User talk:Justlettersandnumbers/old4

---

Note: This page pretty much covers all of 2018. There's stuff from most of 2016 and 2017 here, stuff from about July 2014 until mid-January 2016 here, and some even older stuff, from when I first started editing until about July 2014, here. But I often delete stuff from my talk, so none of these pages is complete.

---

How can i speak with you?

I'm not ignore you i want to be agree Master Studio (talk) 14:04, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Master Studio, if you want to talk about the Barozzi family, the place to do it is Talk:Barozzi family. Otherwise, I will see anything you write at User talk:Master Studio. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:50, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Untitled

Hi, I'm working on the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe page and I'm not sure why the content is being reverted to an outdated version. Yesterday, I added relevant footnotes and references and it has been reverted again. Please let me know how to proceed. Thank you. CIRad84 (talk) 08:36, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

CIRad84, may I suggest that you read about (a) conflict of interest, (b) promotional editing and (c) independent reliable sources, which were my reasons for reverting your edits. I've replied here, but the place to discuss that article is the talk-page, Talk:Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:51, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Fénix Awards

Hi, Justlettersandnumbers, I've just edited "Fénix Awards" in order to rescue the page, maintaining part of your original information. I make the commitment to keep it updated. Following the Wikipedia advice, I'm letting you know this change, hoping that you won't mind and help me to improve the content of this page. Thank you. --Lunaliu (talk) 13:10, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

I don't think that's "my" information, Lunaliu, it's just what was left after I removed a copyright violation there. Anyway, we don't move pages by copying the content to a new page, so for now I've redirected Fénix Awards to Draft:Fénix Awards, which has the previous history of the page. May I suggest that you work on it there and submit it for review when you think it is ready? Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:07, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

I wrote you because I thought, erroneously, that you were the creator of the page. My mistake. Anyway, neither do I copy the content of a page from another page. The information contained in Draft:Fénix Awards is all mine, as it's seen in the History of the page. It was I who put it in there and in Fénix Awards at the same time, because I thought that replacing the old draft was a previous requirement to make a new publication. In any case, the Draft:Fénix Awards is the one to repair, delete or reverse, not the other one. The work in Fénix Awards is new and original, not a copy-paste, (only from my sandbox, where it's still remaining), and has not a copyright violation. I'm not a relative with this stuff, only a fan who asked for some kind of help. It's for sure that the article may suffer from many issues but, as some user wrote: "it needs revision from a movie-spectacle expert". Sadly, again this article was "lost in translation", multiple mistakes, technicalities, and other obstacles that are placing it to a limbo, doing a small favor to casual readers, movie lovers, or general culture. The cry for help is still on the air for someone who has the faculties and the interest to serve and honor what should be the raison d'être of Wikipedia: accurate, reliable and verified information.--Lunaliu (talk) 21:12, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Revert

Hi Justlettersandnumbers, I saw you reverted my edit on Lombard Street (Baltimore). I placed the article in Category:Guardia Lombardi because, as it says in the article, the street is named after the town of Guardia Lombardi. I think this makes the article relevant to that category. Do you not agree? Ergo Sum 01:33, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Well, certainly I had missed that rather surprising statement, Ergo Sum, so I may have been wrong there (though I don't think so). The talk-page of that article would be the best place to discuss it, I think. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:13, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Please attend to my request sir. THANK YOU Amosflash (talk) 10:24, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Royal Microscopical Society

You seem to have reverted one of my edits...

...en route to deleting a pile of crap posted by a troll.

I approve. Narky Blert (talk) 00:54, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

David Ostrowski

Hi Justlettersandnumbers. You requested a revdel for large parts of David Ostrowski a few weeks back per WP:COPYVIO. Lots of content has been readded to the article again, so I'm wondering if you wouldn't mind taking a peek to see if it's the same as the previously removed stuff. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:30, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

I saw, Marchjuly. I don't see any substantial copyright problem with the new content. Nor do I see anything good about it – it looks like the usual gallery puff-piece ("... addresses a sense of subversive Post-Minimalist apathy"? – could we have that in English, please?). Someone needs to go in there with a brush-hook. I might try to do something about it if no-one else does. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:47, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for taking a look. I was just curious as to whether somebody simply re-added content which has previously been removed as a copyvio. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:37, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Baby Bootlegger

Hi Justlettersandnumbers. You requested a revdel for some parts of Baby Bootlegger. I tried to find the correct template for the article but could not find one, so I used what I found. I'm not a wikipedia expert but know about the topic of this page quite a lot. I will rewrite the article this week to remove the copyright violations. Thanks and sorry for the hassle. -- hki007 (talk) 13:52, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Not quite, hki007 – what is needed there is a copyright investigation and clean-up; the revdeletion comes after that. Please don't make any edit to the page until that is complete. If you want to work on a re-write you can do so at this page (please follow that exact link to reach it). Please don't copy anything from the various sources you copied from before (or indeed any other published source), as doing that would make your re-write useless. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:13, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

George Crouch

Hi Justlettersandnumbers. Thanks for your fast response and sorry for the similar copyright issues on both of the articles Baby Bootlegger and George Crouch I have recently written. I want to fix these problematic issues so that the accurate information remains. However, I remain somewhat confused with the Wikipedia policies, what is accepted and what is not. I know about the articles' substance but I'm not that much an expert when it comes to the Wikipedia process or technical details. Where could I find some layman intro to the Wikipedia policies, starting from very simple questions like "are cross-references inside Wikipedia good or bad?". As an example, I had a link in the George Crouch article to the APBA Gold Cup Wikipedia article, and after the latest revisions I notice that this cross-link has been removed. Is it a bad thing to refer to other Wikipedia articles? Is there something I can do to get the copyright violation notification removed from the George Crouch article? Big thanks. -- hki007 (talk) 10:46, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Hki007, don't worry, those pages will get sorted out in time; the really important thing is to avoid adding any more copied content in the future. At George Crouch, the copyvio-revdel request will be removed by the administrator who hides the "bad" edits in the page history; it should be left there until that happens. You are free to edit the page, but not – of course! – to re-add any of the previous infringing content. Wikilinking is (within reason) always encouraged, and the only reason that "Gold Cup" isn't linked in that page is that I forgot to go back and see which Gold Cup it was – sorry! There's a lot of advice for newer editors at Wikipedia:Your first article, with plenty of links to various relevant topics. If you have specific questions, you can always ask at the Teahouse, which is there for that purpose, and particularly aimed at new editors.

A question: when you wrote Finnish transport vessel Wilhelm Carpelan, did you translate directly from some Finnish source or sources (such as fi.wp?), or was the text entirely your own? Because if this contains direct translation, it too may need to be sorted out and/or cleaned up (I'm afraid I can't read Finnish at all, so it's hard for me to judge). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:56, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi Justlettersandnumbers. I'm a classic boat and historic ship aficionado. I wrote both the original Finnish wikipedia article https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/M/S_Wilhelm_Carpelan and the English article Finnish transport vessel Wilhelm Carpelan. The winter photo of the vessel in the Wikipedia articles is taken by me, I could see her for ten years from my office windows. I built the original Finnish article from information snippets from multiple sources, all in Finnish and Swedish, including printed military history magazines from the 1970s (http://www.rannikonpuolustaja.fi/archive/1979_2.pdf) and early 2000s, and the obituary of the person who rebuilt the ship after the Finnish Navy decommissioned her. There's some later edits and additions to the pages by other Wikipedia contributors and I have not checked where all that information is coming from. I pretty much translated the English wikipedia article from my original Finnish article. One Finnish wikipedia editor did remove sections from my original wikipedia text saying that the information is not "relevant" which to me sounded a bit odd, especially now that I look at the sections that have been added by others, and tell about similar technical details of the vessel. -- hki007 (talk) 17:46, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Personal question

Please tell what one needs to do to get Wikipedia access to HighBeam and Newspapers.com? Thank you. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 20:51, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Bbarmadillo, some questions are easy ... but this isn't one of them. It's all changed since I signed up. The starting point should be here, but that takes you here, which is a page I've never seen. I think you need OAuth to log in there, and should then see a "Start new application" button. I'm sorry I can't be more helpful. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:21, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 18:14, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Just stopped by to say thanks again. I've got access to HighBeam following your advice! -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 21:10, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Kaldighi

Hi, JLAN - Kaldighi is back in the NPP queue. I saw where you redirected it back in Aug last year. Not seeing any improvement so I'm inclined to send it to Draft space until it's fixed. Your thoughts? ^{Atsme📞📧} 03:11, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Hmm... {hi, Atsme!) ... I either missed that revert or decided it was a battle best left unfought. The editor is now check-user blocked. I think a redirect is the best choice there, but draft space could work too. I can't find anything about it other than its (probable) existence as a quarter or suburb of Gangarampur – but then I don't speak or read Hindi. We also have Kaldighi Park, which should probably go the same way. We don't have a page on the lake, which this page tells us will be used for "pissiculture" – so maybe not the best spot for swimming? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:46, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Opinion sought

I'm curious for your opinion on the Mariah Robertson page. Should only take about 2 seconds, specifically these unreferenced gallery exhibition lists. And of course she wants to add more, because these lists apparently aren't enough. Spintendo ᔦᔭ 18:25, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Corriente Cattle

You just reverted a set of edits I made to the Corriente article, because one of the three citations I added was to a magazine article that I wrote. I'm not clear on what was wrong with the citation. Generally speaking, a magazine article like that one is a perfectly valid Wikipedia cite. Is your issue that Acres U.S.A. doesn't have an archive of the article on their own website, or would it be a valid citation from someone else, but not from me? Thanks. Gary D Robson 20:46, 7 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gary D Robson (talk • contribs)

Gary D Robson, I haven't examined the source in detail, so can't comment on its reliablility. It's generally considered poor form to quote oneself in Wikipedia. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:06, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Fair enough. If it's basically an etiquette thing, I'll make sure not to cite anything I've written and go back to my original sources.Gary D Robson 21:24, 7 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gary D Robson (talk • contribs)

@Gary D Robson: Just since I'm passing, FYI the actual policy is at Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#Citing_yourself. Alarichall (talk) 00:59, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

@Alarichall: Thank you! According to that policy, it was a perfectly reasonable and valid Wikipedia citation, but it's not worth making a fuss over it. Gary D Robson 15:38, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

"The National memo" dispute

Hi. As requested by Robert McClenon I am notifying you that a Dispute resolution request has been raised for your edits to The National Memo article. Please share your point of view at the dispute's page. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 19:32, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Remy Blumenfeld

@Justlettersandnumbers: Hi, May I know why are you reverting my all edits from article Remy Blumenfeld. It takes two days for me to prepare the whole article with proper citations and formatting. And, It took only few seconds to revert the whole article. The article complies Wikipedia guidelines and all the information is verifiable. If you think my edits not complies Wikipedia rules, you are free to add maintenance tags or can resolve the issue as per WP:FIXIT. Also, I would request you to please refrain from reverting my edits. I am taking the issue to Wikipedia Helpdesk. If there is any problem in my edits, they will inform me. Thanks 223.189.17.142 (talk) 09:31, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

223.189.17.142, what you wrote here is your first edit to Wikipedia. I reverted a large addition by another IP. My edit summary there was "rm a mass addition of promotional content (promotional both in tone and in intent) – WP:neutrality is one of the core principles of this project" – surely that tells you clearly why I did so? A question for you: what is your connection to Blumenfeld? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:20, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: Thank you for explaining reason. What you reverted that was my edit. As I am associated with the subject, I do declare my conflict of interest here. As you told the article does not meet the Wikipedia's neutrality guidelines. I'm again preparing it complying neutrality guidelines and would share it with you for approval. Do it need to register myself on Wikipedia to make further edits. As edit option is disabled now. 106.209.177.61 (talk) 16:34, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: Hi, I have registered myself on Wikipedia. Can you please check my sandbox, I have reworked on the article, complying Wikipedia's policy. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MrDavies/sandbox. I have cited only reliable references, also have removed promotional wording as per Wikipedia:Neutrality. I would appreciate if you can do a favor and let me what more can be done. If you find any error or any kind of violation in article, please feel free to fix it. Thank you. --MrDavies (talk) 15:47, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Well, MrDavies, your first step is to disclose the nature of your WP:conflict of interest, specifically whether you are WP:PAID. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:54, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Yes, As earlier I disclosed that I am associated with the subject and have WP:conflict of interest. I work for Blumenfeld, but not directly paid to edit the Wikipedia article. You can consider me paid, if Wikipedia policy says so. I do not have problem.

Also, Please let me know if current article violates any policy. Also would request you to accept the article if it meets for approval. Thanks--MrDavies (talk) 16:15, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

There's another thing you need to clarify, MrDavies. If you previously edited as the IP 223.180.3.39, as you stated above, how was your very first edit to Wikipedia a lengthy and complete re-write in polished idiomatic English (in contrast to the English you use here), with perfectly formatted references, infobox, and filmography table [4]. That is not the sign of a new editor. It takes a great deal of experience here to produce something like that. Have you ever had another account here? Or perhaps Mr. Blumenfeld paid someone else to write the article and you simply uploaded it? Voceditenore (talk) 16:47, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Liberal and Left-Wing

In the United States, 'liberal' has lost its original nineteenth-century meaning of referring to liberal democracy, partly because the original objective of liberal democracy has been considered achieved in the United States since the end of the eighteenth century. Liberal instead does mean either left-wing or progressive, and I mostly agree with Spintendo that left-wing and liberal are equivalent in context. In any case, it isn't worth volunteer editors spending a lot of time working to tweak the wording to provide a better advertisement for a paid editor. However, Spintendo is mostly correct in an American context, and that is the relevant context. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:57, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

I can't agree. Those words have to be used in a way and in a context that makes it possible for anyone, anywhere in the world, to understand them. I wasn't there, but I understand that Russia under Stalin was pretty left-wing, but not at all liberal; these are common and widely-understood meanings. But – though of course it's always a pleasure to hear from you – I really can't bring myself to devote one more word or brain-cell to the infernal National Memo or its politics. Sorry, but my patience there has worn thin. Best regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:11, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Guardian News & Media Archive

Would you care to let me know how the business deal between GNM and Fleet Street's Finest Ltd. be covered in this section without just deleting it. It seems to be acceptable to cover other means of income generation for the paper in the sub headed - "Membership" subscription scheme - and other business links to DigitalArchive for example. Is it just the outbound link that's an issue? Should it just go to the Guardian page? Best regards, Bret Painter (talk) 23:18, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Bret Painter, please see the notice I left on your talk-page about disclosing your WP:conflict of interest. Wikipedia is not an advertising platform. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:21, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers, Well that's good news, I'm struggling to write anything on this platform. How do I register my COI properly? And please consider my previous note on your talk page a personal request for you register the business dealing between Guardian News Media and Fleet Street's Finest in the archive section as you deem fit. Cheers Bret Painter (talk) 23:31, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Changes in Article.

I do appreciate the Reference changes, of which I did not know the correct way of adding them.

I am though upset of the major changes to my article without my notification or request. As I noted it was just my first published version being to a certain stranded but not my final. You watered it down to an absolute boring piece of pure information with more errors and inaccuracies than original noted. Taking out a lot of information that I had citations for. As Dury did very little teaching throughout his later career, as well with the incorrect version of emigrated and immigrated. As Dury did not leave the US to "emigrated" to the country. "emigrated" Is From, not to. (He immigrated to the US.) As well with removing his marriage which is the reason why he left Europe as well with the change in the caption of his self portrait. It is noted he's 18 on the back, therefor it is from 1835. As I am irritated to such major changes without just suggesting them privately. Of Which some are better, yes, but it still doesn't give you the grounds to change so much without my notice.

I do appreciate the References change, but it's even more inaccurate then before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benjamin.P.L (talk • contribs) 17:34, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Er, no, Benjamin.P.L, when he left the Kingdom of Bavaria to go to the United States, he emigrated. And, sorry, but it isn't your article, it's ours, Wikipedia's. Unwisely in my view, you chose to move it to mainspace before it was ready; it was (and I think still is) at risk of deletion because this person is apparently not WP:notable by our standards (the only explanations I can think of for the absence of any coverage of his work in Bavaria are (1) that he changed his name or (2) that all that stuff is a post-constructed myth). I tried to improve its chances of survival by strengthening the sourcing and removing some unsourced stuff; I'm sorry if you don't like the result. Anyway, the place to discuss errors in or changes to the article is the talk-page, Talk:George Dury. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:54, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers I disagree completely, I see that as just a sad excuse... Articles are by people and are direct references of their work, they do not go out to the whole community but allow the community to improve errors or inaccuracies. Wikipida makes it clear that people's articles are their work. I could make the same claim to anything the you've made. It was ready, it was to a good stranded with correct information with nothing wrong with citation. Just because it was not to a layout of your approval does not mean it wasn't. Don't throw me in another forum for your own changes which I see are worse. The direct TN State Museum article I cited had the same information. Along with the citation from the white house itself on the first ladies portrait. (He Immigrated to The U.S. He did not Emigrate from the U.S, If you included that he did emigrate from Kingdom of Bavaria to the United States, that would work. But, that wasn't added.) Mr. Dury is one of the Finest artist from TN, doing portraits of presidents and kings, he is notable by Wikipedia's standards.. Not yours. (As there are articles on lesser figures even shorter and sadder than mine, so don't be unreasonable.)

Benjamin.P.L, I'm really not sure what you are trying to say here (perhaps English is not your mother tongue?). Anyway, I do understand that you are upset. I left on your talk-page an invitation to the Teahouse. Why don't you try posting there if you don't want to use the talk-page of the article? – you might find someone sympathetic to your point of view, or get some friendly advice beyond what I am able to offer. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:24, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Chulbul Pandey

The page comes under Wikipedia's Fictional characters portal. Kindly don't redirect, remove or try to delete the page. Instead help improving and expanding it. I am aman goyal (talk) 18:48, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Mea culpa

At some XfD or other in the last month, I recall saying something like "This is just the same tendentious breed-moves pattern by someone making the same argument over and over again", about an objection you'd raised. In retrospect, that was cranky on my part, and hypocritical, since I'm as consistent as you are in the arguments I make about such things, and I was recently professing a desire for us to get along better. So, I'm sorry about that. I don't quite recall the context, but it was at the tail end of a lot of stressy stuff from various parties all day long, and I took it out on whoever was handy. I vented in a similar way in the direction of Pigsonthewing around the same time span. Kind of a more-than-momentary loss of temper.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  07:46, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for this, SMcCandlish, though it really wasn't necessary – I took no notice of it at the time, and I'm certainly not going to start worrying about it now. As a result of the years (yes, years) of one person trying to impose his will on the naming of animal breed articles, I now have a profound disinclination to discuss them, or indeed to edit in that area at all. But thanks for the note. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:16, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

George Dury

Thanks for fixing the refs at George Dury I just couldn't figure out what was going on there! Theroadislong (talk) 22:11, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

No problem, it was my fault, not his – I added those refs. What I'm wondering now is whether he just scrapes through notability, or if it should go to AfD. What do you reckon? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:37, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

George Dury

I'll be Glad to explain myself for the concerns you brought up.

I hadn't changed the References yet because I was in the process of adding more, especially for the "Other Notable Subjects" section. Like I noted, if people were Interested they could find them all on the Tennessee Portrait Project's website with little difficulty, while I was in the processes of adding the rest.

As well Explaining that Dury was a Tennessean and spent a longer art career in the state of TN rather then Europe. (That he was primarily a State painter rather than a national.) I was in the process of coming up with a better sentence then putting a State and Nation together.

Dury's Marriage is the reason he leaves Europe for the US. I understand it not being a strong Citation, But it's something simple that shows they were married, as "Mount Olivet Cemetery" has it cited being the Same George Dury.

If you read the Full citation from the "Memorials of Sarah Childress Polk" you would have noticed that the President and First lady paid for their official portraits out of Pocket when leaving the White House in 1849. (Allowing them to bring them Home to Nashville with them.) President Polk would not have a portrait in the White House till the Buchanan Administration, While Sarah till the Arthur administration. Dury Was commissioned by the Ladies Association of Nashville to copy Mrs Polk's official Portrait(GPA Healy's) the one she owned for the white house. As Sarah's White House Portrait is the copy by George Dury, not the the GPA Healy. (You can see the GPA Healy's at Polk's presidential museum.) As For Sarah's other Portrait it was a widowers portrait with no relation to the White House commission, that's why I left it out.(http://tnportraits.org/polk-sarah-childress-dury-1878.htm)

I'll be glad to Fix these problems in just a short Time, Including the References which I know are a mess. (So Excuse them for just the time being.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benjamin.P.L (talk • contribs) 02:17, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

File:Ida Kar by Mark Gerson, 1974, grayscale, cropped.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ida Kar by Mark Gerson, 1974, grayscale, cropped.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Dear Justlettersandnumbers

Dear Justlettersandnumbers,

I was wondering if you could help me out with the Artist biography of: AIX1 And i was also wondering if you could help me with the biography of Recordlabel: Akhadir Recordings Amsterdam Wiki Link AIX1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIX1 Wiki Link Akhadir Recordings Amsterdam: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akhadir_Recordings_Amsterdam

These pages are not for commercial purpose endings but for independence for both the artist and the record label

Thanks for your Time! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akesc (talk • contribs) 12:27, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Akesc, but there's little help I can offer. I've nominated both articles for deletion because I can find no evidence (at all) that Ismaël Akhadir and his various projects are in any way WP:notable by our standards (and yes, I have searched for that evidence). If you want to prevent deletion you'll need to add a good number of references to solid independent reliable sources (major newspapers, music magazines, national music charts, books and so on) which discuss him or his projects in depth; you should then leave a note in the deletion discussions to say that you have done so. Also, if you have some personal or professional connection to him you should disclose it. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:41, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Religious promotion?

How is indicating the influence that a church has over a school promotion? People are free to decide for themselves whether they want to choose that school, but they have a right to know who's influential in running it. I note that there are as many editors who categorize themselves as atheists and agnostics in Wikipedia as Catholics and Christians, so I have no fear that a religion-friendly thrust will impose itself in Wikipedia. Jzsj (talk) 14:00, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Jzsj, given the circumstances, I think it would be very unwise to continue this conversation. Just briefly: if you can't see why some might think that you are here with an agenda, that may help to explain how things got to this unfortunate point – which I greatly regret, as I hope you know. My best regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:30, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words. Jzsj (talk) 19:34, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Richest Americans

Hi Justlettersandnumbers. First, a small technical issue: the talk page of List of Americans by net worth wrongly redirects to Talk:List of members of the Forbes 400. Could you please change that? Secondly, how do you suggest that names be added to that list without copyright controversies? The fact that Forbes lists in their entirety are found on Wikipedia - for years now and with virtually no opposition - should be taken into consideration. Regards, Yambaram (talk) 23:49, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

I fixed the first issue so you can disregard it... I'd also like to hear your opinion on whether the Richest american/s redirects should redirect to 1) List of Americans by net worth, or 2) List of richest Americans in history (the latter is the current state). Yambaram (talk) 00:16, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Late apologies

Please accept my late apologies for being rude and obnoxious during The National Memo discussion. You were right and I was wrong. Having 140% of my contribution deleted got me a bit off the track - this should never be the case again. Thank you for being patient and tolerant all the way through. I learned a lot about the concept of notability and depth of coverage from this discussion. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 17:59, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

That is a very gracious apology, Bbarmadillo, and thank you for it. But it really isn't necessary at all – it was, after all, my own choice to get involved in that discussion and to continue with it even when it became difficult. I'm not going to apologise for my opinions of the harmful effects of paid editing in this project, but I do apologise if at any time my expression of those opinions has seemed to be directed at you personally – that was never my intention. Oh, and I learned a lot too! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:35, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Justlettersandnumbers. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 23:19, 16 March 2018 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Nikkimaria (talk) 23:19, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Offer to Help Improve Paolo Casali Page

Hi justlettersandnumbers, I wanted to reach out to you and ask for your assistance on improving the Dr. Paolo Casali page. If I can offer assistance on helping the page be neutral and utilize Encyclopedic content, please let me know. I am not a paid editor and have no intention of making unwanted changes on this page. The COI was disclosed on the talk page as well. Again, any input from you will help enhance the page and make sure it is written with a neutral point of view. Burles104 (talk) 16:05, 20 March 2018 (UTC)Burles104

Burles104, I think the best place to talk about this would be Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Paolo Casali, again. As I have said there, I'm prepared to devote a small (and I do mean small) amount of time to improving that page; that improvement would, in my opinion, include the removal of most or all of the existing COI text. What you could also do is start listing, on the talk-page, the independent reliable sources: not his own website, his university bio, his papers and publications, the in-house paper of the place he works and so on, but major independent newspapers, books and journals which talk about him in depth and detail. You'll also need to explain the nature of your connection to the other COI editors who have plagued the history of that article. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:21, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Copyright violations

I wasn't aware until you said something that a company with actual newspaper articles on its web site might be violating copyright. I went back to the web site a few years after using those as sources and they weren't there, but that was because an editor with a COI wanted to improve the article and I was helping him. I had to find the articles the proper way at that point.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:50, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Can you give me a hint which article this is in relation to, Vchimpanzee? (I'm assuming it's not Juliette Benzoni, which you don't seem to have edited?) Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:58, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

DriveTime was an article I created many years ago and helped improve several years ago. But the newspaper articles on the web site are gone.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:44, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

COIN Ping

I've mentioned you at Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Eyes_on_editor_Rusboot over our seemingly mutual concerns about User:Rusboot. Hope this is ok.--SamHolt6 (talk) 01:07, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Natives Éditions

Hi Justlettersandnumbers! I would like to ask you for some advice. Recently, I have contributed for the page Natives (Éditions), but it was deleted. Maybe, Natives Éditions is not a huge company, but it is a very serious publisher and a really original music label. Do you think it is possible to do something in order to restore this page? I don't have now any access to its content on Wikipedia, the only link I could find is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Natives_(Éditions)

Thank you in advance for your advice! 1996Paris (talk) 12:34, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

On balance, 1996Paris, my advice is "don't". The consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Natives (Éditions) is not overwhelming, but I don't see any reason or justification for you to ask for a review of the decision reached. You could try starting a new page at Draft:Natives (label), but unless you have a lot of solid reliable sources (say, at least five) which discuss the label in depth, I personally doubt whether that would achieve anything. There seems to be another problem too: every edit (but one) that you have made in this project has been to promote Marina Tchebourkina and her work; if you have a personal or professional connection to that person you should declare it, and should refrain from editing the page about her and also from making any edit about her to any other page. Wikipedia does not tolerate promotion of any kind, and can be quite hostile towards editors who attempt it. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:49, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice, Justlettersandnumbers. No, I don't have any personal or professional connection, neither to Natives Éditions nor to Marina Tchebourkina. I know her CDs, they are remarkable. This musician as well this publisher worth to be known all over the world. Natives has an other outstanding French musician, Philippe Foulon; I had an intention to create an article about him, but now I think I willn't. I will try to find some reliable sources for Natives Éditions, but it is seems to be much more difficult to find them for a publisher, than for an artist… Best wishes, 1996Paris (talk) 14:46, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi Justlettersandnumbers! I have just published the draft for Natives (label). I added some new sources; maybe I can find some additional information later. By the way, I think that the Natives' logo is too transparent, maybe it worth to make it darker? Thank you for your advice. Have a nice day! 1996Paris (talk) 08:58, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Justlettersandnumbers! I haven't had any news since my last edit on a new page at Draft:Natives (label). Can you tell me, please, if you think it will be possible to publish this article? Thank you in advance, 1996Paris (talk) 20:35, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, 1996Paris, I've nothing to add to my previous advice. Notability is not demonstrated, and I don't believe that either you or the label is independent of Tchebourkina. Please remember that Wikipedia does not tolerate promotion of any kind. We have (fortunately!) particularly strict notability criteria for companies, and this one does not satisfy them. Sorry, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:14, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Justlettersandnumbers for your reply. In fact, it's quite difficult to demonstrate a notability of a little publisher, such as Natives. I think that the only way to do it consists in developing of information about the great artists who work for the label. I began with Tchebourkina (I dont't have any link with her), and as I said before, I had an intention to do it with an other outstanding musician, Philippe Foulon. Do you think it can be useful? Have a nice day, 1996Paris (talk) 17:52, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

PC Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:32, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Is there a reason why Justlettersandnumbers isn't an administrator yet? Alex Shih (talk) 17:40, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Whaddya say JLAN? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 19:54, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for extra userright, Amorymeltzer, now I'd better see if I can find out how to make use of it. As for the other suggestion, I'm going to think that over for a day or two at least; meanwhile, thanks for the confidence (probably misplaced) you've both shown. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:27, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

I do agree that, bollockings aside, JLAN is a possible future RfA candidate. I haven't looked in-depth though. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:49, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Bump ~ Amory (u • t • c) 21:37, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

ah ha!

I see now ... I should have looked under Recent listings. Sorry for the extra work! And thanks. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:27, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

No problem, not enough extra work to justify any sort of apology. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:41, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Unjustified removal of contributions ('digital painting')

Hi, justlettersandnumbers, I have given you the only ticket number that I have. I can not confirm what you write, "that a copyright violation was found". On the contrary: no violation was found. A substantial contribution was deleted unjustified. Even if it was deleted unjustified, you write, 'it would not mean that the content will necessarily be restored to the article'. I am surprised that the administrative procedure does not respect contributions untill they are proven to be incorrect, imprecise or in any way improper. After all, we donate time, effort and money. (April 1, 2018)

Best regards, Pauline van de VenVandevenp (talk) 00:15, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Bojana Sentaler

Hello, I've reverted one of your edits by adding back the background section in the Bojana Sentaler entry (your comment mentioned it was deleted due to a lack of references). The references were already listed in the previous paragraphs but I've now added them directly to the background section text so it's more clear. Thanks Abonzz (talk) 14:47, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Sounds good, Abonzz! What I don't understand is why the tone of that page is so promotional, and apparently becoming more so. Why would we want to have something like "... worn her luxury brand ..." in an encyclopaedia? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:49, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

"Luxury brand" is a term often used in fashion lingo to describe a clothing line so I was unaware that it was promotional in tone. However, I can always remove that sentence from the lead. Previously, the lead also indicated that she was known for her alpaca coats. If you like, I can put that part back so the lead isn't too sparse.Abonzz (talk) 20:22, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Copyright issue...

Battle of Poison Spring appears to be pretty much a straight copy-paste from here. You're my copyright-problem-go-to-person (aren't you thrilled?). Ealdgyth - Talk 11:40, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Ealdgyth, there are better people to go-to! But this one was, I think, not too hard. At first I thought it was completely straightforward: the "dwindling supplies" stuff is, I'm pretty sure, public domain (published on nps.gov, copied without attribution by OSU); however, it seems that the "war was not as flashy, but no less bitter" section, copied from a different OSU page, is not. I reverted to before it was (recently) added and requested revdeletion of a few revisions. I've added attribution for the PD content, which was originally cited but at some point in the last thirteen years got un-cited. Let me know if you think any of that is wrong. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:45, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

SillaJen

Good morning Justlettersandnumbers, With regards to the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SillaJen page SillaJen, I have deleted the parts that contain the copyright information. Also, I have requested the company to give permission to use the material that they have published through the newsletter and their website and they sent me an email approving it. It appears that "An email has been received by the OTRS Team." I was wondering if you could review the issue and resolve the current Copyvio message. Thank you for your kind consideration and support :) Best, Oncolytics101 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oncolytics101 (talk • contribs) 17:05, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Unfounded copyright issue, please restore text

Dear 'Justlettersandnumbers'. In february, you deleted and blocked a large and rather valuable contribution to 'digital painting' that I made over a long time, because of an unfounded copyright issue. You were checking he matter with the help of the ticket number that I gave you. As you can see, the lemma now only offers very limited information, partly inaccurate, and certainly not without commercial influence. What did you find out about the assumed 'copyright infringement'? Please let me know how we proceed. Kind regards, Pauline van de Ven (26/4/2018). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vandevenp (talk • contribs) 09:54, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Walking and Biking in Florence

Hi, I made a section in the Transportation about walking and biking in Florence, and was wondering why it was removed? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Katieadeclue (talk • contribs) 18:49, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Katieadeclue! If you look at the edit summary I left for that edit, you'll see that it reads "sorry, this is not encyclopaedic content (you can walk or bike in almost any city); you can't cite your own sandbox as a reference". Most of the content you added was not specifically about Florence (can you name one city, town or village where walking is not a possible way of getting around?) except for the date of creation of the pedestrian zones – which was not supported by independent reliable sources. Does that help? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:37, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2018 May 10

I do not know what is your role in deciding this matter but since you removed the comments last time around thus I am reaching out to you to request that this matter be decided with urgency before the discussion gets out of hand again. I have been trying to avoid commenting there since you removed the comments but it is hard to keep oneself at bay seeing the gross distortion of facts and personal attacks by OP. OP has provided the evidence and NadirAli has responded, there is no place for the last comment by OP. I request you to please remove that comment. Also, please know that this report has nothing to do with copyvios, this is all about the content disputes between OP and NadirAli. OP has no pain in his heart for copyvio rather their heartache is different, it is all about getting an opponent blocked to tilt the consensus building process on multiple pages. OP's grudge against NadirAli is shown in below diffs.

Capitals00 Feud with NadirAli

[5], [6], Deceptive edit summary when reverting the WP:STATUSQUO restored by NadirAli. After that Capitals00 goes on the talkpage to make WP:PERSONALATTACK (the one in number 2), [7], [8] Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 01:53, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

FYI

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Long-term abuse (3rd nomination). Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:52, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

National Fire Protection Association

Hello mate. I was noticed that you eliminate the contribution I added in this article because I did not put citations to contrast the information. If is possible, I want to recover the article in order to indicate the site I searched the history of this association. Thanks for paying attention.

Irene Christian Manu Silvia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irene Christian Silvia Manu (talk • contribs) 13:40, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Vladimir Krulj

I was pointed to this page I was pointed to this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Krulj and I think the infobox is wrong and done for promotional purposes as most of the other information. Can you please fix it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.27.229.242 (talk) 08:07, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

EASA

We are student of Aerospace engineering and we know a lot about this topic. Moreover, you could watch the information that I have put if you enter in EASA official web page.

Thank you for your contributions but I have to say that our information is not invented.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Irene Christian Silvia Manu (talk • contribs) 19:22, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Unblock in March

Just for your information, see this on my talk page:

"Fram, it's my idea to correct all past violations if I found them or I'm notified, and as I said, it's my idea not to "copy and paste" from sources in the future, even if they are in PD or CC0; therefore if I do not find a PAST violation, and I'm notified and allowed to correct it, and this does not count as new problems ("old violations which are only found after the unblock obviously don't count as new problems"), I understand than this is the last chance unblock. --Elisa.rolle (talk) 11:08, 12 March 2018 (UTC)" (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Elisa.rolle&oldid=830041401)

The violation for Dorothy Caruso was in August 2017. As I said if I was notified I would have taken care of it (as I did). Moreover, as you can currently see on my talk page, I'm "semi-retired", I do not contributed anymore new content on Wikipedia, and I'm only correcting things as I found them (or I'm notified). KR, Elisa.rolle (talk) 19:15, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Elisa.rolle, you are responsible for any content you add to Wikipedia, including any copyright violation. At Dorothy Caruso you have been edit-warring to repeatedly restore a copyvio, albeit one of a single sentence. You don't need to wait to be notified by someone else that it's a copyvio – it was, after all, you and no-one else who copied it verbatim from the New Yorker article in the first place, in August of last year. And no, it wasn't you that took care of it – I did part of that, with this edit, and an admin will do the rest. Courtesy ping to Fram and TonyBallioni in case they have any comment. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:33, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

my article clearly passes GNG

Please respond to my response: User_talk:Dream_Focus#Puzzle_Puppers_moved_to_draftspace Dream Focus 11:49, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Lady Eleanor Holles School

Hi, amongst other edits you deleted the list of all extracurricular activities apart from sport, but made no reference to this in your edit notes. What is the thinking here? Rhanbury (talk) 16:19, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Rhanbury, I wonder, did you read the edit summary I left for that edit? Anyway, the thinking here is exactly the same as everywhere else in Wikipedia: our content is based on independent reliable sources, and unsourced material can be – and often is – removed at any time. If you have some connection to the school you should declare it; if you receive or expect to receive any financial reward from the school, disclosure is obligatory. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:48, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I did read the edit summary. Throughout the rest of the article you have added the cn tag on unreferenced material, except in this one case where you deleted the sentence instead. I am trying to understand why the difference in treatment. I am not particularly attached to the sentence, which long predates my involvement, although there does need to be more than sports under the extracurricular heading so I shall seek out some references. On the COI point I have put full details on the talk page and would ask you to remove the COI tag at the top if you are satisfied. Thanks. Rhanbury (talk) 07:59, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Geology of Uganda

Zircon 2 (talk)16:25, 21 June 2018 (UTC) Justlettersandnumbers, thanks very much for taking the time to review the recent Geology of Uganda article! If you would like to consolidate the references to the Thomas Schluter Atlas of African Geology, that would be excellent. I am a comparative newcomer to Wikipedia, and I appreciate all the people who have reviewed the recent launch of geology of Africa articles. A technical question you may understand better than I do. From a category or SEO perspective, is there a reason why none of the African country geology articles are showing up in general search engine searches?

Could you take a look

At Post-presidency of George Washington for lifted text and close paraphrase. I removed some and revdel and then did a second scan, and I suspect it has more close paraphrase and copying that I don't have the time this week to get to it and I don't want to send an article on a significant historical figure to CP unless absolutely necessary. If you don't have time, that's fine, but thought I'd reach out as you're great at this type of thing. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:21, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Tony! That's not an easy one to review, as parts are already revdeleted and I can't see what was in the big chunk that was deleted by the author. My initial take: no obvious problems in the current version (though I don't know where that content came from or if it was existing wp content), but revdeletion didn't go back far enough – in past versions, "Mount Vernon a model of efficiency and productivity" was taken from here, "younger freedmen ... read and write" et seq. is (very) close paraphrasing from here. That's off the top of my head; I'll try to look little further tomorrow. In theory, CP should be an investigative process, not an inquisition; if it isn't clear that we're only trying to clean things up and that no-one is actually going to be hanged, drawn and quartered, we probably need to make some changes to the process or the blanking template or something. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:35, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Hey, I was also dealing with this (see the author's talk page) and originally brought it to Tony's attention. I didn't realize you couldn't see the revdel'd parts, I can email them to you for comparison if you want? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:39, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Premeditated Chaos, but I think the table of examples you put on that talk-page is more than enough to show that there is a real problem, so the author's apparent inability to recognise it is quite concerning (I'd thought this was a new editor, not one with almost 40000 edits, many of them to very high-profile articles). The next question is probably whether the problem also extends to other articles. The Contribution Surveyor seems to be out of action, which doesn't make that task easier. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:13, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

But unfortunately it anyway doesn't take long to establish that. Text added to George Washington: "Washington's will was meant to be an act of atonement for a lifetime spent in human exploitation"; text in the source: "His will was an act of atonement for a lifetime of concurrence in human exploitation". PMC, Tony, please let me know if there's more I can do. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:26, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Fuck. He's all over that article. (And see also my talk page, where Yopienso (courtesy ping) seems to confirm this is an ongoing problem). I think this needs to go to WP:CCI. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 11:31, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

My sentiments precisely! In theory I agree, CCI is the next step; but in practice that probably means that just so many more articles will be added to the immovable fatberg that is the backlog there, with the risk that people will continue to work on them only to see their work wasted further down the line. I don't expect it can be made to happen, but a co-ordinated clean-up effort might be a preferable approach. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:54, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Okay. I think I'm up for it, I've got some time generally speaking. How/where should we start? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:43, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Talk:Paolo Casali

Thanks for the reply on Talk:Paolo Casali. I left follow up questions and comments. Thanks again. --Meriville (talk) 03:30, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Also, the image is mine but I have asked him to see if he has a better one that can be used. Please tell me how to prove permission to the image.--Meriville (talk) 03:32, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Meriville, the simplest way to provide permission for a photo you took yourself is to use this release generator. Once you have an OTRS ticket number, you can leave a note of it on the file page (or mention it here). For any other photo, the copyright owner (usually the photographer) should upload the file, preferably with the original EXIF data, here, and create a release as above. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:59, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. I have a newer image of him that I think is better so I will go through the process stated above. For now, do you want me to do so for the current image since it will not be used in the near future? I also left another comment on the talk page. Thanks so much for the quick response and information. --Meriville (talk) 03:05, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Meriville, the photo is on Wikimedia Commons, which has its own rules and practices. My guess is that unless permission is provided, it is likely to be deleted. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:31, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers, I uploaded the newer image and filled out the link you sent. I will email the information requested but it is coming from a gmail account as I don't use my business email for personal reasons. Thanks for walking me through this. I am also leaving another request on the talk page to get the image added and also wondering about the previous request. Thanks so much for your time. --Meriville (talk) 03:06, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers, the permission email was sent and I received ticket #2018070610000381. The file is now up for deletion in Wikimedia Commons for the same reason as the last. If you could please review the request to add the image and the other requests on the talk page it would be appreciated. Thanks again. --Meriville (talk) 02:42, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers, I am wondering what I need to do to get a response on the talk page of Paolo Casali. Not sure if I am doing everything correctly but I have not heard back from you or anyone else about the edit requests or the image permission which you provided me instructions for. Please let me know. --Meriville (talk) 05:26, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Actually, I see a response on the talk page from today. However, the file is nominated for deletion despite me sending the permission statement as instructed above. What can be done to help that?--Meriville (talk) 05:30, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Sorry for jumping the gun. I didn't see anything on the talk page of the article until after I left the message on your talk page. I check daily from mobile and did not see anything so I assumed nothing had been responded. Again, sorry to jump the gun with the above message. --Meriville (talk) 05:48, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Töfrahöllin

Hi there! You changed the entry for Töfrahöllin into a redirect to the entry for the author. I'm not sure why: the entry cited two reviews, which demonstrates that it is notable. Your edit summary mentioned that there were no citations, but we shouldn't expect citations in summaries. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it was a great entry, and lots more could be done with it, but maybe it would be more appropriate to mark it as a stub than remove it? I'd be interested to hear what you think. Thanks! Alarichall (talk) 21:57, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Alarichall! I've no specific knowledge of this book, by a writer whose work I don't know. But I think about this the same as I think about the rest of Wikipedia: that there is no value whatsoever in unsourced content (and yes, despite a strong WP:LOCALCONSENSUS to the contrary, I believe that plot summaries and the like are subject to exactly the same project-wide independent sourcing requirements as any other content and should be either referenced or removed). In this particular case, the (fairly standard) approach I would suggest is to develop sourced content within the page on the author, and consider splitting it out into a separate page if it ever becomes unmanageably large. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:57, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Toll Group and WP:CP entry

Hi J-lan. I think you meant to say the content was copied from https://web.archive.org/web/20080731210843/http://www.toll.com.au:80/about.html and was added with this diff? Could you please fix the necessary pages (article, WP:CP entry, and user talk)? I would do it myself but I don't want to make assumptions about what you were trying to say. Thank you, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:34, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Yes, indeed that's what I meant, what an idiot! – thanks for picking that up, Diannaa! Best regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:57, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Justlettersandnumbers: as a paid contributor for Toll Group (COI disclosed) I am in the process of requesting updates to the page. Just saw this notice of copyright investigation and I'm not sure what that means. I read that there is the possibility of the page being deleted and want to make sure that does not happen. If necessary, can the particular content that is in question be removed but the rest of the page remain? Not sure what I need to do to remedy the problem (or really what the problem is). Thanks in advance for your help with this! MeInMelbs (talk) 01:51, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

What it means, MeInMelbs, is that someone has apparently copied copyright material from one of the company's websites into Wikipedia, which we don't allow. It'll be sorted out in due course, and any infringing content will be removed; it usually takes from one to several weeks for that to happen, so some patience may be needed. It should be quite straightforward, but I just didn't have time at that particular moment to check everything and do it straight away. There is absolutely no risk that a page on such a major company will be deleted. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:38, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Justlettersandnumbers. Any update on when this can be looked at? Is there anything I can do at my end to expedite the process? Cheers MeInMelbs (talk) 04:10, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Richard Moya

Due diligence fail on my part... sorry... pours ashes on head --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 07:46, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

About the least of our worries concerning that page, I think, Elmidae, so go easy on the ashes! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:12, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Justlettersandnumbers. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion.
Message added 14:04, 8 July 2018 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—SerialNumber54129 ^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 14:04, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Football stubs

Hi!

Since when do football stubs need more than two references that directly reference everything that's written on the stub itself? Maybe I'm still living in the past, when it was still acceptable. You put two of my articles into draftspace though, when 4 similar articles were reviewed. If you look across Wikipedia, you'll see hundreds, no - thousands of such articles with no fuss about them. --Janisterzaj (talk) 15:44, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

@Janisterzaj: This sounds a bit like a difficulty I noted in the section User_talk:Justlettersandnumbers#Töfrahöllin above. In this case, User:Justlettersandnumbers removed the content of an article of mine and turned it into a redirect. It wasn't a great article by any means, but it visibly met notability criteria, and although it had some content that didn't have secondary references, this was consistent with relevant policy. (And Justlettersandnumbers agreed that his/her objection to that policy is out of step with community opinion.) @Justlettersandnumbers: There's no question that you're doing some really good work on Wikipedia, and I'm grateful for your labours. But perhaps you could be a bit gentler when it comes to policing stubs? Thanks! Alarichall (talk) 00:48, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:38, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Gerda! I do notice that the jewel, unlike the rest of us, never gets any older. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:10, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

If you look more closely you can see it growing ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:21, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Richard Moya

Thanks for your explanation on my Talk page. However, I'm confused about where to proceed with my work on the article. You provided a link [9] to create a temp, but the Draft:Richard_Moya is still out there, and it contains my work with its revision history. I would prefer to keep working at the original at the draft location, so the revision history is not lost. Can you somehow undo your mistake there? Mbcoats (talk) 20:43, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Mbcoats, I don't think there's any mistake. You can work on a new version of the page at that link, but please don't copy any compromised text from the old version (because that will make the rewrite unusable). When it's ready, please leave a note here or at Draft talk:Richard Moya, and I'll ask someone to move it into place. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:46, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

My article has been published as Richard A. Moya. Thanks for you help. Mbcoats (talk) 18:21, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

lists of artworks

Hi Justlettersandnumbers I could use some advice. What do you make of List of artworks by John Middleton, given that you've created List of works by Giambattista Pittoni? I think it goes against guidance at WP:CSC. What's your view? Thanks, Vexations (talk) 21:55, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi! Hmm, so I did! That happened while I was trying to clean up after a very troublesome nuisance/hoax editor, and I don't think I would have done it otherwise (no, I'm wrong, I once created an interminable list of exhibitions just to get them out of the main article – it was, fortunately, deleted almost immediately). I think a good case could be made for merging each of them to its respective parent page, and I think I might just go ahead and propose that for the Pittoni one. This book lists some paintings by Middleton; I wonder what the source was for our list? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:25, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Many of these lists have been moved out of the bios to stand alone, so I'd sound out talk before doing that. Unless with images they are pretty useless, & perhaps best left to fester. Johnbod (talk) 23:18, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Old email

Forgot to let you know, but sent you an email a few days ago. No need to reply if there's no need, just forgot to mention. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 12:30, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Revert: Marc J. Lane

Hello, I saw that on July 9, you reverted the Marc J. Lane page to a previous version because of a paid editing violation. However, I have since updated my user page to fully disclose who I work for in accordance with Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure, but please let me know if there is anything else I may be missing. Otherwise, please undo the revert as some of the information in this previous version is no longer accurate. Thanks so much. Mannpark (talk) 15:07, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Our old friend

FYI for when you return... Our old friend is back. See this "new" user and especially the global contributions. If not already there, put Carlo Bazzi, Ezio Moioli, and Ladislao de Gauss on watch. He also seems to be editing James Rivière (again) both here and cross-wiki as the IP 151.38.20.48. I'll be away in Italy August 2–September 3, but will check in once in a while. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 06:45, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Gadhawa Rural Municipality

Sir, you moved an article related to Gadhawa Rural Municipality in draft because of publishing without references. I was quite busy while creating that article at that time.Now, I have mentioned reliable sources and references of contents on that draft.Would you mind to publish that draft? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sharad87 (talk • contribs) 16:15, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Sharad87! I see that you didn't wait for your draft to be reviewed. If you had, I would have told you that we already have a page on that village – it's at Koilabas. I've redirected your page to the existing article, but it still needs better references (which means not Facebook!). Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:09, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

The BongShomoy News

talk Sir last time this page you moved to draftspace . i extremely sorry, for not adding reference, :) sir, now i added it, please see it. thank you .Rakib kumar (talk) 06:49, 18 July 2018 (UTC)User talk:Rakib kumar

Hi, Rakib kumar! There's still only one reference for Draft:The BongShomoy News, which really isn't enough to show that the paper is notable by our standards. Most of your draft seems to be unsourced – though, as I can't read Bengali, I can't be sure about that. By the way, if you have some personal or professional connection to the paper, you must disclose it. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:52, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

A note

I feel like the Sirens article you flagged for deletion is notable. Maybe you can add to the article? Plus look at my new signature — ColorTheoryRGB CMYK 21:13, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Surreal Barnstar
	You are a jerk ColorTheoryRGB CMYK 22:22, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Untitled

Sir, Gadhawa rural municipality and koilabas are different regions. This rural municipality has been established since last two years by federal government of Nepal. I am a resident of Gadhawa Rural Municipality ward number 1. So,I would like to request you to publish Gadhawa Rural Municipality article.Many VDCs, including Gobardiya VDC has been merged to form Gadhawa Rural Municipality. Sincerely, Sharad87— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sharad87 (talk • contribs) 11:43, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Sharad87, there was just one reference in that version of the page; it stated that Gadhawa Rural Municipality was formerly known as Koilabas. But it's beyond me to sort this out – we also have Gadhawa, apparently also the same place. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:50, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Copyright

At least check the sources you're deleting before you blank an entire page. The archive source clearly stated "Usage Public Domain / creative commons & uncopyrighted" Just the fact that we have on Wikimedia a copy of the entire song should be evidence enough, but if it's not, then it's reinforced by how the sources very clearly stated that it's public domain. I don't think you're acting in bad faith, but I do think you're acting foolish. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 18:09, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

BrendonTheWizard, please do not again remove the copyvio blanking template from Anthem of the Tajik Soviet Socialist Republic or any other page. That'll be done by the admin who evaluates the copyright status of the material. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:15, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

I would like to politely remind you that the copyright status of the Anthem of the Tajik Soviet Socialist Republic has already been assessed. Tajikistan is the legal successor of the Tajik SSR and national/state symbols are not and cannot be copyrighted. The same holds true under the law of the Russian Federation, the legal successor of the Soviet Union. "it has not been demonstrated that the music, the lyrics or the translations of the lyrics are out of copyright" simply means you didn't check information readily available, as it has already been evaluated for copyright and determined to legally not be subject to copyright. In the future, please stop and see for yourself before you purge an entire Wikipedia article. Thank you. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 20:26, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Meetoo

Hi,

I work for Meetoo the organisation and created the article that you said is copyrighted via this wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Meetoo

How can I show you the evidence? I can change show you that I can login to that page and show you? That is also my author section https://www.meetoo.com/blog/2017/meetoo-a-brief-history.

Here is another one of my blogs on this website: https://www.meetoo.com/blog/2018/3-reasons-you-must-try-a-student-response-system-this-year

I also declared that I work for the company and that this page is completely taken from other independent sources and references. I am not sure why this is becoming such a challenge?

Many thanks, Ben.

Benwaugh4, there's a link to instructions on how to release copyright material for use in Wikipedia in the message I left on your talk-page (at the end of the second bullet-point). However, you might as well be aware that such material is in practice hardly ever included in our articles, among other reasons because it is almost invariably unacceptably promotional in tone. Wikipedia does not tolerate promotion of any kind, so any attempt to promote your employer here is pretty much doomed to failure. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:31, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello

I am undoing all of your redirects. You pissed me off. Thanks for ruining my birthday. Make sure to think about my feelings, as well as the fact that I am bisexual.

Plus, if Sirens can’t have a page, why can’t The shape of my heart song by nas have one?

ColorTheoryRGB CMYK 19:10, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Havi Carel

Hi, this was the first draft I moved to mainspace after being accepted at AfC earlier today and I noticed you tagged it with a few issues pretty quickly once I had moved it. It seemed like the subject would pass an AfD based on some searching, so I'm just checking to see if you thought I was too hasty with accepting it, just to ensure I'm on the right track? SportingFlyer talk 11:49, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

SportingFlyer, I'm sorry to have been slow to reply here. I believe that she is fairly certainly notable based on her Google Scholar citations, and that you were basically quite right to accept it. It probably needs a good deal of cleaning and tidying, however, and the COI is blatantly obvious – hence my tags. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:59, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

COI

Why do you have to assume that people who edit a webpage have a relation with the subject? So people cannot edit their favourite soccer players? or musicians?

Input....

I welcome your input on American Bucking Bull. ^{Atsme📞📧} 21:14, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

OK, Atsme, I've now (finally) looked at that, apparently one of several editors to have done so. Was there any particular aspect of concern to you? If I was working on the article I might look more closely at both copyrights and notability, I think, and definitely at sourcing and scope (is it about a breed or a company?). What prompted you to ask me of all people? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:11, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

I queried you because I believe that while we may have disagreed in the past, that doesn't mean I don't respect your input. Different views may lead to passionate debate which helps to achieve quality & neutrality in our articles - at least from my perspective. Some may consider it disruptive but I'm not one of them. Our commonality is the fact that we are both here to help build the encyclopedia, and do what we can to make it the best it can be - and that's why I was seeking your input. A question has been raised regarding the separation of the company from bucking bull cattle which actually involves multiple breeds, a DNA registry and what genetics indicate to be a consistency in inherited temperament and other desirable characteristics for bucking bulls. It's not the typical breed or color association, although the cattle industry does have a bit more flexibility with regards to DNA and foundation registries. If you have time and the desire, I would appreciate your input in the split proposal that was initiated by McCandlish. Thanking you in advance, ^{Atsme📞📧} 19:45, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Ashby's Mill

I've revdel'd the IP's edit; I think that is the one you were concerned was a copyvio. Let me know if this is not the case. Mjroots (talk) 20:22, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Mjroots, that was indeed the one – that edit was (correctly) flagged by CopyPatrol. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:28, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Photographer promotion

Just a little recreational reading for you and Scope creep: Talk:Rodney Lough Jr.. Enjoy! -- Hoary (talk) 23:24, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar

Hi Justlettersandnumbers. I'm new to Wikipedia and still getting familiar with things. You flagged some updates made to Cabbagetown, Toronto that I made. Cabbagetown HCD Committee is a group that I am part of. My name is noted on the groups website. The page Cabbagetown, Toronto was updated with original content from our committee. Other revisions to some incorrect information was also amended on the page. If the changes haven't already been sourced, the content has been affirmed. I'm still trying to figure out how to reference my sources. My apologies if I missed something. I will ensure that updates and changes conform with the policies and guidelines of the Wikipedia community before edits are saved. If there is anything I can provide or assist with, please let me know. Thanks for your contribution to Wikipedia. StudioLAND (talk) 23:56, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, StudioLAND! I'll leave some guidance on how to proceed on your talk-page. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:02, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Margaret Baker-Genovesi: Difference between revisions

Thank you for your prompt input into this page. I have just posted only the first two sentences and the discography as the content is not found at https://sydneyeisteddfod.com.au/articles/margaret-baker-genovesi/. I hope this will be an acceptable start.Spt.08 (talk) 13:43, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

No, I'm afraid that even that has problems, Spt.08 – there's some apparent copying from a source I hadn't previously identified, this. Everything you write in Wikipedia must be in your own words. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:00, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Sorry again for the extra work. I had been granted use of the content and that image by the creator of the text and owner of the image for use (so it was not personally contentious) but was unaware it was from a printed article. I can definitely see the complexities for Wiki for any textual similarities. This is not a criticism of your actions or the policy of Wiki at all but I do wonder about the challenges of being able to present comprehensive biographical information re classical performers as

• where someone was born is significant especially because it reveals a performer's cultural affinity or the ability to master foreign languages and assimilate aspects of a foreign cultural heritage
• the age and location of their debut is significant because it gives an understanding of the trajectory of their career and hints to significant talent
• the repertoire, opera houses, discography, and named conductors are critical to objectively establish the quality and standing of the artist, their international recognition, and their artistic legacy
• the additional roles they have been engaged highlights their artistic and technical mastery and again provides an objective indication of their international standing amongst their peers. For a singer, this specifically includes adjudication and the teaching of masterclasses.

To this end, I have been reading through a number of biographies of this sort, especially of living artists, and a lot of the material is presented in a somewhat stilted manner and I wonder if this is as a result of the constraints for entirely original content. To me, this impoverishes the content somewhat viz: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taryn_Fiebig; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No%C3%ABmi_Nadelmann; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_GrahamAnyhow thanks againSpt.08 (talk) 20:30, 22 August 2018 (UTC) Hi again - did I do the wrong thing by posting the revised draft on your talk page? Thanks Spt.08 (talk) 11:26, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Draft: Jeff Hunt (music producer)

Hi Justlettersandnumbers, I just wanted to let you know that I am not being paid by Jeff to edit his wikipedia page. He is a friend and I have been helping him with this. We took directly from his autobiography because it's comprehensive. Working with him to create an edited version of his autobio that's not self-aggrandizing, but just verifiable facts. Alaks Hovel 23:22, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Alakshovel, Wikipedia is built on what is reported in independent reliable sources, and cares little or nothing what people or organisations choose to say about themselves. Anything you write about Hunt should be based on solid reliable sources that are not connected to him in any way; if you can't find enough of those, he may not be notable by our standards, and in that case should not have an article here. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:51, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Well there were several links to external sources corroborating the claims before the entirety biography was deleted, so. Alaks Hovel 15:55, 21 August 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alakshovel (talk • contribs)

Weissenburg, Zscheiplitz

You are an ignorant bully, who tires to impose his own understanding of the term "promotion"! Your actions are very alarming and are to be brought to the attention of the wiki community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avhahn (talk • contribs) 10:35, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Avhahn, please be careful to avoid making personal remarks directed at other editors. If you want to bring attention to edits I've made to Zscheiplitz and Weissenburg, Zscheiplitz, do please feel absolutely free to do so. You can choose between this general complaints board or the conflict-of-interest noticeboard; you should be aware that your own edits will also be looked at. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:43, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Even if you consent to allow copyrighted material for which you hold copyright to be put on a Wikipedia page, English Wikipedia still can't include it as per WP:COPYVIO so Justlettersandnumbers was perfectly justified in their removal as per the big notice about copyright that was posted on talk. In addition, Wikipedia articles about places are not appropriate places to transclude information from a municipal / tourism website for a host of other reasons. I would suggest Avhahn would be wise to look up WP:COI before proceeding further. Simonm223 (talk) 12:32, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

reversion on Massese Sheep

Can the link be added under a new section "External Links"? The source is referenced in numerous articles (reliable or not) and is often the only source. I understand that the pages there have not been tended to or updated in years, however some information is still pertinent and may support other sources. Refiner (talk) 15:50, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Refiner, what we've found over the years is that that source is frequently inaccurate, often hopelessly so. There's surely no need for it at Massese (sheep), where there is already an adequate number of reliable sources. It's great that you're doing something to improve livestock articles, and great that adding sources is what you've chosen to do. However, I'd not suggest adding any more links to either OSU or sheep101 – neither has a good track record. A sound source which covers virtually all livestock breeds is: Valerie Porter, Lawrence Alderson, Stephen J.G. Hall, D. Phillip Sponenberg (2016). Mason's World Encyclopedia of Livestock Breeds and Breeding (sixth edition). Wallingford: CABI. ISBN 9781780647944. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:37, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Copyright Issue

Hi

I have rewritten the Alex Sloley article in my own words. There should be no copyright issues now. I have put in the correct place as a temp sub page.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Disappearance_of_Alex_Sloley/Temp

I understand that I have to ask you to replace the old article with the revised one?

Nacentaeons (talk) 17:56, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Question about UK English

In this edit, you said "oh, please, this is a UK English page, 'meet' is an ordinary transitive verb". In the US, if someone "meets" students, it means she's introduced to them, and that may be the entirety of the interaction, whereas if she "meets with" them, she spends time in a meeting with them. Is that different in UK English? MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 21:44, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

(Butting in) "Meet with" really has a rather restricted place in British English, and doesn't carry that different meaning. Of course we all know the wider American usage, but I think the different meaning escapes us. In fact I'm slightly dubious the distinction is that clear to Americans either - many always seem to use met with for all contacts. Saying when it is used in English is rather complicated - I'd say mainly in 3rd person & past tenses. You'd never say "I met with..." at all. Johnbod (talk) 01:15, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for asking, Mandarax. I expect that, like most things in language, it's more complex and variable than any one of us thinks. I think Johnbod more or less has it, but here's my take: you "meet" people, regardless of what form the meeting takes; to "meet with" is to encounter or undergo an unexpected thing, as in "meet with an accident"; the get-together-and-chew-fat meaning is covered in colloquial English by "meet up with". While I'm at it, "surgery" is uncountable in the context in which it's used in that article; I'll change that in a minute. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:30, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Yes, I somewhat simplified the situation in what I said above. The "meet with" thing is definitely different. I always try for correct UK date formats, spellings, and usage for UK subjects, but I was obviously unaware of this. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 09:06, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Why have you removed valid edit?

You have removed an edit that I made on the UAL page regarding the partnership schemes that they offer through several colleges outside London e.g. Buckinghamshire College Group. Please advise why you have removed this as the edit was correct; my daughter has completed and received her certificate for a UAL qualification there last year, and is enrolled for an extended version of her UAL Diploma for this coming academic year. Wordsworthnothing (talk) 07:33, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

YGM

~ Amory (u • t • c) 12:56, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Improvements

Hello, I'm fairly new to editing so please forgive my trail-and-error approach. I wrote the article on Jon Jashni. I've cited my conflict of interest as I am associated with the company he runs. I feel I have kept the article neutral in tone, though I'm unsure how to request a cleanup if one is required. So that I may improve the article, might you give me an example of what further secondary sources are needed to meet the notability criteria for creative professionals? Based on what I have learned on Wikipedia:Notability (people) I feel this article cites numerous reliable sources that are independent of the subject, in addition to citing the significant role he played in his body of work. And his membership with the AMPAS, AFI, and PGA certainly denotes he is an important figure in his professional field. Please let me know how I might improve this article. --Xxxx7291 (talk) 05:38, 1 September 2018 (UTC)Xxxx7291

USSOUTHCOM

Hi, I wasn't able find the copyvio quote you noted in the link you provided in the tag. Can you confirm the link is correct? Thanks - wolf 16:05, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, Thewolfchild, the link is correct – I've just checked and I didn't mess up this time. The content was copy-pasted from that page with this edit, and removed soon after. I wouldn't ever have noticed it if I hadn't just removed the same content, added by the same IP, from Inter-American Defense College. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:16, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Oh I agree, you were right to remove that edit, as it copied the entire page word for word. I just couldn't find the quote you removed in that page. If I somehow missed it, then I was hoping you could point it out. But if they've just taken info from that page and wrote it in their own words, that's not a copyvio. (But it does need to be cited). Thanks again - wolf 18:36, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, got you now. That's not a copyvio (as far as I know), just some random/spurious content added in the same edit by the IP editor. It didn't/doesn't make any sense in the context of the article, so I took it out. Was that wrong? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:40, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

John Treviño Jr.

You added the notability tag to John Treviño Jr. recently. This page is under construction, as mentioned in the comments, 'Initial Stub'. Given how long ago the subject lived, online information is limited. In my opinion he is notable and I will continue to develop material to flesh out the article. Mbcoats (talk) 02:29, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Moving above comment to John Trevino Jr. talk page.... Mbcoats (talk) 01:25, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Copyvio rewrite

Hello, I hope you don't mind me reverted the deletions for BAME Labour and Mike Grindley. I'll work on rewriting them over the weekend hopefully, if that's OK. RevertBob (talk) 07:52, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

RevertBob, there is no useable text in those pages, which have grave foundational problems created by a now-indeffed serial copyright violator. It would save work all round if you would just copy any references, infobox, categories etc (but not text!) you want from them, and then undo your removal of the tags. Once they've been deleted you can create replacement pages at your leisure. You might consider doing the same for Black Socialist Society and Labour Party Black Sections, where you've removed the speedy deletion tags but don't seem to have done anything about rewriting them; I'll wait until the full week has passed (i.e., until tomorrow) before tagging those two again. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:50, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

If you give me until the weekend, I'll work on all of them. It seems such a shame to delete them all, especially when they're quite notable and useful topics. RevertBob (talk) 12:52, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, that too – but mostly it seems a shame that we've allowed an editor to fill our encyclopaedia with copyright violations for the last eight years. I'll stub the four articles leaving references etc in place. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:59, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

OK that's great! Yes that is but also never good to throw the baby out with the bath water either. RevertBob (talk) 15:52, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Nathan Wyburn with Joanna Lumley.jpg

Hi Justlettersandnumbers. I wonder could you update me? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:41, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Well, only in general terms, Martinevans123, because of privacy. The ticket as it stands doesn't provide acceptable permission for the image – which should anyway be uploaded to Commons, I think. I'm watching the ticket, and will update the file page(s) if anything further comes through. Sorry not to be more forthcoming! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:30, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

So I have now received an email from permissions@wikimedia.org, asking me to request that the copyright owner uploads the image himself afresh, but at wikimedia.commons. I guess they'll have to create a Commons account to do this, as I'm pretty sure they don't have one. So much for attempting the easy route. Thanks anyway. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:58, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

An account anywhere on Wikimedia only takes a username and a password and thus takes about 10 seconds to create. And one account is global (that's why you can check "global contributions" for any account); if they have an account on any Wikipedia or Wikimedia site, is it usable globally. Softlavender (talk) 22:20, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure they don't. In this age of internet spam and targeted mail, for many wary folks 10 seconds is 10 seconds too long. And I certainly wont be trying to bully him into signing up appraising him of the benefits of an account. I've forwarded the request (although of course, wikimedia.commons couldn't do this, as they are not part of this process) and we'll just have to see what happens. It just feels a bit like "let's throw it over the fence". Martinevans123 (talk) 22:35, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

No Wikimedia account requires an email address, so there is no problem with privacy or spam. Softlavender (talk) 23:00, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

You're quite right. But I think for some folks it's just the principle of "signing up" to something in which that have no interest. Did you tell me on my Talk page that "The two OTRS groups are separate and do not see what the other has received"? So I'm now wondering why they asked the copyright holder to add the permissions-en ticket number on their email to permissions-commons. (My apologies to Justlettersandnumbers for this intrusion.) Martinevans123 (talk) 07:56, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Martinevans123, it's not actually obligatory to upload freely-licensed files to Commons rather than here, it's just where they should be; nor does it actually have to be the copyright holder who performs the upload, though that is usually the person who has the original version of the file with the EXIF data intact. This molehill has already developed into a decent-sized hill, so do please proceed however seems easiest to you, and someone will probably run around and fix it afterwards if necessary. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:19, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

I've already complied with the request in yesterday's email, which was to ask the copyright holder to upload their image, with EXIF data, directly at Commons. I'm really not sure there is any further scope for me to "proceed however seems easiest to me". Thanks anyway. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:25, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Jon Jashni

I removed the COI template from Jon Jashni because 'X' has made a PAID disclosure on the Talk page. Left the notability template in place. Shortened the article. David notMD (talk) 12:57, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Institution of Structural Engineers

Hi. thanks for reverting my changes on the above article citing WP:COI. I'm a member of the Institution - trying to do research on the organisation in an attempt to one day pass the excruciating examination for full entry. Thought I'd update the wikipedia which is poorly formatted and woefully out of date - and lacking information - so that people in the future would have some sort of idea regarding the history. The Institution is a charity - and I'm not the owner or trustee of said charity.

Any indication as to what sort of Conflict of Interest I may have exactly, and how you came to that conclusion? Hakini (talk) 22:18, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Cautious Clay

I am a little confused as to your action on Cautious Clay, of which there is now one version in the draft space. There had been two versions, in article space and in draft space, both with tags about possible conflict of interest editing. I had changed the draft into a redirect to the article. You reverted my edit, with a comment that there had been a copy-and-paste move. This leaves the version in draft space standing. You then converted the article into a redirect back to the draft. This leaves article space redirecting back to the draft. First, I see that the article was created as a copy of the draft, which strips attribution and so is technically plagiarism of the copyleft on the copied article. I hadn't understood what is meant by a copy-and-paste move, although I knew that it was not a good idea; now I know what it is. But, first, was the article draftified because it was improperly created? Second, there is now a redirect from article space into draft space. I thought that redirects from article space to draft space were not appropriate and were supposed to go R2. Is there a reason why there is now a redirect from article space to draft space, or is that a mistake? Also, what should I do in the future if I determine that both a draft and an article exist, but the article is a copy of the draft? Is there a way to report copy-and-paste moves? Robert McClenon (talk) 19:46, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Robert McClenon, I was going to drop you a note of explanation, but then I thought "no, he'll see why I did it", and didn't bother; my mistake, for which I apologise. So, I'm uncertain of the ground here: if someone makes a cut-and-paste move in article space, we simple revert it (provided we catch it in time). I don't know if the same necessarily applies to content pasted into mainspace from a draft; in this particular case the draft page has quite an extended history, which I thought (and still think) needed to be preserved, so I treated it in the same way. I wasn't worried about the cross-space redirect, as those seem to just fade away in a day or two. Assuming for a moment that all that seems OK to you, what I completely failed to consider was whether you might want to reverse your decline of the draft; again, my mistake, more apology! Please let me know if (and if so, how) you think this should have been handled differently. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:59, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. No, I don't want to reverse my decline of the draft. I took the easy way to decline the draft last night by saying that an article already existed because it was the easy way. Otherwise I would have either declined the draft for a hard reason or left it standing in a pending review state. I wasn't planning to accept the draft because there had been paid editing. So I am satisfied leaving it back in draft space. As to the redirect, I think that redirects from article space to draft space go away because they are tagged and speedied. I don't know if a bot tags them, but I know that editors tag them. I will tag the redirect for speedy deletion. I wondered if there was a reason why you chose to allow redirect creation rather than to suppress redirect creation. Okay, I will leave the draft alone and let other people deal with the paid editing, since it has already been flagged. I will tag the redirect for speedy deletion. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:16, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

It still isn't clear what the usual procedure is or should be if a draft is contentiously moved into article space by copy-and-paste. The next time it happens, I will inquire further. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:16, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! So, I didn't suppress any redirect because I didn't move anything – I just undid the paste at one end and the cut (which happened to be yours) at the other. On what to do: my guess is that it depends on the history of the draft. If it's all by the editor who does the paste, then attribution is not needed (any more than if someone pastes stuff developed in a personal sandbox). Where it gets harder is when, as here, the draft has substantial history and several contributors; I think attribution has to be preserved in that situation. But yes, let's ask if it comes up again. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:29, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

The redirect was speedily deleted as R2. I have had to request that if I do a move to draft space and forget to suppress redirect creation. I don't know if there is a bot that tags redirects from article space to other spaces for R2, but if an editor does that, they do get deleted. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:19, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Article and Previous Content Conflict - Youngjae (South Korean singer)

You said that you would look at this situation when it came up. At least I think that is what you said.

I accepted Draft: Youngjae (South Korean singer), after moving the previous redirect entry, which was a redirect to Got7, to Youngjae (South Korean singer) (old version). The new draft is now the article. The problem is that the redirect now contains some history. Normally I would just have the redirect tagged for G6 deletion as housekeeping. Should I have this old version deleted, or does it need a history merge or what? Robert McClenon (talk) 02:21, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, that seems to be a very tangled web indeed – there are those two, there's Choi Young-jae, there's Draft:Choi Young-Jae (South Korean singer), and I don't know what else (there's also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Choi Young-jae, btw). My only suggestions are (a) to decline the draft still awaiting review, and (b) try a histmerge request for the first two (I'm not clever enough to know if that'll be accepted, but it looks like a possibility). With hindsight, it'd probably have been better to decline the first draft on the grounds that we already had a page, even it was only a redirect – that situation might be worth some general discussion at WT:AFC? In this case, community consensus was to have that redirect. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:07, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Draft: Jeff Hunt (music producer)

Hi, so I have added several reliable third-party sources pointing to Jeff Hunt as the founder of the Table of the Elements label. Can we move along with submitting this for review?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jeff_Hunt_(music_producer)

Thank you! Alaks Hovel 14:36, 14 September 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alakshovel (talk • contribs)

Alakshovel, I've added a template with a "submit" button to that page. Once you think your draft is ready, just press that to submit it. I don't think there's much point doing that at the moment – the sources you've added appear to be just passing mentions of Hunt as owner of the label. What's needed is substantial in-depth cover of him, not of John Fahey or a music festival. Until you have that, the page is not at all likely to be accepted. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:48, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

It seems like there is some asymmetrical moderation going on here. Did I do something particular to upset you guys? I've seen entire articles of people that rely on a single article (i.e. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Haggerty_(tennis)) but were processed as submissions, even though labeled as a Stub. What exactly in the article do you think people will have substantial problem with? This biography? Because the biography at this time only states "Jeff Hunt is the owner and a co-founder of the label Table of the Elements, described by Pitchfork Media as "a national treasure."" both of which are claims easily corroborated by the seven sources listed as reference. Is it the discography that's causing the issue? I want to get to the bottom of this before I press "submit" because I'm not quite sure what the major issue is exactly, and I want to address it. Alaks Hovel 14:31, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello Alaks. The difference with David Haggerty (tennis) is that the source is devoted to him, unlike any of the sources for Draft: Jeff Hunt (music producer), and there are multiple articles about him and his work as President of the International Tennis Federation in leading newspapers around the world. I've left you some more detailed advice on what to do about your draft on your talk page. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 19:52, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Alakshovel, why would you think that anyone is upset? I can assure you that I for one am not. If what you are trying to do seems difficult, it is probably because you have not taken the trouble to discover whether it is something that can actually be done.

Voceditenore has left you some very sound advice; may I suggest that you heed it? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:34, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Latest wheezes from "our friend"

Some red links to put on watch... Under the guise of the IPs 151.68.12.69 and 151.20.21.172, he has been busy creating numerous articles on numerous WPs on a chap called Gabriel Grego and sometimes Gabriele Grego. See here for more. There's a particularly fanciful one on the Esperanto WP [10]. Grego's apparently one of the partners of the now-deleted Quintessential Capital Management. I imagine what interests our friend is Grego's side interest in kickboxing and mixed martial arts. Meanwhile a new account, Saver68 has been merrily uploading loads of images of Carlo Biotti. Another new account QCM100 has been busily uploading images of Grego to Commons as "own work" which they clearly are not. There's another new account at Commons SandraPol23, who takes an uncommon interest in the ...er... Biotti's and Polli's. Also pinging AttoRenato. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:37, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

And there was I thinking, not more than two hours ago, that there'd been a bit of a lull – how unrealistic can you get? It seems to me that what we need here is a wikimedia-wide edit filter, but of course I've no idea if there is, or ever could be, such a thing. Crow, MusikAnimal, is there any hope of something like that? We have here a globally-locked long-term nuisance user who is wreaking havoc on smaller and more vulnerable wikipedias (not to mention wikidata, where there's apparently no control at all!). Something needs to be done, and at a level that is more just WP:RBI on each individual project. Any advice? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:49, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

It looks like at least one admin at WikiData has caught on. He's blocked the IP 151.20.21.172 for a week and reverted a lot of the IP's WikiData entries. However, given the constant IP hopping, there's only so much that can be done there so long as WikiData allows edits by IPs, a policy that I find utterly bizarre. Voceditenore (talk) 16:35, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

I've found another highly probable registered sock account, active mostly on the Italian WP [11], but also ventured here once [12]. Key words for a filter may be difficult given that he has largely shifted to landmarks, streets, quartrieri (often fictional) in Milan and surrounding towns, museums in Italy, and a few artists and architects. Voceditenore (talk) 08:31, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Great detective work as usual, VdT! I've watch listed some pages. Did you ask for the socks to be globally locked? If not, I will. Co-incidence: just (literally minutes ago) seen your name at Latvian National Symphony Orchestra, where you removed copyvio in 2009! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:04, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Cripes! A new registered account [13]. Pretty clearly him from the crosswiki targets. [14]. I've just reverted a load of nonsense from Italian design. And check his edits to Piero Portaluppi (a recent target of his all over wikidom). Also watch Gualtiero Galmanini. We need to report this at meta:Steward requests/Checkuser. Voceditenore (talk) 01:29, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Well spotted – again – VdT! Please see this. I'm not hopeful that check-user will yield anything useful, but I asked anyway. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:35, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail again

Let me know when you read it! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:53, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, Amory, safely received, thank you. Reply brewing ... Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:59, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Apologies for bothering you yet again...

May need something bigger than a can.

...but I need your copyvio expertise regarding what steps to take for this issue. I'd really rather turn it over to you as I suck at being an OP at noticeboards, so if you would be so kind as to take a look at this issue (which led to many more) it would be much appreciated. My original question was on the TP of Moonriddengirl who is currently very busy in RL. I saw that Amory posted on MRG's page, so that's where I went hoping to get the issue resolved. I can't figure out how the subject article was promoted to GA, much less passed GNG, and that doesn't count all the other copyvio issues involving that same editor, so I'm feeling a bit overwhelmed by it all. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 22:41, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Respected colleague Atsme, you're not bothering me at all, drop in any time, you are always welcome. This looks as if it could be a fair-sized can of worms, so please forgive me if I don't look at it tonight – I really need to get some sleep. As I'm sure you know, anything that looks seriously bad after discounting quotations can always be blanked with {{subst:copyvio|url= source(s) }} (that generates instructions, and code to be left on the listing for the day and on the user's talk-page). I'll try to take a look tomorrow. 'Night, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:03, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Raw n-dash

Here you replaced {{snd}} with a raw spaced n-dash. Do you have any particular reason for disliking the template? The dangers of writing it literally as you probably know are (a) an possible line break before the ndash (admittedly would need an unusually narrow window in this case) (b) subsequent editors unable to see easily, in monospace, whether it's a dash or hyphen so have to take extra time to check, which I tend to do a lot. And of course " – " is even uglier. David Brooks (talk) 19:54, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for this, DavidBrooks. I don't actually recall making that edit, but I imagine that all that went through my head was WP:KISS and/or Occam's razor. I didn't know about the possible line-break before the n-dash, but nor do I know of any prohibition on that line-break. It isn't (as I thought it might be) just a vagary of our software, other text processors and so on seem to do the same; I suppose, though, that it is something that our software could be made not to do? Anyway, if you want to put it back, do please just go ahead and do so. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:04, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. The nbsp before a dash is inherited from classical typography: you don't break the line before a dash, because it causes a small double-take for the reader. But, in this case, I'll invoke WP:AINT. David Brooks (talk) 23:50, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

New article

I am making a new article, and can you help (I.e. by adding sources and details) me? The article is about Vengeance by Denzel Curry. The video DID recently drop.ColorTheoryRGB CMYK 19:31, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for asking, ColorTheoryRGB, but I'm afraid I just don't have enough interest in that topic to offer to help. My advice is to start the article as a section within the Denzel Curry page, work on it and build it up there, and then discuss on the talk-page whether it should be split off into a page of its own. That's much more likely to lead to a positive result than just starting a new page with poor sourcing, which – as you've already seen – is liable to be redirected or deleted at any time. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:39, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Do you intend to block me?

Hello, Justlettersandnumbers. Do you intend to indefinitely block me for copyright violation? This is an obvious question in my mind and I think the best thing is just to ask it directly. Will it happen? I'm trying to cooperate on my talk page, only if you definitely do intend to block me and have made up your mind about this, that doesn't encourage me to continue. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 01:31, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

FreeKnowledgeCreator, please put your mind at rest! I'm not an admin, so I couldn't block anybody even if I wanted to. What I would like to do is to try to work out with you a strategy for (a) avoiding any further suspicion of copyright infringement, and (b) cleaning up past mistakes in that area. The second task is possible without your help, but very much harder and potentially more damaging to the various articles; the first, of course, depends entirely on you. If you're up for that, I suggest we continue this on your talk-page. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:36, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

OK, I forgot that you aren't an admin - thanks for reminding me. You do, however, have a current request for adminship, which could be successful. You could block me indefinitely the moment you get the admin tools, so the question remains relevant. I'm not saying that I don't intend to continue cooperating, simply noting that if any actual or potential admin is determined to eventually indefinitely block me regardless of what I do at this stage, that doesn't particularly encourage cooperative behavior. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 10:52, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Blocks are made to prevent further damage to the project, so if you don't intend to cause disruption or stonewall cleanup in the future there is no cause for concern. Helping to undo any issues would be most welcome. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:11, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, but what does that mean? That I get an indefinite block if I don't carry out the specific steps I've been requested to? As I say, I rather suspect I might get an indefinite block anyway even if I do carry out those steps, or that revealing copyright problems I'm responsible for would actually lead to an indefinite block. From my point of view, it looks rather like a damned if you do, damned if you don't sort of situation. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 11:23, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @FreeKnowledgeCreator: I don't know what exactly you did, but blocks aren't ever used as "punishment" for past wrongs. They're only to prevent continued disruption. Which means, as long as you don't give anyone a valid reason to doubt your good faith or competence at present, we can't and won't block you for anything you've done wrong in the past, even if we wanted to for some reason. I don't know where you get the impression that you're treading on such thin ice, but as long as you do not continue to insert new copyvios, or whatever it was you were doing, you're in absolutely no danger of being blocked at this point, no matter how widespread the problems were. Though, you will much more quickly regain good standing if you're transparent and assist in rectifying the issues as much as possible. (Swarm ♠ talk) 18:59, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

^ Yup. Wouldn't block you for revealing copyright violations, but for continuing to make them. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:10, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Well isn't that reassuring. Now that I have your word you won't indefinitely block me for revealing all the copyright violations I'm guilty of, I will go ahead and reveal them. Otherwise, asking me to reveal my misdeeds would be too much like asking a man to make the rope with which you intend to hang him, wouldn't it? Of course roughly 200 articles is a large number and I can't do it all at once. It will take me several days. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 01:13, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

FreeKnowledgeCreator, As someone who is very active in copyright issues, I can say (speaking for myself) that I would not block you if you were to provide a list identifying a large number of articles with copyright problems. I don't have control over the actions of others but I can say with assurance that blocks are intended to prevent continued disruption, and if you aren't actively committing violations of copyright policy you should not be blocked. Don't worry if it takes some time. Feel free to give me a ping if JLAN is too busy celebrating to work on them. S Philbrick(Talk) 21:23, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Sphilbrick, I've got the picture now, thank you. I wasn't joking about checking all those articles taking time. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 22:50, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

FreeKnowledgeCreator, Shit happens. We clean up and go on. We generally do not hold grudges against people who stop doing things that are unacceptable once they find out what the problem is, we prefer to keep them to help build the encyclopedia. Worry less, contribute more. If you help us clean up any mess you made we are all happier, and more confident that it will not happen again. It's a win-win situation. It does not have to happen all at once. You may even miss something first time round. If that happens tell us when you spot it later, or fix it yourself. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 08:33, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Support for Your RFA

Just to let You know I give You support for the RFA nomination. Looking at Your edit history, I think You make a good candidate. Eddie (talk) 21:21, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

• congrats!--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:58, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Palazzo Pesaro Orfei

Hello! Your submission of Palazzo Pesaro Orfei at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:36, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Justlettersandnumbers. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 16:56, 26 September 2018 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

TheSandDoctor ^Talk 16:56, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Palazzo Pesaro Orfei

On 1 October 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Palazzo Pesaro Orfei, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when the designer Mariano Fortuny established his studio in the Palazzo Pesaro Orfei in Venice, he was one of about 350 people using the building? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Palazzo Pesaro Orfei. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Palazzo Pesaro Orfei), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih (talk) 00:03, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Nice premises for a new job ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:28, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Aren't they just! I can't wait to finish moving in. I won't be doing much work, of course, too much else to do in Venice. Thanks for your review of this, by the way! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:59, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations on the passing of your RfA!

(Early) congrats on its passing! 99% - an impressive feat. That means unless 29% or more change to oppose within 3 hours (highly unlikely ), then it is a done deal. If you ever have any questions, us other admins (and the 'crats) are always around. TheSandDoctor Talk 18:19, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

I embarrassingly posted a Congrats here which was quickly removed by a trusty admin who apparently figured out I was acting in a Happy Hour kinda way. I think it's safe to share it now on the TP of JLAN, where I originally intended the other to post. 🍾🍸 Cheers!!! ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 21:01, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Looks still open to me. --S Philbrick(Talk) 21:18, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

You have no chance of winning. You might as well withdraw now. The people have spoken. Captain Bob 123 (talk) 21:24, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

• I came here to preemtively congratulate you on your successful RfA, but I guess I'm a bit late for that. So, a belated early congratulations to you! Kurtis ^(talk) 22:49, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Now it's time!!!--S Philbrick(Talk) 19:27, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Your RfA was successful

Congratulations, I have just closed your RfA as successful and made you an administrator. Take a look at the Administrators' guide and the administrators' reading list if you haven't read those already. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to get in touch on my talk page. WJBscribe (talk) 23:31, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Congrats on adminship!

Congratulations on your successful RFA! It's your turn to hear the words of wisdom I received from Katie after my RFA passed:

Remember you will always protect the wrong version. (I got nothing here. It's inevitable. I'm surprised you haven't done it already.) Remember you must always follow the rules, except for when you ignore them. Without exception, you will pick the wrong one to do. (See #5.) Remember to assume good faith and not bite. Remember that when you are applying these principles most diligently, you are probably dealing with a troll. (You'll attract many more of those now, because mop. They must like to drink the dirty water in the bucket.) Use the block ability sparingly. Enjoy the insults you receive when you do block, because really, what else is there to live for? Remember that when you make these errors, someone will be more than happy to point them out to you in dazzling clarity and descriptive terminology. It will not be a personal attack because we are admins and, therefore, we are all rouge anyway. Finally, remember to contact me if you ever need assistance, and I will do what I am able. GABgab 23:35, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales, because if it did, it would be much, much better. All rights released under GFDL.

• Congratulations. :) I look forward to your success in this new role. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:38, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

• Very well deserved JLAN. I literally cannot think of another user on this project who has more need for the tools than you. I’m sure you’ll figure it out on your own, but my talk and email are always open if you need anything. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:47, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

• Congrats! Ealdgyth - Talk 01:02, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

• Only took six months... ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:54, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
• Congrats. ^Thanks, L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 02:30, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
• Congratulations for adminship !! CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:54, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Congrats..The admins' T-shirt for you. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:54, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

• Felicitations on your successful RfA. Take a deep breath and enjoy the moment. Done? Great. The CSD backlog is this way. -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:44, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
• Welcome to the admin lounge. The complimentary lemon-scented keyboard wipes are on your left; your personal monkey butler will be assigned shortly... Yunshui ^雲_水 07:30, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
• Well done on passing your RfA! Very much deserved :) Orphan Wiki 12:01, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
• Congrats. I believe you'll find that the bulk of the complaints you'll get still stem from your copyright practice, so it won't change all that much :) MLauba ^(Talk) 13:11, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

With 215 supporters, Justlettersandnumbers’s RFA is the eighth to pass in 2018 (image courtesy of Linguist111

• Congratulations and best of luck!! Linguist^unEins^uno (Linguist111) 15:52, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
• Congratulations! Mz7 (talk) 07:45, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
• Congrats! And try to be careful when taking actions against established editors, as new admins occasionally do this. L293D (☎ • ✎) 18:48, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Congratulations on your highly successful RfA! We all know you'll be good with the mop! SemiHypercube ✎ 00:32, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes, very well done, JLAN. Look..... I have dispensed with the usual rainbow-clad unicorns, boxes of kittens, strong beer and chocolate cakes, And I've gone for "just lettuce and Humbers"!! Enjoy! lolness Martinevans123 (talk) 12:35, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Martin, for the sake of humanity, please don't end a conversation with "lol" again. Every time I read a sentence like that, I feel my IQ dropping.... Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:39, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Don't worry. Have now adjusted to a higher IQ percentile version. Justin Welby 123 (talk) 12:46, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

• 
• 
• 
• 

A huge thank you ...

... to anyone and everyone who took part in this, whether with questions, corrections, support, advice or criticism. Thank you all for the trust and confidence you have – collectively – placed in me! Now I just need to live up to it ...

I most particularly want to thank MRG, Amory and Alex for their steady support, wise guidance ... and patience. Thank you so much! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:19, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Congratulations on your RfA - take it slow, and ask for help if you're ever unsure. Good luck! - TNT 💖 19:58, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Best wishes

Congratulations on your successful RfA. I hope you will wield the mop with care and that you will take to heart the concerns that were raised there about your tone and approach to new editors. I think you know that you may be the first voice that some people hear on wikipedia. Although policy is clear, it can be applied with a carrot and kind guidance as opposed to a bat. Sometimes the cluebat is needed, but now that you have some very powerful tools at your command, you need to be slow and cautious in their use. ("With great power comes great responsibility".) I urge you to think about the interactions that you and I had in your early years here, where, sad to say, the tone of our respective written words led each of us to almost precisely the same (wrong) conclusions about the other. We desperately need to nurture content editors. Most people who make mistakes — including you and I — can learn and grow from them. Good luck. Montanabw^(talk) 17:51, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Congrats...

...on your RfA, you had a very impressive turn-out. I'm glad it didn't turn into a train-wreck like so many have as of late. But anyway, good luck to you with your new duties. Cheers - wolf (#61) 15:11, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi, JLAN. Just dropped by to pile-on more congratulations at your successful RFA. And also to say well done for keeping your cool while at WP:RFA, one of our more… turbulent community forums. I hope you are enjoying the new role. Best regards, AGK ■ 20:25, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Copy vio

I've reverted this edit (and the two that followed) as they appeared to copy word-for-word from the cite linked. I'm not really familiar with copyvio policy, so what should happen next? A report somewhere? Rev/del? Something else? Thanks - wolf 15:26, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Thewolfchild! Yes, revdeletion would have been the next step if the problem had been limited to those few edits; however, it seems to go right back to the initial version of the page (which links to the identified source), so I've listed it at WP:Copyright problems. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:59, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

The creator of this article has over 1200 page creations, of which 138 are articles. I checked another one his earlier creations, (a similar one about an air wing; VAW-77), and found it was also a word-for-word copy from the same source. So, clearly there is a potential for more of these so, what happens now? - wolf 16:34, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Another one; Naval Air Station Kingsville. Same editor, same source. - wolf 16:37, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, wolf. One of the advantages of listing a page at WP:CP is that whoever deals with it will be sure to check other contributions of the same user. This may turn out to be (more or less) all right – I have a vague memory of that website copying public-domain content from elsewhere and then claiming copyright on it, but I could be wrong. The editor doesn't seem to have been active for quite some time, but anyway has seven days in which to offer an explanation. Then we can go from there. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:08, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

How to fix attribution

I think I figured out what you meant by fixing the lack of attribution for the List of Fairy Tail Zero episodes, but I need confirmation. Is putting a {{Copied}} template with the proper ID's at the top of each talk page for the list and Fairy Tail Zero all I have to do? I also don't understand what you mean by "our license". User:SubZeroSilver (talk) 00:29, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes, that's right, SubZeroSilver – just shout if you run into difficulty. About the licence, all I meant was that under the terms of the CC BY-SA 3.0 licence that applies to all Wikipedia content, anyone can freely re-use the content, but must provide attribution to the creator(s). The 'copied' template takes care of that for copying within Wikipedia. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 07:14, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Alright then, I'll get on that later. User:SubZeroSilver (talk) 13:09, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

FYI re "one of the recognized art master of 20th century art"

See Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Alec Smithson. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:36, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

How about this brilliant illustration for Polli (company)? Would probably drive our friend crazy. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:36, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Remember this Natoli? Well, his alleged son Amedeo died on the Simple, Italian, German, and French Wikipedias, but has risen from the dead on the Danish one where he is preposterously described (in apparently execrable Danish) as "having revolutionized the insurance and insurance reinsurance industry and defined the structure of modern philanthropy" and "having become the world's richest man and the first billionaire in US dollars and often considered the richest person in history". Not only that, according to Wikidata he was a practicioner of boxing and savate. Meanwhile I've now taken the Commons SPI findings to Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems for blocking and tagging. We'll see what happens. So far no response. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:59, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Great work, Voceditenore (and I like the image too!). I've asked for a global lock for those of them that don't already have one, we'll see how that goes. Not that I think it'll make much difference, by the way. Oh well, on to the next! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:28, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Rex Ray

Justlettersandnumbers, I received the notice from you that edits to the Rex Ray have been removed, as they appear to have added copyrighted material. I am the copyright holder for items that require a copyright ie photo, publishing attributions and authorship content. How is it that you remove these edits without knowing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Runswithoutscissors (talk • contribs) 22:29, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Runswithoutscissors! You can if you wish follow the instructions here to make that content available for use in Wikipedia and by anybody, anywhere; however, I might as well warn you that content released in this way is hardly ever included in the encyclopaedia. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:03, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Cosmos-Maya copyright problem

Hi Justlettersandnumbers, You observed some copyright problems with Cosmos-Maya. I had a look at the content in question and the related references/citations. I feel these were picked up as copyright violations because the content in question was the name of a technology or some numbers used to quantify something. E.g., "art and technology of Computer Animation & Digital VFX" and "600 minutes (30 half hours) of animation on a monthly basis." However, I do understand that some of these could have been avoided and therefore I have posted a new version of the article, as suggested, at this temporary page Thank you! Lukehaokip (talk) 21:44, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Andreas G Orphanides

Hi -

Thanks for letting me know re the potential copyvio on that article. Do let me know what needs reworking and I'll get to it. Vizjim (talk) 06:46, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Just to let you know, I have left a proposed solution on the page. I haven't been involved in a plagiarism issue before so am unsure if this meets the requirements or if the piece needs rewriting at a more fundamental level. Vizjim (talk) 13:47, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi. It seems likely that at least one of the IP addresses editing the page is the article subject, which significantly complicates this one. He is claiming that the copyvio page never existed, which is obviously silly and why we have conflict of interest editing rules in the first place: on the other hand, there now is no actual copyright violation. What to do? Vizjim (talk) 11:34, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Korean animation

The odds are that the student(s) who worked on this will not care to fix stuff (the course has ended). So if you are interested in this issue, any copyediting you'd like to do to rescue any content would be much appreciated. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:25, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Frances Westley

Please explain how I fix the article. Looking at the similarity identified they are mostly for official titles names and fields, I do not see how having the same title, book titles, and department and list of funders is copyright violation. I do not understand how I fix the issues given the statement not to remove the copyright warning. Could you please advise. And forgive me if this is the wrong way to raise this issue, but it is what I understand from the comments on the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjushamillabakka (talk • contribs) 12:32, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Sjushamillabakka, you can start a rewrite at this page if you wish; otherwise the page will probably be cleaned up fairly soon and you can then continue to work on it if you want to. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:10, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I already have done a rewrite page at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Frances_Westley/TempSjushamillabakka (talk) 14:04, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Sjushamillabakka, I must apologise: I've only just seen this last post of yours. In the meantime, I too have rewritten the Westley page; I'm truly sorry about that. The rewrite you have proposed is apparently free of copyvio, but is clearly closely based on the previous version; it's also less than encyclopaedic in tone, and much of it is unreferenced. I'll be honest: even if it had been used to replace the previous content, I'd probably have rewritten it, and probably much as I have done to the previous version. I'm not quite sure where to go from here; what I suggest is that I incorporate a couple of missing bits of referenced material from your version and then – with your permission – delete it as unused. If that doesn't work for you I may need to ask advice. Please let me know! Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:14, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thanks for your admin work Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 17:37, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Justlettersandnumbers. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 09:37, 23 October 2018 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Thine Antique Pen (talk) 09:37, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Thorsborne Trail

I created the Thorsborne Trail page, which was deleted due to copyright infringement. I am happy to rewrite with original content. How do I go about this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kritik Dansaran (talk • contribs) 10:06, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Kritik Dansaran, you can go ahead and create a new page with the same title. If you want me to restore a skeleton version of the page (the structure, but not the text) I can do so. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:05, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Trovagene

@Justlettersandnumbers: So... you deleted Trovagene, but I already re-wrote the section that said "copyright infringed"... why? Abattoir666 (talk) 13:01, 22 October 2018 (UTC) Apparently I was also the only individual to actually re-write it, or ask to have it checked (which no one seems to have done), why was it deleted? Check the edit that was auto-reverted by someone who didn't even look at it. Abattoir666 (talk) 13:03, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

And yes, a viable re-write was proposed. Abattoir666 (talk) 13:04, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Abattoir666, no rewrite had been proposed – the rewrite page has never been edited. Of course I checked the content before I deleted the page, and found significant copyright violation. To take a single example, the sentence "PCM-075 has completed a safety study in patients with advanced metastatic solid tumors", which was in the last version you edited, is taken word-for-word from this page or one of the many others that repeat the same content; coupled with the promotional tone of the page, the level of infringement was grounds for deletion. If you wish, I can either restore a skeleton version of the page to draft space, or ask another experienced copyright admin to take a look; or, if you are sure that deletion was not justified, you can request review of what I did at Wikipedia:Deletion review. All of these are fine with me. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:03, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: Did you check the edit that was reverted as I suggested before you deleted it? Abattoir666 (talk) 18:45, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Also, why'd you delete the 'entire' page instead of just the bit surrounded by the brackets? Abattoir666 (talk) 18:46, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Abattoir666, you don't need to png me on my own talk-page. Yes, I did check that edit – perhaps you didn't see what I wrote above, "the sentence [...] which was in the last version you edited, is taken word-for-word from ..."? The last version you edited had copyright problems. Do you have some connection to the company, by the way? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:43, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Not in the slightest. I just think small companies and public laboratories focusing on curing cancer should have a larger presence on Wikipedia, you know, given the importance of the subject matter. The public 'wholly' neglects the field despite cancer being invariably one of the top ten causes of death worldwide. How are people going to know which companies to back, who to support, who to turn to, if the apparent gateway to popular understanding thinks that they are "not noteworthy?" Even CRISPR has a page, and it has 'no' bearing on the general public (except for that time the world got a laugh out of the fellow who tried to alter his own body's genetic structure, then promptly died). And you saw the version reverted by the other mod, because I could have sworn the passage cited for copyright infringement was effectually resolved. Abattoir666 (talk) 21:17, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: Any news on bringing back cancer awareness to the masses? Abattoir666 (talk) 14:13, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Request for reconsideration - Copyright Issue noted

Hello Justlettersandnumbers

I noticed that you have indicated a copyright issue on my the wikipedia page I created https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josipa_Petrunic. This is my first Wikipedia article and it was approved a few months ago. I am the main author of this page. Each of the sentences included in the biography has been carefully referenced and summarized. The information that has been noted as being copied are from Dr. Petrunic's bio which is available in the public domain on multiple websites and I didn't copy it from any of the sites listed in the copyright notice given below. If there is an issue using it, I can remove those sentences.

"The previous content of this page or section has been identified as posing a potential copyright issue, as a copy or modification of the text from the source(s) below, and is now listed on Wikipedia:Copyright problems (listing):

https://www.bna.com/2017-Sustainable-Business-Summit-Toronto http://sogerman.ca/events/the-future-of-electric-mobility-economic-impacts-and-opportunities/ https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/canada-s-next-leaders-2018-top-40-under-40-1.1097343 (Duplication Detector report · Copyvios report)"

I would appreciate your help Thank you Parv Canada — Preceding unsigned comment added by Parv Canada (talk • contribs) 22:54, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Parv Canada, there are two ways of going about this: either you can work on a rewrite here (obviously, without copying any of the compromised content from the old version, as that would make the rewrite useless); or, if you prefer, I can clean up the page for you to work on as you wish. This, this and this may help you see where problems lie. Let me know? Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:36, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Dear @Justlettersandnumbers -Thank you so much for replying. I would appreciate it if you could kindly clean up the page and I will work on it. Thank you so much for your help. Parv Canada

Revised Page Draft:Lucinda Chambers

Hello justlettersandnumbers, Thank you for reviewing my page, I understand the reason for moving it back into the draft space, I have amended the quoted material, and am working on adding more relevant information for her. Could you please have another look at the page and let me know if this page is more acceptable for the wikipedia guidelines? I am working on this page for a university project and really would like for this page to be up on the main space. Fionarosewalters (talk) 22:43, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

It's really a lot better, Fionarosewalters, thank you! There's more to do: the next problem to deal with is that you have in many places followed the Daily Telegraph very closely, even though you haven't actually copied the exact words; you can read about that – and why it's discouraged – here. The best way to avoid this is to draw on more than one source for whatever you are writing. The draft needs a good copy-edit – I would aim to remove at least half the text, and certainly the various bits of peripheral detail (about family members etc). After that, you could try submitting it. You can probably get better advice in the WP:Teahouse than you can from me – I'll leave you an invitation. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:00, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing again, it has been surprisingly difficult for me to find information on her that isn't about her working for vogue, so this is why I have had to use that one source. Maybe this would be somewhere that someone else could improve upon if they have some other info on her. Either way thanks for your help!Fionarosewalters (talk) 23:13, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

William E Lori copyvio

I just saw the changes you made to the William E. Lori article concerning a reported copyright violation. It is my opinion that you went way overboard. You deleted almost the entire article. Much of it was added by myself and I know that in most if not all of those additions there was absolutely no copyright infringement. I can't show you specific examples because the history has been erased. However, I urge you to be much more careful in the future. Display name 99 (talk) 23:57, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

👻💀👺🤡🎃

Trick or Treat!!!	Happy Halloween!
	Why are demons and ghouls always together? Because demons are a ghoul's best friend. What happens when you goose a ghost? You get a hand full of sheet. Atsme✍🏻📧 01:04, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Discussion about Works by Elizabeth Winzeler

=I am a new editor, just finished being trained in a fellows (content specialists) class by WikiEd, not very experienced. I've been writing and editing mainly women in science articles and many of those I've improved have lists of works. Also, my content specialist in the fellowship class suggested that I add a list of important works to another article I was creating (Bette Korber). So I'd like to be consistent and keep Winzeler's selected works list in her article. Would you feel it was more appropriate if I cited fewer articles out of the many she's published? Or just ones with fewer authors? I'm pretty sure genomics research needs a big group but there are long lists of authors on some of her papers. I hope you can accept having this section reappear in some form. Thanks for considering this. LLMHoopes (talk) 03:40, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Declining speedy on Ekaterina Bakanova

• I'm just writing to let you know I've G12'ed the above article as there was literally nothing left once you removed the copyvio; and certainly nothing that would save it from an A7 or BLPPROD. I'm curious what you thought there was to be worth keeping, given the entire text was lifted wholesale with a few minor alterations from a copyrighted page? Courcelles (talk) 21:26, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Courcelles! I've just looked at it again, and I think that you're right (and thus that Diannaa was right too). I was reluctant to delete it because she is so very obviously notable, and the 42% Earwig overlap did not persuade me that it was irretrievable. But yes, the remaining material added up to very little. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:52, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

She is notable, agreed; we have a draft article on her sitting around somewhere, I saw. Should likely look into getting that published... Courcelles (talk) 21:58, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Jim Towey rewrite

Hi, Justlettersandnumbers,

Sorry, I'm fairly new to editing wikipedia, and have never had to deal with a copyvio/revdel issue before. I was hoping that you could give me some advice on the procedure for rewrites. An article I've been working on, Jim Towey, was apparently based on a foundational copyvio from 2010. The eight years of intermediate edits and my own extensive set of recent changes and additions have made it hard to tell, but I think I've managed to weed out all remaining traces of the original violation. I have a proposed rewrite up at Talk:Jim_Towey/Temp, and absolutely no idea what to do next.

• Is it alright that I also salvaged other editors' work?
• Is there a way of deleting the page history for the original copy-pasted content, substituting the rewrite, and still keeping a record of everyone else's genuine-quality contributions?
• Is there anything I should be doing at the article's copyright problems listing?
• What should my next step be towards un-blanking the article?

Thank you, Genericusername57 (talk) 04:23, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Genericusername57, I hope that all of those questions have now been answered (in the page history)! Thank you for your work on this, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:48, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help. Genericusername57 (talk) 23:06, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Tokai Park

On the page that I edited, you wrote the following, saying that there are copyright issues: "(copyvio blanking, foundational infringements of https://yellow.place/en/friends-of-tokai-park-cape-town-southafrica, https://www.pressreader.com/south-africa/cape-argus/20161128/281745563993432 and apparently some other source)" I don't even understand what any of this means, however there are no longer copyright issues. All I did was to update the links from the old ones to new ones. iSPOT migrated to iNaturalist. So why should this be a copyright problem? You didn't even give us a chance to fix the article according to Wikipedia's copyright rules, you simply blocked the page. Now I am a new user, and feel that this is a bit heavy handed. I'm also totally confused. Please see my talk page to show that all of the original articles now give access and allow external websites to use the content. If you are still not satisfied please explain clearly why. I would really appreciate an explanation (in simple English please, not Wiki jargon), and I would like to know if this issue can now be resolved please. Kind regards, Arebelo (talk) 11:57, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi Justlettersandnumbers, I may be able to help here as I know some of the people and organisations involved. Could you link me to the discussion? Feel free to email me if you think that might be more appropriate. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 08:26, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Been there, done that. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 10:44, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For doing such a great job significantly cleaning up Elizabeth A. Winzeler, as well as the wonderful work you've been doing with your shiny new mop, dealing with copyright violations and deleting unwanted pages. SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 14:45, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, SkyGazer 512, much appreciated I'm learning, so if you (or anyone else for that matter) see me make a mistake or misjudge something, do please say so! I haven't looked at Elizabeth A. Winzeler for a few days, but I think it needs cleaning up all over again. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:01, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Edith Farmiloe

Hello Justletters and numbers. Could you take a look at my Edith Farmiloe page and tell me what I need to do to get it published. I have communicated as requested re my Lega Zambelli copyright issue but I have had no comeback. Regards etc — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adelphi14 (talk • contribs) 12:37, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Adelphi14, I will try to look at these soon. Unfortunately we have a lot more suspected copyright problems than we have volunteers to deal with them, so it could be some time. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:51, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

OTRS related to Pure Storage

Could you take a glance at ticket:2018110210006552 ?

The good news is that there is a potential replacement article here: User:Ianwikramanayake/draft. The bad news is there is probably a conflict of interest so the replacement article would have to be reviewed enough so that you would feel comfortable with it. However, that might be easier than trying to tease out what needs to be cleaned out of the Problematic article,

Obviously, I could work on it as well but I noticed a jump in the backlog at OTRS and would prefer to work on the recent influx of requests.--S Philbrick(Talk) 21:20, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Sphilbrick, I've looked at that ticket, but I have no idea how to handle the matter – as I understand it, we can't place content written by a company employee (however helpful he/she may be) in Wikipedia because that would be – or could be – deceptive advertising, which is illegal in the United States. I think I'm going to have to start a discussion about this, probably at WP:COIN – unless you think that it should first be discussed among OTRS volunteers? Anyway, I'll pick up the ticket and send a "taking advice" sort of answer. I have been absolutely zero help at OTRS for a month or more, trying to learn to do some basic tasks with new tools here. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:37, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for taking this on. The OTRS backlog jumped about 50 entries and it's a struggle to even keep pace much less with down the backlog. Regarding the issue, it was my understanding that COI requested edits to existing articles, can be accepted if the independent editor reviewing the request feels that the proposed addition is acceptably neutral and sourced. Obviously, an entire draft article is an extreme case of this but I thought the same concept might apply. That said, I'm not active at COIN so that may be a good place to get good advice.--S Philbrick(Talk) 17:53, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Repeated violation

You may want to address this repeated violation. Regards --Muhandes (talk) 17:27, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Muhandes, I see that they have been blocked. Thanks for reporting. S Philbrick(Talk) 17:48, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Urgent requests

Hello. I am sorry to bother you but I will need immediate semioprotection for my talkpage and Talk:DHX Media due to vandalism. Thank you. CLCStudent (talk) 22:27, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

I was late to the party, I'm afraid, CLCStudent, in time only to hide a few edit summaries. I'm not the best person to ask for help in an urgent matter anyway, because I'm still very much learner with the toolkit. If I may offer advice for another time, if you should be unlucky enough to encounter one: a bad or inappropriate edit, however wrong it may seem to be, is probably only going to be visible for a very short while, so it's likely to be more productive to ask for help straight away, rather than to keep reverting it. Anyway, unpleasant for you, glad it's over. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:51, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

REFUND of Leslie Joy Whitehead

The offending copyrighted article was written by the same author as the editor who created the article. I've chatted with the author and they have agreed to release the text of the original source under CC. The original article (http://www.ebritic.com/?p=703462) is now correctly licenced for use on wikipedia, and has a notice on the bottom of the article ("The text of this article is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA), allowing anyone to share, distribute, transmit, and adapt it."). We should be good to go. Adding a note to that ref that it is CC would also be useful when restoring. Thanks very much. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 13:34, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Done that, Insertcleverphrasehere. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:29, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers, Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 21:43, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Month-old copyright issue

I know it's impatient of me to say this, and that you've said you wouldn't be the one to handle it, but it's been over a month since the copyright investigation for the summaries written in the List of Fairy Tail Zero episodes began. Since then, other editors have accepted and attributed it as "season 8" on related pages following my effort to retitle the page, improperly done as it was, which indirectly caused this whole debate. Not to mention, after the Japanese episode list template changed its coding weeks ago, all of the blanked material on the investigated article is displayed on the main List of Fairy Tail episodes article anyway. Because of the investigation notice, however, I've refrained from making any changes to the article to correct the display issue or rewrite any of the summaries. I've already provided attribution and made my case that the page has been subject to backwards copying, but I want to know if there's anything else I can do to resolve this. User:SubZeroSilver (talk) 19:19, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Wikiquote for the quotes...

And we have WikiCommons for the Images. So shall I start to remove them? I love to... — Preceding unsigned comment added by FotoDutch (talk • contribs) 16:07, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

FotoDutch, whatever major changes you want to make to established practice in Wikipedia – whether adding large numbers of quotations, or removing large numbers of images – I do suggest that you make sure that there is community consensus for those changes before you start. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:44, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Economic History of New Zealand

Hi ,is the Draft:Economic History of New Zealand still copyrighted?? I was considering accepting it but I see that the author added a big chunk of text into the draft after you cleaned out the copyright (12,000K text addition seems suspcious). I can't tell if he/she added copyrighted text to it (and I can't see the deleted revisions to compare the new text additions to the old text additions) can you tell me if it's still copyrighted?? Thanks JC7V-talk 03:36, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, JC7V7DC5768, unfortunately you were right – I've had to revert that large addition. You might find this tool useful for checking for copyright violation. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:40, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Horsey thing

New horse-related article: Gainsborough Stud. Looks like it needs some touch-ups; for instance, there was at least one date that wasn't verified and I just now had to add a citation that did. Any time you are able to spare would be appreciated. The article creator is a good-faith editor and a good researcher, however I'm not sure horses are at all his specialty. Thanks. Softlavender (talk) 02:34, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Help us urgently

Hello. It is interesting for me, why you deleted the page "Eldaniz Elman oglu Mammadov"? He is one of the young and famous Library and information science specialist and scientist in Azerbaijan, and well known in Iran, Turkey and Russian with his scientific articles. Whith this page we are going to show scientific articles of Eldaniz Mammadov's, of course with the consent of doctor E.Mammadov's. We have listed a list of his scientific works. This page is also available in Azerbaijani. https://az.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eld%C9%99niz_M%C9%99mm%C9%99dov_(f%C9%99ls%C9%99f%C9%99_doktoru) Now we are preparing this page in English. So please help me recover this page and do not delete this page. Eldaniz Mammadov's students need this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gulnar Ibrahimova-Mammadova (talk • contribs) 22:44, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Breeding again...

Irish Bull Terrier - I reworked the article, proposed a merge. When you catch a break, I'm interested in knowing what you think...^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 04:43, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Olena Chekan

Dear Justlettersandnumbers, This open official appeal

my name is Bohdan Rodyuk Chekan von Miller

I am an artist and industrial designer

The article on English Wikipedia Olena Chekan now set for deletion

Olena Chekan is my beloved Mother

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olena_Chekan

OLENA CHEKAN – The Quest for a Free Ukraine - Bohdan Rodyuk Chekan (Ed.) http://derkonterfei.com/product/olena-chekan-bohdan-rodyuk-chekan-ed https://ukrainianweek.com/Columns/50/154401 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYnhrOGjrM8 http://titel-kulturmagazin.net/2016/03/25/schlaglichter-auf-die-ukraine/

OLENA CHEKAN - Hymns to Ukrainian Art – Bohdan Rodyuk Chekan (Ed.) http://derkonterfei.com/product/olena-chekan-hymns-to-ukrainian-art-bohdan-rodyuk-chekan-ed http://ukrainianweek.com/Culture/163918 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLcMRP4BxFM

She was the illustrious political journalist, a glorified Soviet and Ukrainian actress, prominent screenwriter and courageous person: for the extension of her life during Euromaidan all Ukraine fought, my mother died in my arms 21 December 2013, Kiev, Ukraine, from glioblastoma - brain cancer, the fourth stage of 18 months of life - a lot, you can see the statistics of this disease. And if we are talking about freedom of speech of the media in Ukraine, who did more than my Mom

http://gorbaniewska.zawolnosc.eu/ru/inne/1 http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~sarmatia/916/916morebooks.pdf

Therefore, in memory of Mom and Svetolik Skale Mitić, I started a new project:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_journalists_murdered_in_Ukraine this article is the beginning of a photo exhibition for future elections in Ukraine My project is intended to bring democratic changes to a ruined country engulfed by war and Russian aggression.

• Svetolik Skale Mitić is my first husband of my Mother you know of course that Svetolik Skale Mitić was one of the founders of journalism in the countries of the former Yugoslavia, Svetolik Skale Mitić sent letters to my Mom even from Nicaraguan captivity. I still keep his love correspondence with my Mom. https://www.svoboda.org/a/26285034.html

• General Yevgeny Miller is the father of my grandfather's brother's wife: CHEKAN (née MILLER) Maria Evgenievna, 1897-1982. Brother of my grandfather (my Mom's Father Vasily Ivanovich Chekan) - Protopresbyter archpriest Alexander Chekan (Chekan Alexander Ivanovich) (1893 - 1982) https://clio.columbia.edu/catalog/4077462?counter=1 He took part in the Russian Civil War: In the Volunteer Army and VSYUR Don Army in the 1st separate heavy howitzer division; since Aug. 28 1919 Second Lieutenant, since 30 Sep. (The Lieutenant). In the Russian Army before the evacuation of the Crimea - Siege of Perekop (1920). Staff-captain. He participated in the Gallipoli Campaign. Alexander Chekan was injured and dying from wounds, he was saved by a nurse - the future wife Maria Evgenievna, the daughter of the general Yevgeny Miller. Alexander Chekan continued to defend the Motherland on Dec. 18 1920 in the 1st battery of the 5th Artillery Battalion. He with his wife emigrated to Bulgaria (1921). He received his higher education in Sofia, where he was also the secretary of the branch of the Russian Student Christian Movement (RSCM). Chairman of the Union of Russian Students in Sofia and the Union of Russian Students in Bulgaria (1920s). Later they moved to France. Since 1947, Alexander Chekan the second priest, then the abbot of the Alexander Nevsky Cathedral, Paris.

• my uncle - Jerzy Bogdanowićz Polish theoretical nuclear physics scientist, Prof.Bogdanowićz participated in the scientific activities of the Large Hadron Collider: http://lss.fnal.gov/archive/other/sissa-3-94-ep.pdf http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988NuPhA.479..323B project in CERN and was nominated for the Nobel Prize. Jerzy Bogdanowićz - in young age the hero of Warsaw Ghetto Uprising and was awarded with The Order of Polonia Restituta (Polish: Order Odrodzenia Polski, English: Order of the Rebirth of Poland) and The Cross of Merit (Polish: Krzyż Zasługi). at his funeral in 1999, which I attended with my Mother Olena Chekan there was the red white roses wreath from the President of Poland Aleksander Kwaśniewski.

• my mentor, a close friend of my Mother - Alex Moscovitch was a French politician and analyst. He was also an associate and companion of General Charles de Gaulle. We met in Moscow 1990, when my Mom was creating an interview book "The Star of Alex Moscovitch | Etoile d'Alex Moscovitch" based on regular tape recordings of conversations with Alex Moscovitch. The book-interview was published in Moscow at publishing house "NORD" 14 September 1992 with the autobiography of Alex Moscovitch "Le Temps Des Punaises" in Russian. Two years spent together with Alex Moscovitch became for me a school of life and experience that formed me. Alex Moscovitch photos on the Wikipedia page from my archive at home! I found this article and put it on his page too https://www.lemonde.fr/culture/article/2011/10/17/17-octobre-1961-toute-une-histoire_1587334_3246.html

The layout of the interview book "The Star of Alex Moscovitch | Etoile d'Alex Moscovitch" by Olena Chekan was created by my Father Stanyslas Rodyuk Master builder M.Arch. Ukrainian architect, founder of the principles of the use of fractal properties in the parametric architecture of postmodernism and urban planing in the USSR and Ukraine https://www.flickr.com/photos/155931501@N04/41187636625/in/album-72157691957163572/

• Stanyslas Rodyuk (born 24 November 1937; died 15 February 2003) was the author of the idea, creator of planning design and the developer of the architectural project of the building of The Druzhba Sanitarium in Yalta that is located on the Crimea peninsula, Ukraine, at present Russia in the Greater Yalta district. His aesthetic vision of planning was that of parametricism in urban architecture and embodied in the main promises of modernism: public space, light and a sense of opportunity.In connection with his political views, Stanyslas Rodyuk was suspended from completion of the building of The Druzhba Sanitarium in Yalta by the architect project leader Igor Vasilevsky - a son of a Marshal of the Soviet Union – Aleksandr Vasilevsky. Stanyslas Rodyuk died of left lung pneumonia caused by tumor load of sarcoma 15 February 2003. The Druzhba Sanitarium in Yalta is recognized as the best architectural project in the history of all Soviet Modernist Urban planning .

I knew these people personally! They are my family! at home I have a huge archive of their photos, letters and personal veshey

Yes, in creating these articles I acted as an amateur. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Your_first_article I independently learned and mastered the skills of working in HTML to create these articles in Wikipedia As I know one of the Wikipedia principles: make help this article better https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Writing_better_articles

But by destroying and correcting with the lack of truth these articles (none of you personally knew them!), Wikipedia destroy the truth of history.. it is against the right to freedom of opinion and expression, AI and digital security could https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/FreedomOpinion/Pages/OpinionIndex.aspx

https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/LTD/G17/071/20/PDF/G1707120.pdf?OpenElement

https://news.un.org/en/audio/2018/10/1023932

I know that during a global catastrophe Wikipedia users will be encouraged to print all articles on available printers to preserve the history of Mankind, but what we will print if the historical truth of the Wikipedia articles will be lost forever? I please you not to turn Wikipedia into a copy-paste which is published under dictation «1984» Big Brother, it is unacceptable to turn Wikipedia into a fence with graffiti that is constantly being broken by anyone who wants.

We can join forces: the professional skills of all Wikipedia administrators and editing area Users with the historical documents archive, that I saved for these articles with documentary confirmed sources of external links.

I bid you, all Wikipedia administrators and editing area Users my hand of friendship and open heart! We can make these articles, about which I am writing in my appeal and the whole of Wikipedia better: Let`s do it! Together! T∴ A∴ F∴ Cordially, Bohdan Rodyuk Chekan von Miller Esq. Gauaren erregina (talk) 16:32 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Resham Dankh

Hi, you reported the page Resham Dankh for speedy deletion due to copyright infringement. If you would kindly restore the page to the deleted version, or even move it to a Draft section, I'll rephrase everything in my own words. I was considerably busy and copied only a major part of ONE section. Everything else was proper. Thanks. SerTanmay (talk) 17:13, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

That's not quite how it appeared to me, SerTanmay. Anyway, I've restored the skeleton of the article, without the running text (there was no clean version to revert to; when part of the text is verified to have been copied, any other text added by the same editor is normally also removed as a precaution). Please don't copy from external sources again! Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:15, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi, thanks, I'll keep in mind in the future. SerTanmay (talk) 18:19, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Automated Clearing House

Thanks for your comments on this article, but I would have thought that an article defining a general (financial) term was key to Wikipedia. I previously included numerous references to ACH Systems around the world (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Automated_Clearing_House#ACH_systems_around_the_world), but regrettably another editor removed those references. I will restore those references and add "see also's" for external information describing or making use of this generic term. Beyond that, if you can provide some advice, I'd appreciate it. Jedison brussels (talk) 15:29, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Jedison brussels, I moved it to draft for you not because we shouldn't have such an article, but because it had no independent reliable sources at all. That's still what it needs. There must be be myriad books, articles, text-books and the like that discuss and explain the concept, the history, the mechanisms and so on. I imagine the list of such systems round the world was removed for the same reason – the website of each individual house itself is not an independent source. If the topic is "automated clearing house", a general concept, it should not be capitalised; "Automated Clearing House" would be the name of a specific institution. Please let me know if you need help or advice, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:58, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi Justlettersandnumbers, can you please check if you consider that the article has enough independent sources before I submit the draft for review? I have taken references related to the introduction, characteristics, operation, systems around the world (not just links to websites of the operators, but links to specific pages describing the ACH in a country when available), and uses. I have not tried to add a history of ACHs, as I think that is a slippery slope, but if I can find that information somewhere (maybe the World Bank Global Payments System Survey), then I will definitely add it. Jedison brussels (talk) 10:10, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Immediate restore of RD1 for The Scoots

You have revdel’d content from The Scoots due to apparent RD1 violation from http://wiki.southparkstudios.co.uk/wiki/The_Scoots. This is blatantly false. The content of the site in question was copied from the WP article here, not the other way around. The article The Scoots was independently written by experienced editors including myself. Please immediately revert your deleted content and restore the page. Thank you. - SanAnMan (talk) 15:51, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

SanAnMan, Thanks for pointing that out! It happens so often that people who delete articles or parts of articles do so without bothering to understand exactly and precisely what they are doing. There are far too many "I know it all" editors. 09:24, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

My apologies for this faux pas. When patrolling new articles that are only a couple of weeks old, one does not expect to find other sites already copying Wikipedia content (they're not indexed yet?). In this case I could not find the date for the South Park wiki source, but it looked quite official and had a copyright symbol at the bottom of the page. I note that the latest episode of the series, Time to Get Cereal, has a similar 88% violation according to Earwig. Incidentally, the editor concerned complained that I had failed to query the violation with the article creator before taking action, while failing to notify me that they were taking the matter to ANi, a fact that I did not know until much later. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:40, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Cwmhiraeth, please don't apologise, you did what anyone would have done based on the apparent situation; I checked it (of course) before revdeleting, and found the same – it just turned out that we were wrong! The editor had no reason be impolite and no reason to go straight to AN, all he/she needed to do was show that the external page was in fact created after ours (as I'd asked on his/her talk-page). Whatever else, please don't let this minor hiccup interfere with all the good stuff you're doing at NPP. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:11, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers and Cwmhiraeth, I think I can guess who that editor that went straight to AN was (coughcoughNightscreamcoughcough). Unfortunately he’s got a very short fuse but he really has no right to talk, he’s got a long edit history filled with ownership, rude and curt comments, and worse. But I hope that I followed better procedure by coming here instead. Anyways, let’s just chalk this up to a slip-up and we all just try to do our best and work together. - SanAnMan (talk) 02:43, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

restore page for Penelope Trappes

Regarding the deletion of the page for Penelope Trappes: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Penelope_Trappes&action=edit&redlink=1

The bio on Spotify that was cited as copyright infringement was written by me, manger of Penelope, with help from Penelope Trappes herself. We put the bio on Spotify and Wikipedia the same week (perhaps even the same day), as spotify allows managers to change their artists' bio. I am also the photographer who took the photos under the name Agnes Haus. I, and Penelope, are 100% ok with the bio being creative commons, copied, redistributed, changed, etc.. there is 100% no copyright infringement happening here.

Thank you! Flight005 (talk) 18:44, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Then, Flight005, you will need to make a proper paid editor disclosure and submit a draft through the WP:Articles for creation process. I can, if you wish, restore the skeleton (but not the copyvio text) of the deleted version. We have no way of knowing who wrote the Spotify material, or of knowing that you are who you say you are (we'd like to take your word for it, of course, but we can't); we have to regard the text as a copyright violation until and unless we can confirm that it is not. You can if you wish try releasing it under an appropriate licence, following one of the methods outlined here; however, you should know that material from external websites is in practice almost never included in Wikipedia. As her manager, you should of course refrain from editing any article associated with Trappes, including The Golden Filter.

Is there more than one person using this account? You claim here to be her manager and Agnes Haus, but you claimed here to be "1/2 of The Golden FIlter", so either Trappes or Stephen Hindman. Please clarify – Wikipedia accounts are strictly for individual use only; if there's more than one of you you must each create a separate account. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:22, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Agnes Haus is an alter ego of me, Stephen Hindman that i go under for art/management purposes (eg. photography/music management). I can refrain from editing The Golden Filter page. i didn't create it - but have in the past edited mostly discography bits so the page is more accurate - not sure if it's better to leave it as it was or keep it up to date (please advise?). As for paid disclosure, i don't get paid for this. Penelope and i are married and i haven't been paid to write bios. nor have i ever gotten a management fee, even though i "managge" aspects of the project. If it's possible to restore the skeleton of her page that would be great. perhaps someone else out there will fill in the information accurately. in an effort to prove i wrote the bio on spotify, and that i am Agnes Haus, i just put "-AH" at the end of the spotify bio: https://open.spotify.com/artist/6shE4Y1z4lzRqoDp65XfzT/about . Either way, i completely respect keeping the integrity of Wikipedia, and really just kept the bio to the facts (no opinions). hope some of this helps, for better or worse. thanks!! --Flight005 (talk) 19:46, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for cleaning up

Dear Justlettersandnumbers, thanks for cleaning up the Villa Romana Prize article today. I am relatively new in editing Wikipedia content, beginners mistakes ;-) Although I don’t get why you removed the added decade sub-categories in the receipient’s list? My opinion is, that the decade sub-categories would render the long list more legible. I also don’t understand your concerne regarding the three paragraphs of content (very skimpy) to be not neutral enough? It’s very descriptive, basic facts. Indeed, it could be improved grammatically, to much one-to-one translation from German. Thanks again dewilprj (talk) 21:11, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2018

Let me make this perfectly clear, as I thought I did in my edit summary, all I did was fix a list defined reference error that had been in the article since November 15. I have been working on clearing out a massive backlog at Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting, which is where this article - Maronesa - was listed at. All I did was comment the ref out, so if need be, it could be returned to the article if desired, as you apparently desire. I'm not involved in a content dispute on this article. However, if this article should ever appear in this category again in the near future, I will promptly ignore it. Thanks. Isaidnoway (talk) 11:32, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

I'm so sorry! When looking at, and then reverting, the repetition of the same old stuff from the disruptive IP, I completely forgot that you had since made that technical edit, though it was what had drawn my attention to the page; obviously my edit summary was in no way directed at you, and I'm sorry that it must have looked as if it was. I apologise for the unintended discourtesy. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:46, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

No problem, I admit I was a little frazzled when I wrote that, just having fixed this article (scroll to the bottom), where an editor decided (without discussion) to split off part of the article and leave that mess behind. It had good article status and I was very disappointed that anyone would leave a good article in that shape. My apologies as well for letting a disruptive editor get under my skin, causing me to shoot off at the mouth before thinking. Isaidnoway (talk) 12:10, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Questions regarding the deleted draft of Gerovital Cosmetics

Hello,

I'm writing in regards to your report and subsequent deletion of the Gerovital Cosmetics draft.

You mentioned the issue was copyright violation, although I had no time to edit my draft regarding this, nor any indication as to which content was not appropriately reproduced. Furthermore, this issue was not reported initially by user theroadislong, with which I was working toward a final and complete version of the article. Since it was now deleted, I would like to know what steps I can take to rectify the issue, and if there is any way I could receive indications as to which content was infringing copyright.

Thanks! RazPalea (talk) 11:01, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi again,

Please, be as kind as to let me know if you have an answer to my previous question. I would like to resume working on the article, and I need to know if you have any mentions regarding the copyvio you signaled.

Thanks! RazPalea (talk) 11:30, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

RazPalea, the copyright violations I noticed were the parts of the page that you had copied word-for-word from here – stuff like "A small laboratory - Mol-Mos – stands out and carries its activity in Cluj-Napoca" (whatever that may be supposed to mean). I didn't check for copyvios from other sources also, as there was no need – there was a previous (apparently) clean version to revert to, so that's what I did. I'm confident that Theroadislong would have done a thorough copyvio check if he/she had intended to accept the article. The talk-page of the draft is the place to discuss improvements to it. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:05, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your response! Regarding the information taken from here, since this is an article about Gerovital Cosmetics, which is owned by Farmec S.A., they also own the copyright regarding that information. Therefore, is it still necessary to rewrite that section as to respect the citation and copyright standards, or could I provide any sort of proof about having permission to use that information as is?

Thanks! RazPalea (talk) 09:34, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Stash

Hi! Thanks for taking the time to review my COI edit request for Stash. Could you please clarify which parts of the request were objectionable so I can revise accordingly? Thanks! Mary Gaulke (talk) 15:43, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: Hi, I'm sorry to pester but please weigh in further on the talk page. I've been asked to clarify exactly which parts of my request were controversial enough to need consensus, and I can't do that without your input. Thank you. Mary Gaulke (talk) 22:41, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Elisa Rolle's articles". Thank you. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:37, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Need your assistance

Please see Pure Storage - OTRS Ticket#2018110210006552 - ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 00:26, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Ooops - nevermind. I just realized the page states that an OTRS agent can resolve the issue, (I momentarily forgot that I am an OTRS agent) so I don't need admin assistance after all. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 15:37, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Aargh, Atsme, we've just edit-conflicted there. The problem with the COI editor's text is that it's written by the company, and so is WP:deceptive advertising. Though there's no consensus that I'm aware of that we cannot allow this, I don't believe we can take any action that risks being illegal under the laws of the United States – and this seems to be one such. I discussed this briefly with TonyBallioni here. What I was about to do was to stub the foundational copyvio, move the rewrite to draft space, and suggest to the COI editor that he submit an edit request if he wants to. Now I won't do that without your agreement. By the way, I don't think copy-pasting the content into the article is ever the right way to go about that – the standard technique is to move the rewrite into place over the copyvio version, and then histmerge the two. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:58, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Well, poop. I read the draft, checked for copyvios and it's clean. I didn't see anything overly peacocky and thought the draft was well-written. I went by what the OTRS ticket requested, so I took the shortest route to get it done without imposing on our already taxed admins. I thought it would be better if I actually did a cut/paste to show that it wasn't a COI edit. I was in the process of creating an MfD but if you believe the whole process should be handled differently, let me know and I will happily move out of your way. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 16:05, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Just got to thinking - on the bright side, I'm an AfC and NPP reviewer so, in retrospect, I inadvertently saved us those extra steps. I reverted the MfD tag I had added earlier to the user draft but had not yet created the MfD subpage for it. Before I do anything else, do you still want to move or hist merge anything, like the user draft and/or its TP, or whatever else you think is the best way to complete the task? You have all the tools to do that now. 😊 ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 17:58, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Sarah Binder

I reversed your draftification of Sarah Binder. It was a bad decision: the article is adequately sourced, and very clearly meets WP:PROF (election to the American Academy is a selective honor of the type that meets #C3). —David Eppstein (talk) 23:42, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Fair enough, David Eppstein. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:31, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Windmill Hill Cavern

Hi JLAN, thank you for your edits on this new article. I was reviewing its nomination for a DYK here and was concerned that there might be copyvios because some of the wording was too close to the original. Its seems I was right. I see it's been further edited since you removed visibility of copyright content. Could you take another look at that and let me know if you are content that it now okay. I really don't want to pass this for the front page if it breaches copyright. Bermicourt (talk) 15:12, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the trouble to ask, Bermicourt! Yes, I'd seen that the page had been substantially rewritten by JC7V7DC5768, who seems to have done a great job of it. Earlier today I did – just for safety's sake – check for any inadvertent infringement, and found nothing of any concern. I'm pretty confident that it's clear and ready for its moment in the limelight. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:36, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, that's helpful. Bermicourt (talk) 16:59, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Barbara Jana...something

I voted at your (justified) Afd nomination of the above article, and quickly fixed a few things on the page. I think the main editor of the page has competency issues as a) they reverted my edits to create this version, and b) after I suggested they not edit until they learned how to, they contacted me directly with a cryptic email that began:

Hi, Some one has deleted most of guts of the contents of Barbara Januszkiewicz artist article which is an acts of vandalism or unconstructive edits. I asked for help and added more reliable secondary sources. I have written a few articles, but my strength is just coming up with living jazz and visual artists that don't do mush in bringing attention to themselves. I am a poor editor, and need help with the wikipedia codes. I don't want to see this article or the others I have started have unconstructive edits. Plus why would anyone editors on Wikipedia jump to so many conclusions about OP?

... but they have been editing since 2009. Just making a note of this as I saw your repeated requests for basic info on their page.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:20, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Another note, I have been looking at the contribs of that editor, and it seems clear it is all COI material in the art and jazz domains. A little searching shows immediate connections. Of course I could be wrong. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:47, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, ThatMontrealIP, I saw some of that, too – and I had an unsolicited email as well. Just it case it's not completely clear: I've not asked the editor to disclose his/her identity (which would be quite unacceptable), just to make clear the connection with Second Street Studio, which apparently is or was next door to Metro Micro Gallery. Thanks for your contributions to the unfortunate article. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:25, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

The editor got blocked for a promotional username and promotional editing, so good call on rooting that out. I am going to have a look at the related page creations.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 12:37, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Weewarrasaurus

Hi JLAN, by coincidence I happened to be reviewing this one in the last couple of days and have not approved it because the images appear to violate copyright. Again, I'm no expert and would welcome a second opinion. Bermicourt (talk) 17:03, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Hmmm ... I'm not very good with images, but I'll try. As far as I can see, content published on peerj.com is licenced CC BY-SA 4.0; that is an acceptable (actually, preferred) licence on Commons, so I think those are probably OK. If you want to be sure, I'd drop a quick question at Commons:Village pump/Copyright (or just ask someone like Ronhjones, who's an admin both here and there). However, there seems to be another potential problem: peerj.com is a pay-to-publish site, vanity press for academics, so it's pretty doubtful that the principal source for the article can be regarded as WP:RS. It seems to me anyway much WP:TOOSOON to know whether a discovery published three days ago is going to be accepted by other experts in the field. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:10, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Ping fail, Ronhjones. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:26, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

License at peerj.com is cc-by-4.0 (https://peerj.com/about/FAQ/) - also shown at bottom of https://peerj.com/about/aims-and-scope/ "©2012-2018 PeerJ, Inc | Public user content licensed CC BY 4.0 unless otherwise specified." There being no license specified on https://peerj.com/articles/6008/ - I corrected the license (it was cc-by-sa-4.0) and finished the license review. Images are fine. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:40, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

So the images are okay, but if the sources fails WP:RS and the discovery is WP:TOOSOON, it seems to me we shouldn't be showcasing it on the main page. Bermicourt (talk) 21:00, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Well, Bermicourt, I wouldn't take my opinion as definitive! Why not ask at WikiProject Dinosaurs, or ask an opinion of someone like FunkMonk, who is I think active in more or less this area? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:22, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

I would suggest to you that all journals are pay-to-publish sites, and that PeerJ is not lacking in peer review: [15]. The peer review process is not openly documented for this journal paper, but the same is true of many other journals. 2001:569:782B:7A00:6981:9ED2:7238:E66A (talk) 23:52, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

• PeerJ has a commercial CC licence, so the images are fine for us to use. As for "too soon", it is the rule rather than the exception here that articles about new species (of any kind) are created right after they are published. I even recall one bird article (Perijá tapaculo) being featured the same year it was named (I was the only one who found this iffy, as far as I remember), with no problem. FunkMonk (talk) 16:08, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Pericle Fazzini

Can you take a look at this article, Pericle Fazzini, I noticed that you had reverted some earlier edits and it appears the same user has removed a large chunk of references (5 total), seen here. Apparently they prefer their own references. Article was, and still is, listed at Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting, where I ran across it. Thanks. Isaidnoway (talk) 13:39, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

U Didn't Even Give Me 24 Hours!

So, I guess Wikipedia is tougher about copyright issues than other issues? I ask because I've started other articles on Wikipedia that had problems for YEARS, yet u took 1 down for copyright issues, w/out even giving me 24 hours notice (article on George Grimm [Buddhist scholar])! If it's that important, then fine, I guess, but it seems pretty cold on this end. Put much more work into that than any article I've ever started on Wikipedia. Work I'll now have to do ALL OVER AGAIN, since the article is completely gone w/out a trace of it's ever having existed. Guess I should have saved it in a separate spot.Slarty1 (talk) 21:54, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, Slarty1, Wikipedia takes copyright seriously. When you open an edit window, a message appears which reads "Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted"; it means what it says. George Grimm (scholar of Buddhism) was deleted (twice!) because it was substantially copied from external sources including a book published in 1973. If you want me to restore a skeleton version of the page, without running text, I can do so. And please ... don't copy stuff from external sources – everything you write here must be entirely in your own words. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:34, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Re-ping Slarty1, since I messed it up before. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:14, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I would very much appreciate Any form of my article. I've put SO MUCH work into it. Most of my 2nd attempt was substantially different from other sources, IMNSHO. This is getting to b a heartbreak for me. I really think this guy deserves an English article. Pretty Please/thanx in advance.Slarty1 (talk) 00:23, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Done, Slarty1 – see Draft:George Grimm (scholar of Buddhism). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:20, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Re: Mount Potts

Thanks for checking the Mount Potts page. It looked like there was a long history some of which might have been saveable, which is why I didn't simply delete it myself, but it definitely needed some expert attention! Grutness...wha? 12:54, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Use of the Copy Patrol Template

Hi JLAN. I don't think our paths crossed much before you became a sysop, but through your sysop interests (COPYVIO) and my maintenance interests (NPP) our paths have crossed since then. I admit to being a bit puzzled by your approach to copyright and was hoping I could gain more insight. I have noticed several times I have tagged something as G12 and where it seemed like there was a good to strong claim of notability rather than deleting it you placed the investigations template. I admit to not knowing a ton about that process, but do things get handled fast enough that this is truly better than performing the deletion? Since I could understand the logic of your actions there, even if it is out of step with other sysops, I hadn't asked questions before. However, your templating of Giovanni Parmigiani confuses me. I spent some real time to look for possible copyright issues and to remove those from the article. I also ensured that citations which were being used in the middle of the copied text were kept in the article and otherwise tagged both large problems (copyedit, an unreferenced section) and specific (more detailed claims which could use an in-line citation). Why was this not enough that you then felt the need to template the article? Should I, in your thinking, just be applying that template to places where I would be using G11 or requesting revdel when doing NPP? Thanks and Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:13, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Barkeep49, I think I should have dropped you a note about Giovanni Parmigiani, and I should certainly have thanked you for the clean-up you did there. I chose to blank and list it because there had been a number of copyvios from several sources, going right back to the first version of the page; it seemed to me that you'd removed some, but not all, of the infringing content. Once a page is listed at WP:CP, there's a week's grace in which anyone can work on creating a copyvio-free version of the page; after that it's likely to be either deleted or reduced to a stub.

In general, G12 is the right tag for recently-created pages that consist all or almost all of copied stuff; the longer and more complex the page history, the lower the amount of apparent copyvio, the more likely it is that {{copyvio}} will be a better choice. Happy to discuss this further if this isn't completely clear or you have more questions. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:34, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for this explanation. On Parmigiani I had all of the other sources you listed and I had intentionally not included them/removed the text because it felt like basic information, which was frequently technical. Anyhow thanks again for the answer. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 23:49, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

RevDel

Hi. There seems to be an issue with the RevDel request function. I can no longer give the beginning and ending changes. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:50, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi, onel5969, that's a pain! Are you adding it manually or using one of the scripts? If the latter, I'd be inclined to suspect a problem with the script – the manual method seems still to be working. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:54, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm using the script. Just started using it, and was just getting used to how to do it. Is there somewhere I can look at to do it manually? I don't see it often, but do need to request it from time to time.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:59, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Onel5969, the markup is:

{{copyvio-revdel |url = |start = |end = }}.

I believe there's more than one script; anyway, if one of them isn't working well it's probably worth mentioning at WP:VPT. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:44, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

And congrats on being reviewer of the year! That is truly amazing number of articles reviewed! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:02, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the script. And regarding the reviewer thing... just trying to help out where I can.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:36, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

David E Shaner article copyright concern

Hello, I did a rewrite to the David E Shaner article and place it at Talk:David E. Shaner/Temp. I also made a note on the David E Shaner talk page. Please let me know if there is anything else I should do to have the copyright concerns reviewed.

thank you

Ptarry (talk) 00:21, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Untitled

Where is my Briar Nolet Draft- It took me ages to write and now I can't find it. Please send it to me so I can edit it to perfection. DOnt let my hardwork go to waste — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danceawe (talk • contribs) 15:09, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Danceawe, as you can see by going to Draft:Briar Nolet, it has (twice) been deleted as "G11, unambiguous advertising; G12, unambiguous copyright infringement of https://www.dancespirit.com/briar-nolet-2326798754.html". Wikipedia tolerates neither copyright violation nor promotion, I'm afraid. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:31, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

photo copyright

Hi, You deleted a photo I up loaded (Alina von Davier) for copyright violation, but I am the copyright holder. I set the copyright to CC w/ attribution, but the file was deleted anyway. I would like to use the photo you deleted fro her biographical entry. Please advise on how to replace photo. Cantineac (talk) 18:17, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Cantineac! Yes, I deleted that image; as far as I recall, it was because it had a clear copyright claim but no permission from the claimed copyright holder (please note that we can't and don't just assume that an editor with a somewhat similar username is the copyright owner).

In general, freely-licensed files are uploaded to Commons. I suggest you follow this path:

• upload the file, complete with EXIF data, here
• generate a statement of permission here
• ... and send it to OTRS: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org
• you should soon receive an automated response with a reference number.

Unfortunately there is a backlog there of the order of months rather than days; if after 60 days you've had no further communication, please come here and give me the reference number ("ticket number") and I will see if I can expedite it for you.

Please also note this: if you have some personal or professional connection to von Davier, ACTNext or ACT Inc., you should disclose it; if you receive or expect to receive any financial remuneration for or on behalf of any of those persons, disclosure is obligatory. Thank you, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:29, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Happy Saturnalia

		Happy Saturnalia
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:00, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Apologies

Thank you for your notes on several of my additions yesterday - I'm a rookie at this and not yet 100% aware of the rules... no excuse, but it won't happen again... Lenny --Lennycampello (talk) 20:43, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Lennycampello, that's generous of you. Wikipedia particularly welcomes editors with expert knowledge, so do please feel free to ask if ever you need help or advice on any aspect of editing. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:55, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Buon Natale!

Merry Christmas from London, JLAN ...

and a New Year filled with peace and happiness (and grapes, tangerines, panettone, ricciarelli, pan d'oro, and ciocolattini).

Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 08:46, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

To anyone and everyone who watches or visits this page

Piero della Francesca, detail of The Baptism of Christ, National Gallery, London

My very best wishes to all for the holiday season and for the New Year. For family reasons I will be on Wikipedia only infrequently – if at all – for several days from now. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:29, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Brays Oaks, Houston

I think the revision on the left here should be OK. I had reverted everything at that point, and added the tag in the next one. Home Lander (talk) 22:40, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Indeed, I overshot by one – thanks for picking that up! Happy holiday time! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:55, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers, you too. Thanks. Home Lander (talk) 23:49, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello Justlettersandnumbers, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019. Happy editing, Chris Troutman (talk) 17:47, 25 December 2018 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Untitled

Hi Justlettersandnumbers, I saw you moved a page i created Osadolor Nate Asemota to Draft:Osadolor Nate Asemota because of a supposed copyright violation policy.

Kindly check https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Osadolor_Nate_Asemota For immediate considerations. Thanks Amosflash (talk) 17:03, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Amosflash (talk • contribs) 16:58, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Not exactly, Amosflash – I blanked the page because of the copyright problem, but I moved it to draft space because it is not ready for mainspace. By the way, do you have some personal or professional connection to that person? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:14, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

No personal connection sir, just doing a professional job as it deserve, I have publish couple of pages that meet the standard and guidelines of article creation.

Please help me and revert the page for review.

Thank you sir. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amosflash (talk • contribs) 18:05, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

So, Amosflash, you don't know him, yet you were able to take this photograph of him? You claim here to hold the copyright to his webpage, and are able to email from his email address. How could that be possible unless you are (a) the person or (b) someone very closely connected to him? By "professional job", do you mean that you are paid to do this? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:09, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

I wasn't paid and can't be paid for it, I was able to reach out to their admin representative to initiate the process in other to be restored, I never wanted any of my created page being moved or deleted, this is almost 2 years I joined Wikipedia and have gain some experiences in page creation, the first thing I learned Is that the publisher must not relate or be a 3rd party to the person.

I simply contacted their admin team to send the process, maybe I didn't state it clearly initially, maybe because error in my sentences while explaining in details.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amosflash (talk • contribs) 19:44, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

The picture was taken by them, I just uploaded it on Wikimedia but didn't know how to fill the categories, that's why I ended up putting my name as the author, please I will edit it and add their team as the author

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amosflash (talk • contribs) 19:52, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

I hope you will attend to it as soon as possible sir,

Remain blessed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amosflash (talk • contribs) 03:12, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Mark Biltz

I would like to protest your immediate deletion of Mark Biltz. Please it back either to the main article section or my user space and I will rewrite it. --Omer Toledano (talk) 05:23, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Omert33, that page was deleted because it was almost entirely copied from other sources including this one. We don't restore copyright violations, so I won't restore this one. I can if you wish restore the skeleton of the article (the infobox, references, categories etc) – just let me know. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:46, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers:, yes. Please do. Please restore anything which was suitable and I'll add to it in an appropriate fashion. OK? --Omer Toledano (talk) 10:51, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Done, Omert33: Draft:Mark Biltz. Please take care not to add copyright content to Wikipedia again. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:42, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: so when do you think I can put it back up again? Will you be keeping an eye on it? --Omer Toledano (talk) 11:44, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers:, what do you think? Is it OK now? (Draft:Mark Biltz) --Omer Toledano (talk) 12:06, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Omert33, you don't need to ping me on my own talk-page. I've removed a small apparent copyvio from the draft, which now seems clear of copyvio. It also seems to be poorly sourced and far from neutral in tone – apart from anything else, there is no "Blood Moons phenomenon", it's just so much made-up cabalistic nonsense, so its "discoverer" should not be so presented in the voice of Wikipedia. I suggest you submit the draft for review in the normal way (i.e., by adding {{AFC submission}} to the page). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:57, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi, PLease attend to my request, I will be grateful sir.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amosflash (talk • contribs) 17:41, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

help on this

Let me also know if I can republish or you help me on bringing it back, the only issue it had has been resolve to verify the copyright holder, the article is well arranged....Thank you Amosflash (talk) 17:48, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Justlettersandnumbers!

Happy New Year!

Justlettersandnumbers,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
SkyGazer 512 ^{Oh no, what did I do this time?} 23:46, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year!

Hello Justlettersandnumbers: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a great New Year! Cheers, Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 23:59, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year snowman}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.

You deleted my article "Andrzej Sztando"

Dear Justlettersandnumbers You deleted my article "Andrzej Sztando". You said: "16:13, 1 January 2019 Justlettersandnumbers (talk | contribs) deleted page Draft:Andrzej Sztando (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.ue.wroc.pl/pracownicy/andrzej_sztando.html) " But have you found that there is statement on this page: "All the content of this page is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0" ? This text is written in 3 places on this page. Is it not enough? Preparation of this article (references) took many hours of my work... Can you explain this situation and help me please? Can you undelete this please. Thank you. Iszop63 (talk) 18:58, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Done, Iszop63 – you had neglected to provide attribution for the plagiarised content, as is required by the CC BY-SA 3.0 licence (I've now done that for you). I have to wonder exactly when that creative commons licence was added – I note that it was not in the page when it was archived five days ago. By the way, if you have some personal or professional connection to Sztando you should declare it (and if you receive any financial reward for that relationship, you must disclose it). Happy New Year! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:23, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: Dear Justlettersandnumbers. Thank you very much for your forbearing explanation and for your instant answer, for undeletion and for adding necessary attribute. I really appreciate it. I'm sorry I forgot to add this attribute. I will remember it in the future. I have not any personal or professional connection to Sztando. I am just passionate of local and regional development, so I am going to enrich Wikipedia with information on categories and persons connected to it. And I want to do it fully in line with Wikipedia rules and vision. Do you think my article is now fully OK and ready for resubmitting? I really don't want to make some another mistake. Thank you once again and Happy New Year for you too! Iszop63 (talk) 20:33, 1 January 2019 (UTC)