User talk:Jmabel

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

I am currently only moderately active on Wikipedia. I've been uploading a lot of my own photos (and occasionally some other images) to the Commons, writing the occasional article, participating in other articles mainly on a "hit-and-run" basis, and maybe doing the occasional translation, but for the foreseeable future, that is my level of participation. I am not being one of the "mainstays", as I was from November 2003 to April 2007. - Jmabel | Talk 04:18, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


Stray barnstars[edit]

I've moved my barnstars, etc., to User:Jmabel/Barnstars. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:31, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Stray DYKs[edit]

My DYKs can be found at User:Jmabel/DYK - Jmabel | Talk 00:43, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


He lived a good life, but it's still sad. We had over 300,000 hits on the page yesterday. Hope all's well with you, Joe - it's been a long time. Tvoz/talk 07:55, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

The Tower House[edit]

Hi. Several queries. The first, I've said to KJP1 that I doubt we can use those plan images as the book they're taken from is dated 1973 and unless we can prove that the plans were made much earlier, like in the 1870s they should be deleted in the commons. i've said though that we might be able to claim fair use on the external plan. Secondly, I've found two PD images I think here, the second if you click forward on 4 of 147 is there. There's at least 2 others on that site though. The photos are dated to the 1870s and should quality for PD. The problem is that when I try to upload the larger size is php which won't upload, and of course the large watermark. I feel sure that there's a way around this. The source of the photos on ribapix is The House of William Burges ARA, edited by R. P. Pullan (Burges' brother-in-law) (London, 1875-1885) As its portfolio no. 26 and the four images I've found on ribapix are sourced to the book, it should contain a gallery of images of the house and might be worth checking out in a library. Can you help, we badly need a few images of the interior.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:58, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

I can't help in the sense of seeking out the book -- much too busy now -- but if there is an image that is visible via a viewer, there are two possibilities: (1) work out the URL (if any) of the underlying image and get around the tool directly to the image or (2) do a series of screen captures of portions of the image and put them back together with Paint, GIMP, PhotoShop, or a similar tool.
Also, in terms of the images from the book: it presumably gives photo credits, no? - Jmabel | Talk 17:14, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Richard Popplewell Pullan I think yes who inherited the house after Burges. They're definitely public domain. Perhaps you could have a go when you have time?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:21, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
I don't see anything here I can do more easily than someone else. What am I missing? - Jmabel | Talk 05:36, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Puget Passes.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Puget Passes.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:54, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

  • I would like to point out that when I uploaded this in 2007, we did not have our current templates for non-free use, and the image was used at that time in an article. It is now orphaned (probably because these passes are no longer used) and should be deleted. - Jmabel | Talk 15:23, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Teletype Model 35 ASR picture added to the Model 33 article?[edit]

Wouldn't it be better to add this picture to the Teletype Corporation article where the Model 35 described in detail?Wa3frp (talk) 14:49, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Feel free. Since the ASR-32 was there, I thought it was appropriate, but it isn't like I had looked extensively at where it might go. - Jmabel | Talk 15:18, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Satz Moshiach Kumt.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Satz Moshiach Kumt.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:32, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Now indicated as unknown. Since it is PD-US-no notice, this should be perfectly acceptable. - Jmabel | Talk 17:42, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Public-sector trade union Comment[edit]

In February 2014, you placed a "POV tag" on the Public-sector trade union article. The article was an editorial. I removed unreferenced information, original resources, and added citation tags. Unfortunately, those changes took out a lot of prose, but I think it was necessary. You might want to reorganize and then reevaluate the article. Just FYI, buddy. Mvblair (talk) 16:39, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

  • Thanks. I removed the tag. At least now we have something like a semi-useful semi-stub. - Jmabel | Talk 19:33, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment[edit]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Stokely Carmichael 1967.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Stokely Carmichael 1967.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:20, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

  • Then obviously it should be deleted. We did not have an acceptable substitute when I uploaded it nearly a decade ago. - Jmabel | Talk 22:00, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
    • Then simply wait for a week and it will be deleted by someone. Good that someone found a substitute, by the way. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:07, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Altamura Man[edit]

I've just removed a WP:Prod from this page, which is a bad translation of our Italian article[1]. Any chance you could touch it up a bit? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 09:40, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  • Looks like others are already working on this. - Jmabel | Talk 16:12, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of București Mall[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article București Mall has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

NN 410,000 sq ft mall

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Epeefleche (talk) 04:55, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

This editor is also speedy tagging clearly notable festivals in Germany too which simply just need expansion. If he continues to do this then I think something needs to be done about it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:55, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

  • The article is a stub. However, the issue raised was notability. It was the first mall in its country, and the article states that, so notability should not be at issue. - Jmabel | Talk 16:08, 5 June 2014 (UTC)


Teria como terminar de traduzir essa página? Grato. (talk) 11:51, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

  • I don't understand what you are asking me. You've given me a link to an edit page. If you've edited it, I don't see their edits until they are saved.
  • No entiendo que se me pregunta. Me ha dado una enlace a una página de editar. Si Vd. lo ha cambiado, yo no puedo ver los cambios hasta que son grabados. -- Jmabel | Talk 15:59, 20 June 2014 (UTC)


Will you join us for Wiknic this weekend? Please sign up at Wikipedia:Meetup/Seattle/Wiknic/2014 if you can come. --Pine 17:42, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Zdob și Zdub for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Zdob și Zdub 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/Zdob și Zdub until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Launchballer 22:20, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

w:pt:Population Matters[edit]

Hi, in case you have the time, I'm making a general request hoping that someone can tidy my machine code translation of the Population Matters' article mentioned. (Ultimately I hope to move the article to "População é importante" or whatever might be the best translation of "Population (as a subject) is important"). The article is currently up for deletion so I'm contacting a few potential translators. Please check: W:pt:Population_Matters&action=history to avoid wasting time. If the article is deleted I would still appreciate its development at w:pt:Usuário(a):Gregkaye/Testes. Any help with any population related article would also be appreciated. Many thanks Gregkaye (talk) 06:14, 15 July 2014 (UTC) w:en:User_talk:Gregkaye

Sorry, I can't help here.
  1. My Portuguese is not good enough to do translation into Portuguese. I read the language relatively well, but would never claim to be able to write it acceptably.
  2. In general, machine translation is not encouraged as a way to produce Wikipedia articles. People who want that low-quality text can just get a machine translation themselves via Google, etc.
- Jmabel | Talk 14:44, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Enrique Simonet[edit]

Hello Jmabel

The page Enrique Simonet is very poor, I would like to make it better but my English is not good enough to edit

I see you did a great job with Museo de Málaga, will you please improve Enrique Simonet?

Thank you very much

Best regards -- (talk) 16:05, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

  • I see that the Spanish-language article is not great either (a long list of external links, but really nothing cited in the article). If you would get the Spanish-language article more solid first, then contact me again, I would gladly translate that to English. - Jmabel | Talk 17:52, 1 August 2014 (UTC) <-- good read, it gets really good after 2 chapters. --Cei Trei (talk) 19:16, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

ignoring your pal = not cool. --Cei Trei (talk) 20:15, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
(1) This seems to have nothing to do with Enrique Simonet, so I ignored it as an irrelevant comment in the section. (2) Am I supposed to know who you are? As far as I know, I have never had this account name cross my path before. - Jmabel | Talk 05:01, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
💔--Cei Trei (talk) 10:28, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Care to clue me (possibly in email) who you are & how I know you? Because I'm really not into playing games here. - Jmabel | Talk 14:30, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Relax Joe, it's just me. I just felt like telling you about this good book I've been reading. I'll email you when I have something essential to say. Have a nice day! :) --Cei Trei (talk) 15:36, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Still not sure who you are. I have a guess, but if you've changed your account name, I'm guessing you don't want your old account name to appear here by way of my confirming. - Jmabel | Talk 15:58, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Still only a guess who you are, but thank you on the book front. No idea when I'll get to it, though: I have a crazy backlog of stuff to read... - Jmabel | Talk 19:53, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
I know the feeling. I usually divide my time by reading two books: one during the day (usually non-fiction), while for the second one I reserve a few minutes of reading before going to bed. That's how I started reading this one before it got me hooked up, making me read some 200 pages during the last couple of last days. They're gonna make a movie about this one (think of Oliver Twist meeting Holden's Catcher in the Rye). Speaking of movies, there's a new movie coming out depicting ol' Vlad in "Dracula Untold" (budget: 100 million bucks). I'm telling you this because I know how much you love Dracula books (lolz). Anyways, one should always read what they feel like reading, and I'm sure your list is good enough. Catch you later! --Cei Trei (talk) 21:03, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
OK, the Dracula remark confirms your identity.
As for books in progress: multiply the fiction+non-fiction by English+Spanish (plus trying to learn some Japanese at the moment because I'm going to be there for a little over a week later this year). - Jmabel | Talk 22:59, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Marcel Iures Henric IV.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Marcel Iures Henric IV.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 17:28, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Obviously, if it has been removed from the article, then it should be deleted. - Jmabel | Talk 03:15, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Jews of Carthage[edit]

Hi Joe and long time no speak. As someone who has researched some ancient Jewish communities, do you feel you could add to this conversation at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jews in Carthage. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 07:42, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Sorry, IZAK, not a subject I know a lot about, and I'd just be weighing in with ignorance. - 15:53, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    • @Jmabel: Thank you for the response. Kindest regards, IZAK (talk) 22:20, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Your comment at ANI about me /Dr Blofeld and SchroCat's misconduct[edit]

Regarding your comment at ANI about me, please have a look at these elements concerning the behavior of Dr Blofeld and SchroCat in the article, which I wrote on the Paris talk page yesterday and which I have also brought to the attention of the admin Bbb23 :

There were various discussions on the talk page and arbitrations before July 2013 which User:Metropolitan has summarized above [2], and they all concluded that there was no consensus for a photomontage replacing the single view of the Eiffel Tower and La Défense. User:Dr. Blofeld started editing the Paris article on 23 June 2013 because it had been nominated for GA (Good Article) status, and on 2 July 2013 this editor put a photomontage in the infobox without paying attention to the previous talk page discussion and arbitrations or opening a discussion on the talk page: [3]. 5 days later, I reverted Dr. Blofeld's montage and politely pointed out that there was no consensus for a montage, and that it had already been discussed on the talk page (in case Dr Blofeld didn't know): [4]. Only 3 and half hours later, I was reverted by User:SchroCat without any explanation: [5]. Please note that after going back in the edit history of the article until 2011, I cannot find a single edit by SchroCat in the Paris article until that 7 July 2013 edit which consisted in reverting me and replacing Dr Blofeld's montage in the infobox. SchroCat came to the article apparently with the sole intention of "protecting" the montage of Dr. Blofeld. And all that has happened since then is the consequence of this original problem: forcing a montage in the infobox with disregard for all previous talk page discussions and arbitrations, and then reverting anyone who attempts to remove Dr Blofeld's montage from the article. Der Statistiker (talk) 20:36, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

I may also add that regarding your suggestion that I add things to the topic that have been neglected, I have been confronted to blanket reverts from SchroCat (see for example this one, whose justification was "Not really an improvement: Please discuss this massive disruption to the article on the talk page BEFORE taking any further action"), this coming from an editor who is a friend of Dr Blofeld (see their respective talk page histories) and who had never edited the Paris article before coming in to revert my edits.
I understand that Dr Blofled and SchroCat have lots of friends around here (and indeed you admitted that they contacted you off-Wiki), but that shouldn't give them a privilege to revert other editors at will. Der Statistiker (talk) 13:32, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

  1. Dr Blofled and SchroCat presumably contacted me precisely because as an admin who is not currently doing substantive work on en-wiki day-to-day, I don't have an axe to grind. And if you read what I wrote, I hardly handed them what they asked for, so please don't give me any conspiracy theory bull. Dr Blofled sent me an email through my wikipedia page; SchroCat followed up similarly. I don't know either of them personally, though I am moderately familiar with their work on here over the long haul.
  2. I'm not taking my time to trace through years-old history. I acknowledged you as one of the potentially useful contributors to the article, but it is clear that you are the only likely useful contributor to the article who holds certain views about where it should go now (the issue is where it should go now, not how it got here), and that is precisely what it means to go against consensus.
  3. At this time, the article is protected, which is just as well. What I'm suggesting to you is that (on the talk page) you propose content you think has a decent chance of getting consensus and see if you can build that consensus. (I suspect that some mutual trust could be built by working together on how to de-cruft the landmarks section.) If you can't, then walk away and work on something else. It's a big project. I've certainly walked away from articles where I thought I was dead right simply because I couldn't get consensus. See the history of the Blackface article, especially Talk:Blackface/Archive_3 for a good example of this. Because all you accomplish this way is to waste a lot of time, yours and theirs.
  4. I will also reiterate here something I said on AN/I: if you are going to recruit people into Wikipedia, then recruit them into doing useful work, not into coming in here to amp up the volume of an argument. If they are effectively meat puppets, recruited to take a side in an argument with no expertise and no significant involvement in this site, then their opinions will be rightly ignored in sorting out what is the consensus. - Jmabel | Talk 16:10, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
I have NOT recruited anyone. Those are baseless accusations from ThePromenader and SchroCat. I am not responsible for what other people write. I am only responsible for what I write myself. As for proposing things on the talk page, I've done that all through last year, and it has always been rejected by those three editors: ThePromenader, SchroCat, and Dr. Blofeld, but you're not interested in going through the history of the article.
I also want to point out that I was NOT alone. Other editors with unquestionable record at Wikipedia such as User:Seudo and User:Superzoulou often agreed with me on the talk page, but they were worn out by the endless criticisms and reverts from SchroCat and Dr. Blofeld, and they stopped editing the article or even trying to discuss things on the talk page, since discussions with ThePromenader, SchroCat, and Dr. Blofeld essentially never go anywhere (anyone disagreeing with them is rapidly accused of acting out of bad faith, or of lying, or of using Wikipedia to advance an agenda, or of being a sockpuppet/meatpuppet; it's understandable that most editors quickly run away from the article when they are subjected to that). Der Statistiker (talk) 19:36, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
If you have repeatedly proposed things on the talk page, and repeatedly had them rejected, then obviously (pretty much by definition), you cannot get consensus for your proposed changes. So walk away and work on something else, instead of wasting your time and theirs with fruitless arguments on the talk page. And while you might not be the person doing the recruiting, it defies belief that a bunch of people come to Wikipedia and the very first thing they do (or nearly the first thing) is to weigh in with similar opinions on what needs to happen on the "Paris" article. - Jmabel | Talk 19:47, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
I am not talking about the photomontage. I am talking about various issues with the article. For example the "Landmarks by district" section. Way too long. We told Dr Blofeld on the talk page, but since he's the one who created this section in the first place, he refused to acknowledge our criticism regarding the length. After a very acrimonious discussion (Seudo and Superzoulou also said the section was too long, so I wasn't the only one), he agreed to trim it a bit (but only marginally, and that section is still very long), but he exacted "revenge" by cutting more than half of the demographics section to which I had contributed over the years. See this edit and its crazy justification: "Demographics: As you campaigned for me to cut the landmarks I'm cutting this bloated section again to even things out".
I can present other examples (the lead of the article, the administration section, etc) where discussion with Dr Blofeld was (and still is) nearly impossible. Der Statistiker (talk) 20:13, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
I agree that the landmarks section is too long and said as much. But I'm not interested in having my talk page turn into a place to discuss the article. - Jmabel | Talk 23:49, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps what is needed here is an RFC to bring in a number of people who are more neutral. I certainly would not actively discourage you from starting one, but I'd still recommend that it's easier to walk away and work on articles where you are not in a fight with someone. - Jmabel | Talk 23:52, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
I love the way this has turned into "ah pity poor Der Statistiker, so hard done by by nasty Blofeld/Promenader/SchroCat". I noticed your forgot to mention the disgusting way you trolled the Paris talk page and article throughout the month of August 2013 with nothing but attacks and bad faith, motivated by nothing but OWN grievances that I'd developed the article and cut your massive Demographics of Paris section which had undue weight. Not sure he is really interested but I do invite Jmabel to look at the extremely hostile reception I received last year for being bold and editing it and promoting it to GA. Had you approached me in the first place in a less belligerent manner without excessive criticism I'd have been perfectly happy to talk it through with you. Then you only seemed intent on pushing your opinion and acting as if it was fact, like you are now with the image. Last year the landmarks section didn't look too excessive, it was even longer originally and the good @Tim riley: passed it as a GA. In looking at this again now, I agree that there's too many landmarks mention, some of which are not of primary importance which should be in the landmarks article not the main. I thought it important to cover by arrondisement, but Jmabel is right that it does affect the quality of prose. The main article can cover by arrondisement in detail, the main article should really be a condensed summary which I'll trim when it is unlocked again. Notice Der Statisker than if you'd provided constructive criticism in a non belligerent fashion with intent to improve the artile and assume good faith in me like with Mabel, I'm perfectly open to discussion and collaboration. I suggest you look in the mirror and look at why discussion "was (and still is) nearly impossible". As for neutrality Jmabel, I'm sure @SchroCat: and a few of the others would take great offense to that, as if they can't speak and air an opinion for themselves. I'd also like to point out that in the early stages of July-August last year Promenader was also almost as critical of my article developments as Der Statistiker and for a while the two were in support of each other. Der Statistiker's hostile attitude and pure arrogance and stubborness are to blame for their breakdown in relations. This exemplifies profoundly that it is you Der Stat who has the problem with civil discussion and collaboration, not me or Promenader.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:16, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Guys, can you take the argument somewhere other than my talk page? - Jmabel | Talk 18:52, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Well, your "perhaps what is needed here is an RFC to bring in a number of people who are more neutral" remark does make you very much a part of this. You've obviously formed your opinion that the involved editors are not willing to discuss issues fairly, I've set the record straight and told you why. Had it been you Jmabel approach on the article talk page then with your usual professional manner I'm sure we'd have quickly come to an agreement on what needed work. As it stands nobody has complained about the landmark section in a year. Had another editor like yourself stopped by I'd have discussed it with him too. Conclusion?:Der Statistiker's abrasive attitude and stubborness means that coming to an agreement with him over anything is impossible. Anyway, enough from me, thanks for the time you've put into this already Jm.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:00, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Last Exit on Brooklyn[edit]

Hi Joe, there is a discussion at Talk:Last Exit on Brooklyn#External links about the inclusion of a link to the corresponding article on Seattle Wikia which you may be interested in joining. Skyerise (talk) 15:11, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


1998 is the correct date... sorry. I've fixed it at the Commons. —phh (t/c) 00:59, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

  • Thanks! - Jmabel | Talk 04:24, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Will You Consider Overturning my Ban?[edit]

Hi Jmabel, excuse me for ban-evading via an IP address to ask you to consider unbanning me, but I don't see any other choice. I was permanently blocked more than two years ago on charge of sockpuppetry, which I deny. I am asking you and three other administrators to look at it. I just picked you off the list, checking only that you were recently active.

I need to keep this invitation neutral, so the best thing is just to point you to my RFC/U ( I can't restrain myself from saying that the RFC/U was kidnapped by my long-term hounders, and that I was denied the ability to speak in my own defense (unheard of in RFC/Us and against their clear instructions.

I'll also risk saying, but judge for yourself, that I never socked Wikipedia, and that an injustice has been perpetrated against me.

I would answer your questions if I could but you'll have to unblock my talkpage, presumably a less-controversial act.

Colton Cosmic.

Have a look at the Timoner page[edit]

… for what I have been doing for this Ondi Timoner article. It should, I hope, begin to address the issue of hype that has existed there. Note, one issue is the Interloper Films content licensing, which should never has been allowed in the first place (see Talk section in re: the same). Cheers, comments/response here, as I do not have time to monitor my talk pages. Le Prof (talk) 06:11, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Ramon Casas i Carbó[edit]


I come to you as you wrote the most part of that article (Ramon Casas i Carbó). I am looking for a "correct" (copyright wise) version of this drawing as I'm not sure I can upload something from tumblr on Commons. Would you know where I could find such a picture ? Thanks, Cédric Boissière (talk) 15:00, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

You can answer on my talk page (fr:Discussion utilisateur:Cédric Boissière) on the french wiki, even in english.

  • The version of the image isn't at issue: either the drawing is in copyright or it isn't. I believe Casas i Carbó's work should be out of copyright because he died over 70 years ago and was a national of a country where that is the term for which copyright is retained after death, but if you want an expert opinion I suggest you ask at Commons:Commons:Village pump/Copyright. - Jmabel | Talk 18:53, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of buildings in Seattle[edit]

There is an AfD discussion taking place; I thought you might be interested since you had questioned its notability before. This AfD was inspired by this one: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of historical buildings and landmarks in Portland, Oregon, in which I give you props. Cheers, Valfontis (talk) 15:49, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requested articles/Images[edit]

Thanks for adding Stuyvesant Apartments‎ to Wikipedia:Requested articles/Images. It's a nice, new article now. If you have any more such interesting redlinks, please do add them. Best wishes, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:29, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

  • Thanks. I've written hundreds, but am focused more on Commons these days and when I categorized these photos I noticed there was no corresponding article. - Jmabel | Talk 17:30, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Hundreds? Fantastic! :) It's so nice to see old LOC subjects become articles. All the best. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:39, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Re: George Washington (Coppini, 1927)[edit]

Greetings. I am not sure about the copyright statuses of the sculptures, nor do I know if copyright is based on the original design or if later casts are considered separate works. If the former, then the work should be in the public domain since it was created in 1912. The Portland cast is right on the border... created in 1926 and dedicated in 1927. If I am being honest, copyright rules drive me a little nuts so I tend to just upload images of works I know are old enough to be in the public domain, or sometimes I just upload images of public art to Commons and let others worry about copyright, though I am embarrassed to admit it. ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:30, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

  • Ah. If it's a faithful replica, then no new copyright would exist. - Jmabel | Talk 23:10, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
By the way, while I am thinking about it, you might be interested in this thread re: photography and the possibility of coordinated photo campaigns, over at the newly-launched (home of the Cascadia Wikimedians User Group). ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:34, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
  • I'll get a look. - Jmabel | Talk 23:10, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Ah. I'm not active on that wiki (and have no real desire to be), but feel free to snag me on Commons if there are ways I can be useful. In particular, if there is a "want list," let me know, and I'm usually available to get anything that's particularly needed in the Seattle area (though not necessarily quickly). - Jmabel | Talk 23:13, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
    • (FWIW, I'm now active on that wiki. This is a never-ending vortex). - Jmabel | Talk 04:22, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Pachomius transcription correction[edit]

Hello, just wanted to alert you that Tamfang corrected the tentative transcription I made by figuring out the funny letter - the correct letter that should be used instead is in his/her answer at the Humanities Desk. (talk) 18:56, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

  • Thanks! - Jmabel | Talk 20:41, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Celia Adler[edit]

Hello, Joe - I'm presuming on our recent acquaintance to approach you for guidance and perhaps a boost. For a Hebrew Wikipedia women's biographies project, I agreed to create a page for Celia Adler based on the English. My intention to expand the English page first began with some cleanup and minor expansion on that of her mother, Dinah Shtettin, at which point I got bogged down. It seems I have no nearby library resources available on the topic and haven't yet searched the Web. Would you be willing and able to add relevant content on Celia Adler or otherwise advise me how to proceed? Thanks! -- Deborahjay (talk) 19:44, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Probably the article consists mostly of what little I found about here while researching for the article on her father. It looks like just Googling her name turns up quite a bit, and if you want to work on the article I think that's where to start.
Beyond that, I'm up to my neck in other projects, and while I speak some Yiddish I'm afraid I'm illiterate in that language (somehow I've never learned the Hebrew alphabet; go figure; it would probably take me a matter of days, but I've never done it), and I suspect the best sources are mostly in that language. The Forward's website is down at the moment, so I have no idea what kind of online archives they might have: I imagine they'd be more likely to have things on a New-York-based Yiddish actress than anyone else. Then there's YIVO, of course, and the Yiddish Book Center in Amherst. That's probably where I'd start asking if I (1) were doing a serious research project, (2) could cope with Yiddish-language sources, and (3) couldn't quickly find what I needed in the Forward.
Best of luck. Let me know if you don't find what you need by pretty straightforward web searches. - Jmabel | Talk 20:53, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Sylvan Grove Theater and Columns[edit]

Looking for photo to add to this new article. Got one? Skyerise (talk) 22:57, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Seattle Wiknic 2015[edit]

Cascadiawikimedians transparent Gill Sans 155px high.png
In the Seattle area? You are invited to the Seattle Wiknic 2015 on Sunday, July 5, 2015, 11am to 2pm at the Washington Park Arboretum, in the meadow area to the south of the Graham Visitors Center, approximately at 47°38′15″N 122°17′38″W / 47.637435°N 122.293986°W / 47.637435; -122.293986. Click here for more details!
Wiknic logo.svg

Wiknic signup[edit]

Hi, thanks for signing up at Wikipedia:Meetup/Seattle/Wiknic/2015. The picnic is a potluck, so on the signup page please say what food or drink you are planning to bring. Thanks! --Pine 04:10, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Not even sure if I can make it, so there seems little point to saying what I'd bring if I can be there. - Jmabel | Talk 05:25, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • OK, thanks. Weather update for Wiknic: the forecast is now for 91 degrees and a high UV index. Peaceray is bringing icewater, but everyone do please take appropriate precautions for the weather, such as sunscreen, hats, sunglasses, and staying hydrated. There will be some shade in the trees. It's ok for those of us who are more temperature and/or sunlight sensitive to come but leave early, or skip the event if you think that you should; people who are very young, elderly, or have other health issues are more vulnerable to heat stroke. Health and safety first. Cheers, --Pine 15:08, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Meetup to revitalize & prioritize WikiProject Seattle[edit]

Official Seal of Seattle.jpg
In the Seattle area? Edit Wikipedia or Wikimedia sister projects? You are invited to help. Come to our first Meetup to revitalize & prioritize WikiProject Seattle on July 27, 2015, 6pm to 9pm, at Café Allegro
Cascadiawikimedians transparent Gill Sans 155px high.png
Yours, Peaceray
To unsubscribe from future messages from Wikipedia:Meetup/Seattle, please remove your name from this list. -MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:35, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:POUM Obreros.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:POUM Obreros.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 00:13, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

  • I'm not at all sure why it was removed from the article where it was relevant. I've now restored it. Note that this was uploaded nearly a decade ago, has been in the article ever since, and was removed a few days ago as part of what appears to be an edit war. - Jmabel | Talk 00:45, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
It's a perfect example of "GF destructive" behaviour to see an orphaned fair use image like this, but to not check the recent history of the claimed article, before trying to delete it. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:09, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
If I'm following the history correctly, it looks like the fair-use flag used to be in the infobox. Then User:Jp16103 replaced it with an SVG version. That was reverted and re-reverted, and now Jmabel has restored the fair-use image, but in the article body, leaving the SVG flag in the infobox. I have no great interest in which of the flags is used, or whether both are used as currently; I'm just trying to lay out the sequence of events for anyone who's confused. --Trovatore (talk) 01:28, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
They swapped it, but it was a Comcast IP that removed it. I've seen more useful edits come from BSNL than from Comcast. 8-( Andy Dingley (talk) 02:02, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Wing Luke Museum[edit]

I shouldn't have bragged about having created that article; it's rather embarrassing! Today, such a stub would get would speedily deleted. — Sebastian 05:34, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

I've seen worse. By far. - Jmabel | Talk 05:47, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia Lab at the UW Research Commons[edit]

WikiLab Logo.svg
What: Wikipedia Lab
When: Weekly on Mondays, starting 10/5/2015 through 11/30/2015, 4:30pm-6:30pm
Who: UW students, faculty, and staff; Wikimedians; Seattle community members
Where: UW Research Commons
Focus: Women and the Sciences in October and Pacific Northwest in November; weekly topics
Wikipedia Lab at the UW Libraries Research Commons brings together local Wikipedia experts with University of Washington subject specialists and UW community members to learn about editing Wikipedia. Come contribute vital, local, and corrective content to the world's largest online encyclopedia. Come as you are with questions, ideas, or content knowledge to share!

The Wikipedia Lab will run weekly, every Monday, during fall quarter. The Lab has two thematic focuses: Women in the Sciences and the Pacific Northwest. Each week will feature a special collections librarian content specialist and Wikipedian editors. Sponsored by the UW Libraries & Wikimedians User Group

To unsubscribe from future messages from Wikipedia:Meetup/Seattle, please remove your name from this list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:17, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Article upgrade assistance request (Pre-translation stage)[edit]

Seasons Greetings,

This is in reference to a relatively new umbrella article on en-wikipedia named Ceremonial pole. Ceremonial pole is a human tradition since ancient times; either existed in past at some point of time, or still exists in some cultures across global continents from north to south & from east to west. Ceremonial poles are used to symbolize a variety of concepts in several different world cultures.

Through article Ceremonial pole we intend to take encyclopedic note of cultural aspects and festive celebrations around Ceremonial pole as an umbrella article and want to have historical, mythological, anthropological aspects, reverence or worships wherever concerned as a small part.

While Ceremonial poles have a long past and strong presence but usually less discussed subject. Even before we seek translation of this article in global languages, we need to have more encyclopedic information/input about Ceremonial poles from all global cultures and languages. And we seek your assistance in the same.

Since other contributors to the article are insisting for reliable sources and Standard native english; If your contributions get deleted (for some reason like linguistics or may be your information is reliable but unfortunately dosent match expectations of other editors) , please do list the same on Talk:Ceremonial pole page so that other wikipedians may help improve by interlanguage collaborations, and/or some other language wikipedias may be interested in giving more importance to reliablity of information over other factors on their respective wikipedia.

This particular request is being made to you since your user name is listed in Wikipedia:Translators available list.

Thanking you with warm regards Mahitgar (talk) 05:16, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

RE Stone Cold Sober[edit]

Ok, I see what I did. It was a mistake, which usually never happens. Sorry--Jonathan Joseph (talk) 00:35, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

The White Album[edit]

Hi, could you and page stalkers give a review at Wikipedia:Peer review/The Beatles (album)/archive2. It really needs a good review I think from some of the really experienced editors here.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:24, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

  • Looked at it, made a couple of edits. I find it painfully dry, and don't really have much else to say about it. - Jmabel | Talk 17:43, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)