (talk) 21:35, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@Sonofstar: Insufficent time. I have a host of stuff to do myself and I'm already in a more of a Phaal than a Madras as the moment (I dont do Vinadloo's as there's something about them and me than don't agree). Suggest try at WP:TEAHOUSE. Its generally worth developing fully in draft rather than trying luck going direct to mainspace, unless you're doing something on the old W&LR like I intend to soon which might keep CommanderWaterford happy. Of course if your are from Chennai I might likely advise goto mainspace as a first choice or go via draft not via AfC as a second. -- Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:21, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

EEA vaccine doses stockpiles tracker

I suggest my talk page is not used as a soapbox unless peoples want me to end up on ANI which is where they will be impolitely requested to take me
@Rominator:The link to the ECDC site is great. I totally AGF your Daily Mail allegations will substantiate (over 99% certainty in my estimation), unfortunately there's a number of issues: You've given insufficient information to allow WP:V and also to check the context; secondly the WP:DAILYMAIL is depreciated. So there may be the beginning of a question if you using this talk page as a soapbox against the UK Tabloids. I fully support the raising of journalism issues at [ipso.co.uk], if you want to leave me full details about it there is a possibility (? 5%-10%) I'd consider raising a complaint after I've looked at it but quite frankly I've got other RL (& WP) stuff that is more my priority. In all events don't email about this. Per User talk:Djm-leighpark/Archives/2018 1#Car user and Daily Mail only reader? I am considered a Daily Mail reader. thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 15:50, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
I've now included a link to the ECDC tool in the article. I won't be posting about the DM on the talk page anymore. To be fair, the article in its earlier version looked like supporting the view that somehow it is the EU's own fault that the initial rollout was rather slow because their leader blackmouthed the safety of the AZ vaccine for political reasons and therefore scared people and delayed the vaccine uptake (this was found not only in the DM but also in some other tabloids etc). The EU has so far received ~40 m doses of AZ for an eligible population of ~400 m in the EEA, so that is around 5% (two doses). Of course there is ongoing demand, and I have not even covered eastern Europe which is much more relying on the AZ rollout. Rominator (talk) 18:26, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
One source today or yesterday (cant remember where), suggested the UK might be stockpiling Pfizer: That could be to ensure second doses and also because the (relatively) low percentage of Covid-19 and per latest UK MHRA side effect AZ data in the population means the Benefit/risk for 30-40 yr olds of AZ vaccination might be marginal and moves might be made to offer Pfizer or Moderna for that age group (as per 20-30 yr old currently). That might also means UK AZ produced vaccines could be released to e.g. COVAX where individual Risk/Benefit is greater (also remember AZ is less logistically challenging than -70c Pfizer ... Fair Isle in the UK could not get Pfizer transported to it - at least very easily). I'm sure the UK wants (and needs) to get to the point where the whole adult (or nearly all of it) population is vaccinated so in that sustainable place any Covid-19 case surge to e.g. a new variant beating the vaccine can be quickly identified and hopefully defeated. The England population density of 432/kmsq is quite high and with a broad ethnic and immigrant mix its very easy for a new variant to get in. I believe JVT wants the vaccination rollout fully completed to avoid slipping down the slope where to where the UK was at the start of the year and needing a complete booster jab rollout to be initiated early.Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:20, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
The UK might be at risk from new variants, the South African variant and probably the Indian variant, but I think that has more to do with the AZ vaccine than with migration. There is a diverse ethnic population in large EU member states, like France and Germany too (though I agree larger Indian and South African population in the UK): AZ has only 50% reduction in asymptomatic infection (even according to AZ's own website, after two shots) and offers little protection against the SA variant and it is so far unclear whether AZ protects against severe disease from these variants (as the groups were too small). These variants are already endemic and the logical conclusion would be that these variants will become dominant and escape immunisation. Perhaps the UK should ditch AZ and go for the mRNA kinds too. Also population density is the same or higher, e.g. in western Germany (the FRG before unification) or the Netherlands, for example. Rominator (talk) 08:53, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allied Academies

You are requested to participate on debate of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allied Academies and add additional discussion categories. Applus2021 (talk) 16:24, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Quick question about AfD

what is a shout? Caleb M1 (talk) 11:20, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Some in UPPERCASE or bold to grab attention. It is likely a standard *Merge: !vote line would have drawn more attention than getting mixed in some other discussion that I did not look at, although to give credit Missvain had her eyes open. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 11:45, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

1979 Argentine Grand Prix

Hi Djm-leighpark. Thanks for all your great work on Gordon Schroeder. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 12:22, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ballynahinch, County Galway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nawanagar.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

I want to apply for the import privilege on WikiBooks

I've decided that I want to take over and finish what has not been done on the Character Encodings wikibook. See here. Alexlatham96 (talk) 05:41, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Good luck! Betwwen RL an a number of drafts/articles here I'm not getting involved for the foreseeable future, and I'm not getting another iron in the fire that could easily end up getting me blocked. If you start to make progress there may be another many hundred pages put to AfD. Since my brain was Covid-19ed the old recall might not be quite as sharp. I'm not on WikiBooks or loggign in regularly to bigdelboy which is what I used for that project so you might need to leave me a message here ... but any stuff on WikiBooks WRT character encodings will be under Bigdelboy (though I used Djm-leighpark for a simpler test book I had going there. I seem to remember any implementation on WikiBooks woud lose functionality compared to an english language Wikipedia. Arguably better to translate the stuff to German and send it to the German WP where they might appreciate it. You can ask me but the project brings up some bad memories. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 07:23, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
I just applied to for the import privilege!Alexlatham96 (talk) 21:57, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
One thing about the import(transwiki) privilege ... there is some sort of option to copy supporting templates ... never under any circumstances use it! It is the equivalent of a pilot raising the undercarriage of a jumbo jet while it is on the ground! Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:56, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
See [Wikibooks:Requests for permissions] for the results of my import request.Alexlatham96 (talk) 02:52, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
I added the missing templates to template space. See for example, here. One of the articles, Code page 37, has been restored! Now I have to determine the name convention for EBCDIC code pages. Alexlatham96 (talk) 22:11, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Best wishes and good luck! Hint: page information gives "Transcluded templates" and that can sometimes help and sometimes not, my memories on this are shot. Also I assume you are talking of a restored code page on English Wikipedia. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:56, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
I found two missing templates. See [3]. Alexlatham96 (talk) 02:51, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

edit war

I am sorry to hear about the low quality of my content which lead you to revert it. Can you please reply me on how can I improve my wikipedia entry skill especially in the sense of verifiability. I am new to this section of wikipedia and I hope you understood that I am a beginner. I just want to say sorry and accept the fact that I have made a mistake but if you can point the exact point ,it means a lot to me. Hoping for your response and Thank you.ALLWYN SHAJI (talk) 04:42, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

(Note: Tave responded on ALLWYN SHAJI's talk page} 04:57, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Affair

The Times, the Independent, sky news, the guardian all mention affair.Muur (talk) 21:58, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

@Muur I'd suggest cross check that good faith contribution it and get consensus on the talk page. Some of the sources use "affair" in the context you use, some don't. It looked an unnecessarily WP:POINTy comment to me on first reading, but that's my reading, and of course we are talking about a BLP. You may choose to redo the edit and I certainly won't be reverting it but you are responsible for your own actions and consequences. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:15, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Hi I played this game from the age of 8 and appeared in many Woburn cups, I might have a lot more info about Grice hockey if your interested. Ppadu (talk) 05:46, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
@Ppadu: thanks for the Barnstar, though I have policy of archiving barnstars and try to keep a shut-out! More seriously here is risk the details of the game will be lost. To be usable here there would need to be WP:V sources. Key items would be rulebooks including pitch sizes/layout and photographs. Some Grice Hockey items were sold on ebay recently so there was a commercial value. There also big restrictions on the photographs that can be loaded to wikipedia, in essence needs to the photographer or the photographer's estate's heir. This is a very quick answer as I am somewhat busy! ... Djm-leighpark (talk) 12:46, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Surge testing

Information icon Hello, Djm-leighpark. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Surge testing, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:02, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ewen Alexander Nicholas Fergusson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Conservative Party.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Why the revert?

Hello. Can you explain the reason behind this revert of my edit to Draft:Leadtools? In your edit summary you said it was disruptive. And this one? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 16:26, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

You are WP:HOUNDing and interfering with attempts to restore that to mainspace ... it is difficult you see you making contributions to restore that to mainspace. If you can improve it AND return it to mainspace ... great .. please do so. Otherwise stop hounding. Or we will go to ANI. That draft is in the current optimal position for me improving it. It is hard to see that you have a positive point of view to the article. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 17:21, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
The purpose of references is to support the statements made in the article. As the article has been TNTed, there's no need for the wall of indiscriminate references. I would hope that anyone setting about writing an article about the product would consider each potential reference in turn, hence moving then to the talk page. I suggest they are moved back one by one on an as-needed basis to verify statements that are added.
The draft is no longer about a company, so it was appropriate to remove the WikiProject Companies tag.
Please assume good faith. In the AfD I said that while the company was not notable, the product might be and I supported the suggestion to draftify so that this could be explored. As a reminder, you don't WP:OWN the draft. Anyone can edit Wikipedia articles, and I would like to contribute to this one. I am a member of the Article Rescue Squadron and often work on improving articles that found themselves at AfD, even taking them to GA standard. If you would like to discuss this further at ANI then that is fine with me. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 18:03, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Openenergymonitor

Information icon Hello, Djm-leighpark. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Openenergymonitor, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 01:02, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Edit summary.

Hi, what does this mean? Mark83 (talk) 23:19, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

In the West of Ireland the rain is guaranteed, though there is the moaning about the tunder, as least per a conversation with someone here tonight. Replica 1 was a soft delete and was a guarenteed WP:REFUND especially given the issues with delsort inadequacies of the associate AfD. Unfortunately a REFUND only puts the article back and is does not unmangle the effects of the XfD clousure script. Te easiest thing was to go over those ASAP as they are rather more difficult to recover the longer they are left. Hopefully that helps. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:34, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Luas page protection

Hi, please can you remove your request as I already made one earlier that's still in the queue. If anything, you may post a note on mine to re-iterate the importance of needing this due to the high levels of vandalism recently. Thanks. Bungle (talk • contribs) 07:53, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

@Bungle: I apologise for missing yours in the first place and have withdrawn my later request. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 08:11, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
Don't worry about it at all. It just shows that this needs protecting asap! If they were actually dealt with in a reasonable time then we wouldn't have this issue! :) Bungle (talk • contribs) 08:17, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Railway Preservation Society of Ireland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mainline.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Overwriting (prose)

Notice

The article Overwriting (prose) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:notdict. Nor is it a guide for writers.

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. TheLongTone (talk) 14:39, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

@TheLongTone: I am concerned how WP:PROD could be read and determined that PROD would not be uncontroversial. Despite what you've said above PROD should only be used if the article was not suitable for speedy. So WP:COMPETENCY would be to go to AfD. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 15:01, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Djm-leighpark: Without commenting on the merits of this particular deletion, you are incorrect in your assertions here and to my prod that these prods were somehow in error or against policy. You are entirely within your rights to remove the notice, that's fine, that makes it controversial, but editors are not psychic nor expected to be. The whole point of the prod process is to allow uncontested deletions of minor articles to proceed without bureaucracy. If your standard was used, it would essentially never be appropriate to propose deletion, in which case the entire prod process would be pointless. You're free to think that, of course, but that's not current Wikipedia policy. A little less assumption of bad faith would be appreciated; just remove prods you disagree with and explain why you think the article meets notability guidelines.
That said, on the merits, I agree with TheLongTone that this probably does not qualify as more than a dictdef either. SnowFire (talk) 17:42, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
@SnowFire: In my experience a PROD against an article with the creator still about will almost inevitably yield a dePROD. Usually this wil be a notability issue in which case the inexperienced would often be well advised to consider adding more RS first before a dePROD, as an AfD is likely to follow. I did not note a probably in TheLongTone's shout, ( a WP:notdict relink and a Nor is it a guide for writers)), though I support "concern" may be take from "probably". However this is not a RS so no amount of RS links on the article would help would help. I improved rewrite of the article could be helpful making it encyclopedic might help: Sometimes more eyes would help. In general a PROD nom. should be prepared to follow a PROD with an AfD, or at least a tag if the BEFORE makes them hesitate, and a BEFORE is a more intense scrutiny that a PROD. Obviously I have come across this in looking at the Overwrite/Overwrite (computer science) car-crash ... or should I say multiple-vehicle pile up in general, from which you currently possibly having a sore nose. Overwrite (computer science) is a mess; possibly/probably salvagable per my unsourced draft one braindump, but occupying the Overwrite slot or a redirect from it in its current state is probably insanity. I'd readlly like to get to a point here Overwrite/Overwriting is a DAB page with a link to WikiDictionary. Thaankyou. 19:59, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

New message from Stifle

Hello, Djm-leighpark. You have new messages at Stifle's talk page.
Message added 08:36, 20 August 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Stifle (talk) 08:36, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Pixie Le Knot

Information icon Hello, Djm-leighpark. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Pixie Le Knot, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:01, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Thankyou bot: Following research prgamatically, and perhaps surprisingly, was unlikely to pass wikipedia notability requirements therefore letting this draft go. Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:28, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Overwriting (prose) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Overwriting (prose) 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/Overwriting (prose) 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.

TheLongTone (talk) 13:54, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Trout

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.
you know what you did ;). Also just for your information, there are no real clerks on AN, and in future you can close a case like this yourself. -- Asartea Talk | Contribs 17:50, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
Yum Yum. Thanks for the trout, but its not making me proud and would have earned be a custard doughnut fine on Penner Island. Seriously thankyou for cleaning up after me. I have as a one off (resources & library fines for editing cost me a fair bit p/a) made a small donation to the Foundation (inc transact fees) to in recognition of your clear up work. Peoples will have to AGF me on this - and I have a policy never give again to charities etc. that contact me again after a donation. Djm-leighpark (talk) 18:31, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
Actually after writing the above I visited the place Asartea edited and seen: Expect a highspeed delivery of fish soon ... so hope the above will do. My week is not good, better better than many others, and after bantering the Dentist taking my rotten tooth out be said a simples extract was X and difficult extract was Y and an impossible Z whereupon I would be eagled to the hotel Alexandra, such a luvely place ... but if an easy the respectfully suggested I consider Y donating to (any reasonablee) charity for less fortunates as I didn't care whether X or X+Y just stop the pain. So it was Lose-lose for me ... but the guy was good and Y went to charity (I'm not gettinginto that banter again). And when the wifey insists I go into a burger takeaway drive-thru and it their system breaks down and I is gridlocked with cars to the front and back and the super apologising saying all reboots have failed and I am suggesting Ronnie should elect to go up into space with Branston. And he torvh on my dog has finally gone on ... but as I have never worked out how to do that I don't know how to turn it off and I am going round the superstore with a torch on my dog trying to find out from the wife what ot buy .... the midas touch is not mine today not that I really have ought to complain about compared to some. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 18:51, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Follow me to join the secret cabal!

Plip!

If you ask me, that wasn't worth wasting a trout on. Consider yourself minnowed. Mjroots (talk) 15:50, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

I do remember I was once a Haddock. I had to swim out to sea and swim back again. I think I was in Brid, but I may have been in Swansea, or Neath, or somewhere, or quite possibly in black stout. Wonderful fishes are Haddocks! I cod you not. Djm-leighpark (talk) 16:06, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

RPSI

I've posted to WT:TWP re the RPSI article. As for the COI editors, we have a fairly new weaopn in our arsenal - WP:PBLOCK - the ability to block editors from editing certain articles, yet leaving them free to edit the article's talk page. Mostly used where BLPs edit their own article, but would be applicable in this case. If disruptive COI editing continues then I'm prepared to issue PBLOCKs. Mjroots (talk) 05:10, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

@Mjroots:: Is is OK for me to restart editing the article, albeit on the basis to minimize primary references? Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 06:40, 24 August 2021 (UTC) Or should I stay clear, especially for the moment? Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 06:44, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
Yes, go ahead, if you can replace a primary reference with a reliable secondary source then all the better. AIUI, you've stated that you are not a RPSI member, so you have no COI. I'd rather not watchlist the article, even temporarily so if assistance is required, please ping me via the article's talk page. Mjroots (talk) 06:49, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
I do not see how you have a COI if you are not a RPSI member, or affiliated with them. If you prefer to revert my manual addition and reinstate the prior version in the article history for full attribution in the page's statistics, I would have no objections. Seloloving (talk) 23:15, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
@Seloloving: I joined the RPSI today at some point today (I think) between circa. 09:00 and 13:00 UTC ish (cant remember exact application start time exactly for the moment ... long day). It is also proposed I am PBlock'd per the ANI. It would be inappropriate to not to talk a COI position because of this. Please note others have cautioned on the article talk page that (Cassells, Friel, 2004) is primary. Page statistics are not relevant to me ... not with the typos and mistakes I make! They should be cut by 2/3 to get a true figure! Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:29, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
It's okay. I haven't found any online information yet that Joe Cassells or Charles Friel are founding members yet. It may be stated in the book but Google Books has no previews. I will hold off from classifying it as primary for now. Seloloving (talk) 23:57, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
I bought the book. It was per article talk page comment a celebration of 40 years of the RPSI and fairly well connected. There's some really interesting stuff in it ... ( actually a turntable comment where they say they were blessed with them in 2004 to turn loco's round ... of course the single cabbed 121's were withdrawn circa 2008 ) ... and CIÉ don;t need those useful turntables for turning loco's at Sligo etc etc etc.) Djm-leighpark (talk) 00:14, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

August 2021

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Drmies (talk) 01:25, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
Can't someone please ensure Bigdelboy & djm-mobile are simultaneously blocked. I am still majorly obsessed with the #Free Luas situation which was a major contributor to my rant. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 02:44, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
I am mulling whether as a result of this I will cease my membership of the RPSI, leaving my contribution as a donation. There is no guarentee than is what I will do. The COI with the RPSI will remain of course. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 02:47, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

refs/cites

  • Demír, Cuneyt (2019). "Writing Intelligible English Prose: Conciseness vs. Verbosity". Söylem Filoloji Dergisi. 4 (2): 482−505. doi:10.29110/soylemdergi.617184. ISSN 2548-0502. Archived from the original on 26 August 2021.

Xfd notes

Please be careful

@Seloloving: I can see you are dealing with edit requests at Wikipedia:Edit requests with COI editors that are looking like they are controversial. I would advise strictest caution with sources used, language used, etc. I will repeat, even at risk of being barred for a further period, that formal {{read requests}} are used at a minimum and preferable the matter is put through formal arbitration by an experienced arbitor, which additionally could happen on a separate page. With due respect, and I have not checked your contributions it is unclear to me you are totally sufficiently experienced in this matter. There may be an attempt to make a synthesis of different events, which is an issue. There may be chips on shoulders (and there may be some justification for some of those chips). There may be attempts to place one persons issues on another by inheritance. And there may be need to run some sources via RS. But at the end one of the incident is indeed reasonable to be somewhat scutinised. Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:49, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

To confirm my precise RPSI membership status. Yesterday I had 3 online attempts to purchase online membership from the RPSI. None were totally successful, but all were accepted by the bank. It is likely at least one was "accepted" by the RPSI which is why I have received notification of membership. To some extent at the moment I have not, shall I say,"activated" the membership and not visited member-only pages. I expect to get 2 of the membership refunds back, automatically or on request. I have options of at some point "activating" my membership. However I or the RPSI, may decide to terminate it; treating the membership money as a donatation. My PBLOCK & COI remaining in all cases. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:49, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

I have been mixed up over arbitration and moderated mediation

I have become aware I have used the term "arbitration" over the past short while when I should have been used the "mediation" word, or possibly structured mediation/Moderated discussion. I must read Wikipedia:Dispute resolution more carefully. I apologise for any misunderstandings and mistakes in that area. I might note structured Wikipedia:Mediation off he main article talk page might be a good way of resolving certain BLP issues at time. I merely profer that for peoples thoughts. thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:44, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Put it back!

@Tuvalkin Thankyou for contribution at [8]; and your thoughts at [9]. With respect I believe your logic to be flawed; so please re-read carefully and recheck and revert. This is to clear what I believe is a disruption in the Wikipedia article space. Can you also please which source you are referring to on the talk page. There are several sources on the page, and it is 99.9999% certain you are referring to (Casserley, 1974), but I'd like to be sure. It is not helpful I have been incapacitated at the moment. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:01, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

  • Guy, if its a good source to say it in the lede, then it’s a good source to say the same two sections down. That’s my logic, and your polite yet frantic and menacing tone doesn’t make it flawed. (I see that you’re blocked, though, and that explains why you addressed this matter here, and not in the article’s talk page — well, that seems to be a violation of your block and a misuse of talk page space, maybe?) Now, is that source wrong? I don’t know, I merely removed an editorial inconsistency in that article, didn’t adress its content. However, in its article it says that CB&PR was regauged from 1600 mm to 3 ft back in 1900, so the gist of the statement is true: Waterford and Tramore Railway was indeed the only segment of the Irish railway system not connected to the rest of the (1600 mm gauge) network, and that statement is correctly sourced in the article — which I will not be futher editing concerning this matter. Tuvalkin (talk) 21:17, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
@Tuvalkin. I'll start off with the first point. I have just checked the Casserley source, (you may have to AGF that), and it does not support: "The Waterford and Tramore Railway was the only line in Ireland that was not connected to any other". that you claimed it did. Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:23, 26 August 2021 (UTC) (unless I've misread it and such things can happen)
The Casserley source does support: The line had no intermediate stations, only the two termini, and was to remain completely isolated from the rest of the Irish railway network throughout its life. Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:30, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
The big big difference is the the Casserley source does not support was the only railway in Ireland bit. Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:30, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict) I very clearly did not claim that Casserley-1974 supported that statement, I merely synched two identical statements to the same source. Either you cannot comprehend that notion or you’re not in good faith — either way, I am not up to even discuss with you (let alone assume good faith). You are not challenging the statement, merely asserting that particular srouce doesn’t support it. While that’s to be seen, it would mean the other article, about CB&PR, is also wrong, and even that the rationale embedded in the {{cn}} warning I removed was also incorrect — meaning that me reverting my edit would not help clarifying the matter, merely bring it back to a sate of obvious inconsistency any passer-by like me would notice. So, let’s give room for those in good faith (unlike you) and knowledgeable about the matter (unlike me) fix the issue. Tuvalkin (talk) 21:37, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Djm-leighpark: Maybe it would be a good idea to take a mini break, rather than trying to edit-in-exile, as that could be frowned upon while blocked and lead to further sanctions. I don't think it's worth it when you only need to wait for 3 days, as you can then edit the article talk pages. I have no opinion on the matter being discussed. Bungle (talk • contribs) 21:38, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict): @Bungle: I've finished the explanation since I've started. I'd prefer a {[tl|Verify source}} is placed on the citations if necessary until someone cross-checks the source and prose or I initiate a mediation. I will leave it to you to consider a ban extension or talk page block or maybe a W&TR PBLOCK if it comes to that. last word of mine in section per request. (I cant get into discussion with Tuvalkin at this point for which I apologise, I obviously have worked over the article ... and it is still WIP as I hoped the Fayle source would fill in some of the missing bits) It is always possible for me to misinterprets a source (especially Ahrons and some of the older stuff) but I try to lead a verification trail. I might able to scan the 2 pages of Caserly if it helps). Thankyou. 22:09, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Clerking reminders

It all else fails think.

I suppose I should have copped on This block has been set to expire: 02:32, 29 August 2021. means This block has been set to expire: 02:32, 29 August 2021 UTC ... but I didn't! And I'm now scheduled for hospital today, not for myself, and not to check a OBE Tait who was not a dambuster but maybe a Daedalus person. Might, and might not, be a Bio article here. The nameless local has a changed their dog network with 15 days to change your number, great for most able teens, less so the incapacitated well attached to their dog and will blame the surgeon of any elective number loss surgery and not easy capacity to recover form number loss. Come back GG's all are forgiven. And I missed Goodwood. Relating to vague memories of my p-rettens I do think I vaguely recall the site of the owners of said trust used to meet at the Old manor for an athletics thing ... and their were goldfishes. ah. tim has drifted. Djm-leighpark (talk) 02:27, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

The craic interview

Curlew is on my watchlist, and while in Mountjoy and listening to Walk Tall (country song) I eyeballed the unembellished version of the semi-embellished {{cite}} which came up as part of the {{diff}}. As it was a youtube on a cite web interviewing a author I created, and sent in BF to complete due to my dodgier grammar etc. I was a tad interested, and thought maybe I'll do a little cite embellishment and refined location and maybe an author link and maybe even re-leverage the source back on the Colwell Stage. Well yer man "John", the interviewee from the Christian and Jobs Action Party, was straight in to force the outing of Colwell as a practicing Catholic and to asset Bristol was in Wales. Now yer man from from Boyle, which is perhaps why I twanged the accent, near to the Curlew Mountains, which has nowt to do with Curlew's, but ruined my reputation in the eyes of the monitoring of my i30 by the Knock Hire company my second last visit to Ireland in mid Summer 2017: the first time I had the experience of how their could be a proper mounting on the Curlew's was a could of B141's on the '75 trip to Croker. The chewing of the cud brought back the memories, the manure spreading by the fork on a Food Friday as well. And more recently the notion whenever the missus goes with me to Boyle it costs me a mint in jewelry presents. On a factual note the interview and interviewee may (repeat may) have crossed lines between Lough Key and Lough Ree at some point. Ah yer man was great gas. Djm-leighpark (talk) 04:16, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

I've save a local copy of the transcript in case the thing rots. Archiving that sort of page gives the internet archive indigestion and it analytics are on my case for a week the last time I tried that. Hope to review the source later. 04:16, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Manila push rail trolley

Information icon Hello, Djm-leighpark. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Manila push rail trolley, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occurred, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:02, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

RfA

I have struck your question at RFA, because at best it's canvassing. RFA is not the place to axe-grind. If you have a concern with someone's behaviour at AFD, then ANI or AN is the place to go. Primefac (talk) 00:10, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@Primefac: OK ... fair enough. Possibly valid if not current. Another lessoned learned for me, I generally only getsometing wrong by getting it right. My lastforay to ANI ended in a right Boomberang so I've reluctant to go there. Its known AfD is contentious and straiining and I guess re-nom. in under 2 hours got to me. Better let is take its course. As its claimed a canvas I'll srtike my comment at the AfD. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 01:59, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Spencer Dock, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Price.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Cork, Blackrock and Passage Railway

Hi, I have fixed most of the citation anchor errors in this article. You added two footnotes on 29 August that I havent been able to fix. Most of the footnotes refer to Jenkins & Newham (1993) and the two you added are Jenkins & Newell 1993, was this a typo? If not could you add the full citation for Jenkins & Newell 1993. Thanks Nempnet (talk) 13:35, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Thankyou for fixing stuff. I try to leave WP:V as far as I can. In this case I used Newell (a hall/centre) in Chichester? rather than Newham. On 29 August 2021 it was a quick look up with regards to possible disproving on a Claim on the W&TR article which one page of Jenkins & Newham seemed to disprove which a different page in Jenkins & Newham seemed to contradict! The verify source is to try to remind me to check this carefully in a time of serenity. Thankyou. 13:48, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Vernon Maitland

Information icon Hello, Djm-leighpark. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Vernon Maitland, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:02, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Aerospace Research Systems

I went with delete because the proposed article to merge it into is also at AfD, and looks to me more likely than not it'll be deleted. That said, if the article is kept at AfD, I'd be happy to restore the page so someone can do a merge and redirect. Would also be willing to restore it to your userspace in the meantime. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 13:55, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

With respect I disagree with your assessment. And if it was merged/redirected and the Pamela Rai Menges was deleted it would fall as well. I'd question your asseemnt regarding the assessment of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pamela Rai Menges. The nom.'s kept attacking the article and breaking the CITEREF and BLUDGEONING the process. The clerking been below standard so lots of issues going on there. And little participation. And the speedy keep is reasonable given the nature of the nom's action is it not? If I hadn't had to deal with a mental health nurse this morning I'd probably be pulling this to DRV; as it is I have RL. Given my life this morning has been in relation to TWOCs and the benefits of removal or non-removal of a commode thoughts had passed my mind to quote from your user page and say "a fucking pile of goddamn shit". Anyway do you wish to reconsider or have we reached the end of the road and if we have do you have any object to this being scrutinised at DRV, which I may or may not choose to do? I may ultimately choose to request this is userified or draftified by at the present time I am not asking for that, in the longer or shorter term I may request it. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:51, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Damn, first of all good luck IRL. I don't mind restoring it and letting someone work on a merge; due to IRL issues of my own it'll be a little while before I can, but hopefully in the next hour or so. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 15:25, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
And it should be all set up. Since I don't know this topic at all, I'll let you or whoever else wants to handle it take care of the merge. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 16:21, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:John Melling (locomotive engineer)

Information icon Hello, Djm-leighpark. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:John Melling (locomotive engineer), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:01, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Aerospace Research Systems, Inc.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Aerospace Research Systems, Inc.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) 17:12, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

FYI

You are mentioned at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Djm-leighpark‎. FDW777 (talk) 16:35, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Thankyou. Seems resolved already. Explanation here to SPI raiser. Djm-leighpark (talk) 18:31, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Filer now blocked, unsurprisingly. The extended confirmed protection should keep them quiet for a while now. FDW777 (talk) 19:15, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Manila push rail trolley

Hello, Djm-leighpark. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Manila push rail trolley".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 21:14, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Association for Renewable Energy and Clean Technology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Soya.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Malahide railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CIE.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 18 January 2022 (UTC) tanks. Sorted. {{Done}}. Djm-leighpark (talk) 08:05, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Care-UK-logo.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Care-UK-logo.png. 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) 17:09, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

October 2021

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Girth Summit (blether) 22:55, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi - I find much of that ANI thread difficult to follow, but you asked for a block so I've done that. I don't know you at all, but I've seen your name around - I hope all is OK at your end, and that a break from this place will do you good. Best Girth Summit (blether) 23:00, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
@Girth Summit: {{Template:Block-reason}} would look nicer. — kashmīrī TALK 09:56, 13 October 2021 (UTC) (talk page stalker) — kashmīrī TALK 09:56, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
Djm-leighpark knows why they're blocked, they still have talk page access, and they would be entirely within their rights to remove the notice if they don't like the way it looks. If you're disputing whether the text in the block notice is accurate, this comment is indeed an abuse of editing privileges, so I'm not going to swap the notice for a different notice. Girth Summit (blether) 12:57, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

@Girth Summit: I presume the reason for these comments were are related to @Kashmiri's actions at Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), Stop Funding Misinformation, and Stop Funding Fake News (SFFN). As creator of the latter, albeit with a difficult create redlink birth I guess I see some interest. I generally concur with the merge but I am opined (but may not be able to be proved) SFFN was originally a seemingly independent movement with anonymous members albeit many or all of SFFN members may have had a Jewish background. Kashmiri's merge seems to me have lost a little of this flavour of this and may imply Stop Funding Fake News was always a Center for Countering Digital Hate which I am opined was not the case. I am opined it is possible, maybe even probably. SFFN had a bigger influence in CCDH than implied by the article. I have other things RL and WP to do at the moment but may go to the CCDH article or its talk page at some point or may raise a POV on the section. But my focus is currently elsewhere. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:54, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Kaposi's sarcoma and COVID-19

I recently added the information you provided to the article on Kapsosi's sarcoma regarding COVID-19. This is personal because I am living with someone who has been vividly deformed by Kaposi's sarcoma and who has tested positive for the antibody for this SARS virus. I understand you are angry about something, and that this has gotten you temporarily banned. Please take a moment to reflect on the importance of the contributions you have made, and on how they are affected and stained by your use of the word "fucking" in your comments about others. We aren't really here to hurt each other, though that may sometimes feel how it is. I am grateful for your comment on the talk page for KSHV, and have added this information to the article. I am also humiliated that I have now done so on behalf of someone so vulgar, whatever your intentions or needs. You are undercutting yourself. And my friend, well... He's is dying. Please try to keep the "fucks" to yourself. For everyone's benefit. I am writing this with tears in my eyes. It matters. More than you can possibly know from how far we are from each other. Ok? Please?? Thanks. (feel free to delete this message once you have absorbed it, I don't want it to leave a record of it on your talk page). A loose necktie (talk) 05:02, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

@A loose necktie: We'll I'd call this fucking about on my talk page. And its appropriate your comment remains here. I've worked out KSHV is Kaposi's sarcoma-associated herpesvirus given your contribution at [11] and I see no contribution by me at [12]}. I do observe your contribution at [13] and the only relation I can see to me is on the talk page of the user you thanked there, namely {{Diff|User talk:Ee1518|1018623262|994931454|}. Am I missing something? Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 00:11, 25 October 2021 (UTC)}

Concern regarding Draft:Overwhelmed caregiver

Information icon Hello, Djm-leighpark. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Overwhelmed caregiver, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:02, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Eva Riley

Information icon Hello, Djm-leighpark. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Eva Riley, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:03, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Howrah rail station

Dear Djm, The station is popular and better known as Howrah Junction Railway Station. So kindly request you to undo the change you have made..... Anupam Dutta (talk) 13:35, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

@Anupamdutta73: I regard the move as controversial, have already have it moved back once with a discussion on the article talk page. As you originally posted this thread at the top of my talk page and I've had to clerk it down its likely you are somewhat inexperienced in moves and I'd guess you failed to do one or more of the following: Didn't to read the talk move; missed the previous moves in the article history; failed to read the guideline at WP:MOVE; and failed to identify a potentially contentious move; failed to read WP:RP#CM. To create a discussion for your desired move follow WP:RSPM: if you do this I would sentimentally like to go for Howrah Junction but pragmatically might !vote oppose to stay at Howrah. But in the end I will go with consensus of the discussion. Suggest you direct any questions to e.g. WP:TEAHOUSE. I have a little on a book from Satow+Another that mentions early history of the station and I might add it later (It probably wasn't junction to begin with. The Toponymy here is at least mildly interesting if someone can get to the bottom of it. Please note I also tend to revert possibly contentious moved quicly due to ripple effects on double redirects etc. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 17:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Dear Djm, As you noted, I was a bit lazy... Anyway, I have clearly answered the riddles about Howrah Station in the Talk page.... Anupam Dutta (talk) 05:40, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Hostinger article

Dear Djm-leighpark,

I am contacting you in regards to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostinger article. I am an employee of Hostinger and I saw that there is wrong information regarding the company's Key people

Balys Krikščiūnas (CEO) Antanas Patašius (CTO) Domantas Beržanskis (CFO)

These people are not the key people anymore but I don't know how to change the information to the right key people as I know that employees cannot edit the articles, am I right?

Would you be able to help edit the key people to:

Key people Arnas Stuopelis (CEO) Balys Krikščiūnas (CTO) Domantas Beržanskis (CFO) Daugirdas Jankus (CMO)

Or should I wait till someone from the editors acknowledge the wrong information? It is a little annoying because other people contact our ex-employees know due to incorrect info on Wikipedia.

Anyway, I am thankful if you read this text. Have a good day :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.241.196.131 (talk) 10:06, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and if you need need further assistance about how to go about the process of making the request ask at WP:TEAHOUSE. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 10:24, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Love Productions

The table was restored to it's original order until you reverted it so can you leave it where it was, please? 85.255.237.74 (talk) 13:11, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Talk:Maximo (software)/Notes

Hello, Djm-leighpark,

Is there any reason to preserve this page you created? No editor knows about it but you so maybe it is better to move it to your User space pages. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 23:46, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

And the same question for Talk:Vidyut Gore/Notes. There is no reason to keep notes for your writing on a main space talk subpage when it should be in your own user space. Liz Read! Talk! 23:49, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
Workpages were referenced from talk page page so were available to editors on talk page, that said content has aged and no longer relevant to article so I've resolved into archive pages. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 18:10, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Your edits to Train

Please be more careful when making edits. Twice now [14] [15] you have introduced typos or wrong dates with your edits, which I have had to fix. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:42, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

My apologisies for any mistakes. Plesae be aware there are serious issues in the history section and I consider one of your changes to my previous contributions to be misrepresentational. There are other issues throughout also with various claims. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:51, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Before I even began rewriting the article, I posted on the talk page and at WP:Trains asking for feedback and suggestions. At the time, nobody made any comments. If the history section I wrote has "serious issues" then by all means explain your rationale on the talk page so improvements can be made. My goal is to improve the article and get it to GA, not to misrepresent your contributions. If you feel I have done that, then I apologize, it was not my intent. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:18, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
@Trainsandotherthings. Its a darn sight easier to look at something someone else has done and see issues. I have done stuff on the D&KR which required some study of the L&MR ... but not really going back massively before that. In a nutshell the S&DR was really a (somewhat chaotic) horse/steam/cable operation; The 1830 L&MR was the key operation that operated both passenger and freight trains as we know them. And it was the L&M standard guage that spread round the world (albeit had to be tweaked from the S&DR 4' 8"). The North East collieries were key focus of track & steam locomotive development 18-10ish to 1825/30. Stourbridge Lion may have been the first export to America, but it bury's locomotives that had more influence on American locmotive development. Put bringing this in sourced (preferably online) may be trickier. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:54, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
I decided to remove the mention of the Stourbridge Lion, since it only ran a few times because it was too heavy (leading to, as you mentioned, other locomotive designs more suited to American track conditions). It would make sense to mention on an article specific to U.S. trains, but as this article is top level it's easier to just say "the first steam train in the U.S. ran in 1829" which still gets the point across. I will do some research and add a mention of the Liverpool and Manchester, I believe the Herring book I've been using mentions it as well. That would also be a perfect place to mention how train gauge came about. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 00:22, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Possible Alt sources for Trains in ol

I didn't see these until now, but thanks for sharing, I'll see if I can find useful information from these. I went and added a mention of the Liverpool and Manchester, and Rocket, to the early history section. You were right that it was an important development I missed initially. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 17:11, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Hogan

Irish Mail on Sunday Mag. 14 Nov 2021 Feature: In i/view said about himeself: Studied Edinburgh Uni, quallying in 92 Royal Scot Academy in Edingburh + part time architecture office. Scottish soap: 'Take the high road - worked over most of female case over storylines in 60 episode????? Adopted home London freq Ireland vistor and likes to bike. MI6 operative in "The Dry" filming currently (portray head of Nazi Party ... claims not like that RL) and received trollings. On Red election during the height of the covid. (Notes written while at the library and may be archived early. Djm-mobile (talk) 12:31, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

November 2021

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Grand Mufti. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Sakiv (talk) 14:27, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

@Sakiv Try taking me to ANI if you like. Thankyou. You've been leaving an unsourced mess I've been resolving at some waste to my time. OK you win the edit war. Thankyou. 14:31, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
You are clearly not here to edit in good faith. I don't have time to quarrel with you.--Sakiv (talk) 14:33, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
@Sakiv A wee edit summary and a even bare URL would likely be all I am asking for to help keep an eye on what is wrong and what is right would it not? Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 15:22, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of History of Dell for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article History of Dell 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/History of Dell 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 until the discussion has finished.
Since you dePRODed I wanted to make sure you had the opportunity to include your thoughts. SpuriousCorrelation 19:26, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ARS Public School logo.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ARS Public School logo.png. 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) 18:05, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Sachin Gupta (academic) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Sachin Gupta (academic). Thanks! QuantumRealm (meow • pawtrack) 14:51, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sachin Gupta (academic) (November 21)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Johannes Maximilian was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Please cite proper, reliable, and secondary sources that are independent of Gupta, and that cover him significantly and indicate why Wikipedia should have an article on him. It is insufficient to list his works and link a Google Scholar search. Best regards, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 08:27, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 08:27, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Teahouse logo
Hello, Djm-leighpark! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 08:27, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Comment: Not my article so can't Db-g7 it anyway. Is a case of AfD 0 : AfC: 1 but at least I known AfC viiews for Anti G13 ... the thing is kind of tainted anyway ... Thankyou AfC guys. Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:18, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

A non-email email

File:Puppies in bag.jpg
Two puppies. In a bag.

I wanted to email you but you don't have email enabled, just to say I'm sorry you are stressed. Yes it's fine to back off, it's just one tiny article, it's not important! And I mean, you can always just skip anything somebody writes, as I'm sure you know, if it seems more than you want to deal with. In my opinion there's no point in letting stress especially about little matters actually get into your real life head. And I'm sorry for the stress that I caused you. If you want to yell at me on my talk page or in email, that'd be fine, I'll listen and not snark back. It'd serve me right I'm sure. Thank you for your all you do here Djm-leighpark, sincerely, I think you're doing fine and I wish the best to you. Here is a picture of two puppies in a bag. Herostratus (talk) 05:17, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:48, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sachin Gupta (academic) has been accepted

Sachin Gupta (academic), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

He meets the standardsat WP:PROF. The previouscomment and decline seem to have been unawareodf theexistence of the appropriate guideline.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

DGG ( talk ) 03:44, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
I'm not sure what's been going on here and elsewhere, but I'm always looking for articles on notable academics to rescue. That was my only consideration with respect to this article. DGG ( talk ) 04:12, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Draft attribution

You did some work after me on Smart sensor (digital) to preserve attribution. I'd like to incorporate material from Draft:Low-temperature distillation into Low-temperature distillation but without some pointers, will probably run afoul of this issue again. Do you know the best way to do this? ~Kvng (talk) 04:28, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

I to some extent an enthusiastic amateur on copyright matters, and think of it in a similar way to software copyright minefields, though in the latter a vendor may helpfully lead the blindfolded customer safely in before releasing the blindfold and helping the customer something when they step on a mine. (help is a synonym for sell in business speak). I do tend to be sarcastic. But business is telling me it is transferring my sensors today and wishing to sell me a smart sensor that can cut my vitals off and how good that would be for me. I will get back on the subject. Djm-leighpark (talk) 12:16, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
The key principle is attribution must be rightfully acknowledged. Possibly the two best pages are Wikipedia:Merging (with the WP:PROMERGE section quite prescriptive; and the guideline Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia which are slightly at odds but in general the same. Following these my best understanding is one should end up with:

<nowiki>

  1. The appropriate edit summary on the cut (or a dummy edit if a copy) from the source page:
  2. An appropriate edit summary at the point content pasted in: something like Merged/copied content from source page to here. See Link or reason or a retrospective dummy edit e.g NOTE: The previous edit as of 22:31, October 14, 2015‎, copied content from the Wikipedia page at Exact name of page copied from; see its history for attribution.
  3. A {{copied}} or something similar on both the talk page of the source
  4. A {{copied}} or something similar on both the talk page of the target

I'd usually do anything under a {{In use}} on the target (and sometimes even the source!) so not interrupted midway during a merge which is a worst case senario especially if someone disagrees with a discussion result; especially as advice is to paste more than is needed on one edit and tidy on subsequent edits.Djm-leighpark (talk) 12:16, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

In your case in general, where the move to article space and re-convert to a redirect doesn't work hosting the page as a subpage of the talk page may be an option. {{histmerge}} is a option which for most cases the admins hate. Glancing down Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia I think it suggests/implies alternatives. Whatever happens leaving in draft is a G13 disaster.12:16, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

However all said I am of the belief the use case here is a special case with only one significant main contributor. So I think the following is okay ...

<nowiki>

Users DGG or Diannaa might be kind enough to comment .... I have to suddenly dash for an appointment and running late so haven't reviewed above thoroughly. Djm-leighpark (talk) 12:16, 25 November 2021 (UTC) & Djm-leighpark (talk) 12:45, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

The above info looks okay to me, a bit difficult to parse but not containing any errors.— Diannaa (talk) 16:36, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
I havenever been competent at doing merges in the way WP prescribes; I can usually find some way to evade the necessity. DGG ( talk ) 02:28, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

@DGG, Diannaa, & Kvng: This section was almost prophetic as I've just merged the content fork Draft:Sope Willams- Elegbe into Draft:Sope Willams-Elegbe. The DGG method in this case (working over the sources) would probably have been better. But anyway there we have it. I'll be G6'ing the former in a day or two and will probably try kick the latter into some sort of shape for mainspace. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:33, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Slightly more prophetic and annoying is fact a third content fork under a different name already existed used to bypass AfC. Sope Willams Elegbe Real waste of time. 23:32, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice, everyone. I have completed the merge and included hyperlink and author's user name in my edit description. Added some tags for good measure. ~Kvng (talk) 05:09, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Pamela Rai Menges for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pamela Rai Menges, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pamela Rai Menges (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

ANI Notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Multi7001 (talk) 23:56, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Sorry for cutting you off

I was just trying to avoid drama by closing that discussion. If I had known you were working on a reply I would have left it open. Sorry about that. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:21, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

@ScottishFinnishRadish: I've just removed it. More fool me for not spotting it! Happy to leave how is, less drama better. Hopefully lesson learned. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 01:25, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
That's what I was hoping. Sometimes (though not often enough) people go to ANI and actually reflect when informed they're in the wrong. If we're lucky this is one of those situations. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:28, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Ewen Alexander Nicholas Fergusson for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ewen Alexander Nicholas Fergusson 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/Ewen Alexander Nicholas Fergusson 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.

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:02, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

DRV

Why are you edit warring to remove my comment at WP:DRV? What advocacy, propaganda, recruitment, scandal, self-promotion or advertising am I undertaking there? It is a page to discuss the deletion of an article, so perforce will perforce include opinion, and my comments are entirely relevant to the discussion and not disruptive.

What is the problem? 82.132.235.151 (talk) 11:25, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

In my view you are, and maybe others, have used it as a forum and it has been disruptive. If you can persuade an admin to re-instate my comment, that's fine, I'll let it stand. But new accounts/IP's have been used to harass and abuse people at that DRV I've raised. Feel free to have your last word or take me me to a noticeboard if necessary. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 11:48, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

"Contested move"

In what sense is it "contested" to move "Embolic and thrombotic events after COVID-19 vaccination" to "Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia"? Do you actually disagree with the move? Why? The current name is WP:OR and prevents the article from showing up in Google searches. VITT is the most common and most accurate name. — Omegatron (talk) 16:20, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

@Omegatron: It is contested because I have contested it. And there was previous discussion. See WP:Requested moves#Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves and please go through the required procedure. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 16:30, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
Djm-leighpark OK, but why are you contesting it? — Omegatron (talk) 16:32, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
@Omegatron: Please follow procedure Wikipedia:Requested moves/Controversial. I believe it is possible there may, and please note may, be more different names that are more applicable. I may agree with your choice, last time I looked at this I didn't. But please raise the relevant discussion to ensure you have consensus. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 16:43, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Reclaim Party Logo.jpeg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Reclaim Party Logo.jpeg. 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) 18:29, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Talk:Embolic and thrombotic events after COVID-19 vaccination/Archive 2

A tag has been placed on Talk:Embolic and thrombotic events after COVID-19 vaccination/Archive 2 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

technical error. Prematurely made archive 7 instead of archive 1 and had to undo. Please delete just this subpage so the archive will work correctly. thanks.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 12:48, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Talk:Embolic and thrombotic events after COVID-19 vaccination/Archive 3

A tag has been placed on Talk:Embolic and thrombotic events after COVID-19 vaccination/Archive 3 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

technical error. Prematurely made archive 7 instead of archive 1 and had to undo. Please delete this subpage so the archive will work correctly. thanks.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 12:48, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Talk:Embolic and thrombotic events after COVID-19 vaccination/Archive 4

A tag has been placed on Talk:Embolic and thrombotic events after COVID-19 vaccination/Archive 4 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

technical error. Prematurely made archive 7 instead of archive 1 and had to undo. Please delete this subpage so the archive will work correctly. thanks.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 12:48, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Talk:Embolic and thrombotic events after COVID-19 vaccination/Archive 5

A tag has been placed on Talk:Embolic and thrombotic events after COVID-19 vaccination/Archive 5 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

technical error. Prematurely made archive 7 instead of archive 1 and had to undo. Please delete this subpage so the archive will work correctly. thanks.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 12:48, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Talk:Embolic and thrombotic events after COVID-19 vaccination/Archive 6

A tag has been placed on Talk:Embolic and thrombotic events after COVID-19 vaccination/Archive 6 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

technical error. Prematurely made archive 7 instead of archive 1 and had to undo. Please delete this subpage so the archive will work correctly. thanks.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 12:49, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

CSDs of Archive pages

I just fixed it manually by combining page 7 and page 1. So we can CSD all the other pages, and that way the archive should work as intended. I believe it can sometimes throw errors when the archive pages are already created and ClueBot attempts to use them — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 12:50, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

And since ClueBot updates the Index every time it archives, the redlinks on the index page should get fixed the next time it comes around. Sorry for all the trouble! — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 12:53, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
@Shibbolethink: Yes, your improved clean up seems to have worked. I'd almost wager you copied the code snippet from Talk:COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom, which is also on my watchlist but I generally tend to ignore. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:37, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Actually I think I copied it from Talk:Wuhan Institute of Virology! That's where I usually go as I first used ClueBot there. And I like archive indexing. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 23:56, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

AfD close

Hi Djm-leighpark! I just noticed your close of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of Dell as keep. Every !voter in that discussion favored a merge—did you mean to close it as you did? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 03:10, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I see you de-PRODed the article in question, which is what led to the AfD. Per the WP:NACD guideline, please do not close discussions with which you are involved in that way. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 03:17, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
There is the WP:NACD guideline, there is a (PROD) time limit and and there is RL timeline. OK my memory of this is coming back. I think mythat point everyone was is favour of the merger and was trying to be helpful. Used Twinkle for it and made a right mess of it. Djm-leighpark (talk) 05:10, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Deletion review for History of Dell

An editor has asked for a deletion review of History of Dell. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 03:27, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

So Drama at ANI and DRV for Christmas? 05:10, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Djm-leighpark/Archives/2021_1&oldid=1081271784"