User talk:Koavf

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
An icon of a file folder
User talk:Koavf archives
001 81 topics (2005-03-05/2006-03-07) 63kb
002 56 topics (2006-03-07/2006-08-08) 44kb
003 47 topics (2006-08-08/2006-09-14) 48kb
004 60 topics (2006-09-14/2007-06-05) 73kb
005 48 topics (2007-06-05/2007-08-21) 80kb
006 35 topics (2007-08-21/2007-11-30) 73kb
007 42 topics (2007-11-30/2008-02-19) 44kb
008 34 topics (2008-02-19/2008-03-26) 46kb
009 38 topics (2008-03-26/2008-04-19) 38kb
010 39 topics (2008-04-19/2008-05-31) 60kb
011 88 topics (2008-05-31/2008-08-04) 88kb
012 40 topics (2008-08-04/2008-09-11) 61kb
013 46 topics (2008-09-11/2009-04-13) 47kb
014 60 topics (2009-04-13/2009-09-29) 50kb
015 37 topics (2009-09-29/2009-11-21) 46kb
016 22 topics (2009-11-21/2010-01-04) 22kb
017 49 topics (2010-01-04/2010-02-18) 54kb
018 63 topics (2010-02-18/2010-03-23) 63kb
019 44 topics (2010-03-23/2010-05-02) 48kb
020 46 topics (2010-05-02/2010-06-28) 56kb
021 46 topics (2010-06-28/2010-09-01) 71kb
022 54 topics (2010-09-01/2010-10-14) 43kb
023 49 topics (2010-10-14/2010-11-26) 43kb
024 54 topics (2010-11-26/2011-01-22) 37kb
025 61 topics (2011-01-22/2011-06-08) 37kb
026 43 topics (2011-06-08/2011-07-12) 39kb
027 44 topics (2011-07-12/2011-08-15) 48kb
028 44 topics (2011-08-15/2011-10-08) 42kb
030 73 topics (2011-11-25/2012-02-17) 62kb
031 47 topics (2012-02-17/2012-03-14) 74kb
032 40 topics (2012-03-14/2012-04-15) 39kb
033 41 topics (2012-04-15/2012-05-01) 43kb
034 42 topics (2012-05-01/2012-05-30) 38kb
035 58 topics (2012-05-30/2012-07-27) 73kb
036 44 topics (2012-07-27/2012-09-03) 87kb
037 41 topics (2012-09-03/2012-10-26) 61kb
038 47 topics (2012-10-26/2012-12-01) 111kb
039 56 topics (2012-12-01/2013-02-05) 78kb
040 63 topics (2013-02-05/2013-05-14) 69kb
041 71 topics (2013-05-14/2013-09-04) 135kb
042 81 topics (2013-09-04/2014-01-09) 109kb
043 53 topics (2014-01-09/2014-05-15) 69kb
044 62 topics (2014-05-15/2014-09-17) 92kb
045 123 topics (2014-09-17/2015-05-16) 156kb
046 66 topics (2014-05-16/2015-11-11) 73kb
047 91 topics (2015-11-11/2016-09-30) 113kb
048 43 topics (2016-09-30/2017-01-09) 74kb
049 67 topics (2017-01-09/2017-07-21) 96kb
050 35 topics (2017-07-21/2017-09-11) 75kb
051 50 topics (2017-09-11/2017-11-25) 83kb
052 82 topics (2017-11-25/2018-06-13) 106kb
053 99 topics (2018-06-13/2019-01-01) 219kb
Current discussion

Contents

Untitled[edit]

Hi Thank you for making the changes on Wake the world Firends sessions! Do you think the same edits should be done to I Can Hear Music: The 20/20 Sessions (album)? Thanks Tim — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atozafit1 (talkcontribs)

@Atozafit1: Sounds like a good idea to me! ―Justin (koavf)TCM 04:27, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Yes I am pretty new and not very good at editing. so many strange symbols and signs you got to try to put infront to make charts and hyper link etc A lot to learn. Ill be excited to see the I Can Hear Music: The 20/20 Sessions (album) page updated! Thanks Tim — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atozafit1 (talkcontribs)
@Atozafit1: No problem: it's okay to make mistakes, since it can all be fixed. You can't "break" anything here. That said, it's worth learning how to do things the proper way as you go. E.g. when you post on a talk page, make sure to add a signature by typing in ~~~~ at the end. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 07:21, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Ok cool thank you! I did try to make some edits on those two beach boys pages. Thanks 16:24, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Untitled 2[edit]

11:35, 4 January 2019 diff hist +16‎ Talk:Brian Horrocks ‎ →‎Working in the House of Commons −

	+	

11:33, 4 January 2019 diff hist +23‎ User talk:Citizen Canine ‎ →‎Seasonal Greetings

	+	

11:33, 4 January 2019 diff hist -2,771‎ User talk:185.249.80.5 ‎ ←Replaced content with 'GO FECK YOURSELF' current Tag: Replaced

	+	

11:31, 4 January 2019 diff hist +82‎ User talk:Junior5a ‎ →‎Johnny McCoy ...Aiken Barracks

	+	

11:30, 4 January 2019 diff hist +18‎ User talk:185.249.80.5 ‎ →‎January 2019

	+	

11:27, 4 January 2019 diff hist -715‎ Brian Horrocks ‎

	+	

11:26, 4 January 2019 diff hist +71‎ Brian Horrocks ‎ Undid revision 876775908 by 185.249.80.5 (talk) Tag: Undo

	+	

11:25, 4 January 2019 diff hist +100‎ User talk:Citizen Canine ‎ →‎Seasonal Greetings

	+	

11:24, 4 January 2019 diff hist -71‎ Brian Horrocks ‎ Undid revision 876775796 by 95.136.41.111 (talk) Tag: Undo

	+	

11:23, 4 January 2019 diff hist +22‎ User talk:KylieTastic ‎ →‎Draft:Daymaro_Salina_(handball)

	+	

11:23, 4 January 2019 diff hist +16‎ User talk:LynxTufts ‎ →‎Hritikrajkeshri current

	+	

11:21, 4 January 2019 diff hist -71‎ Brian Horrocks ‎ Undid revision 876775593 by 95.136.41.111 (talk) Tag: Undo

	+	

11:19, 4 January 2019 diff hist -71‎ Brian Horrocks ‎

	+	

12:20, 17 December 2018 diff hist +39‎ User talk:Citizen Canine ‎ →‎un aiuto per Claudia Letizia

	+	

12:09, 17 December 2018 diff hist +9‎ User talk:Citizen Canine ‎ →‎un aiuto per Claudia Letizia

	+	

10:30, 17 December 2018 diff hist -172‎ Norman ‎ →‎Other uses

	+	

10:09, 14 December 2018 diff hist +17‎ Hulk (film) ‎

	+	

14:30, 12 December 2018 diff hist -10‎ Earth Summit ‎ Typo Tags: Mobile edit, Mobile web edit

	+	

	+	

I vandalised all these pages AND STILL HAVENT BEEN BLOCKED! F U WIKIPEDIA! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.249.80.5 (talk) 11:41, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Image without license[edit]

Unspecified source/license for File:Greatest Hits - Tracy Chapman.jpg[edit]

Copyright-excl.svg

Thanks for uploading File:Greatest Hits - Tracy Chapman.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (TalkContribsOwner) 23:46, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

File:Greatest Hits - Tracy Chapman.jpg[edit]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:06, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

File:American Pie by Don McLean US vinyl single.jpg[edit]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 17:59, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

A goat for you![edit]

Boer Goat (8742860752).jpg

As a fellow editor, hope we cross paths one day.

ImmortalWizard(chat) 13:27, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

@ImmortalWizard: If we're both immortal, then that basically ensures that we will. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 16:57, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lonche (January 14)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Abelmoschus Esculentus was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Fails WP:NBAND. No significant coverage by independent, secondary sources. You apparently have a conflict of interest.
Abelmoschus Esculentus (talkcontribs) 00:51, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Teahouse logo
Hello, Koavf! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Abelmoschus Esculentus (talkcontribs) 00:51, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Draft rejection error[edit]

It appears that you submitted the draft :) Abelmoschus Esculentus (talkcontribs) 01:36, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

@Abelmoschus Esculentus: Hm. Curiouser and curioser. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 02:08, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Maritime Travel Inc. (January 14)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Robert McClenon were:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Robert McClenon (talk) 02:39, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Song of the Soviet Army (January 14)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Robert McClenon (talk) 03:57, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Marc Dunlop (Scottish Writer) (January 14)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Robert McClenon was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Inadequately documented. Abandoned draft.
Robert McClenon (talk) 04:00, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Monday 14th January 2019[edit]

Greetings Koavf,

I received notification that my Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Wikigazer/sandbox/wikigazer_user_page&oldid=658823122 has been edited by you to remove:

[[Category:Articles created via the Article Wizard]]

I have been searching through Wikipedia to try to understand what this is for and what implications it may have. Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion seems to be potentially relevant?

Please would you kindly help me to understand why you have done this and what it means for my "newbie" attempts to work in Wikipedia? What is the reason for making this change?

Thanks in advance.

Kind regards
wikigazer

@Wikigazer: No problem. Category:Articles created via the Article Wizard was in fact deleted as a part of the WP:CFD process. See Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2019_January_6#Category:Articles_created_via_the_Article_Wizard. As far as implications or actions required by you: nothing. It's purely an administrative thing that shouldn't impact your work here at all. As an aside, to sign your posts, please use four tildes (~~~~). Let me know if there's anything else I can do for you. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 15:12, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Untitled 3[edit]

Hello

I would like to know if it is possible to replace the categories in this article with muslim instead of spanish. Ceuta did not become spanish until the 16th century. thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.155.44.51 (talk) 21:42, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

But you can be both Muslim and Spanish. One is a religious affiliation and the other an ethnicity/nationality/citizenship status. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 21:45, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
He was born 5 centuries before Ceuta became spanish. so I think muslim or moorish for ethnicity would be more accurate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.155.44.51 (talk) 21:52, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Agreed! ―Justin (koavf)TCM 22:00, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

IRL[edit]

Ovila Abbey Quad.jpg

Nice to finally meet! Looking forward to an even more conversational repeat. Binksternet (talk) 05:58, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

@Binksternet: How kind--it was a real pleasure just to meet a nice guy and also to get a better understanding of your understanding. I'd like to dive back into that article when it's appropriate but for now, I'll toast a cup of tea to a fellow Wikimedian. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 08:47, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

File:The Cranberries - In the End.png[edit]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 17:59, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Redesigning Wikipedia's Spam Defenses[edit]

Hello,

I’m King, a current Junior at Stanford University. You’ve spent many years on Wikipedia. I am curious what you think about the current system of flagging articles and issues and how it could be optimized. Maybe Machine Learning tools could be implemented? I can also be reached at iamking-at-stanford-dt-edu. (Formatted weirdly to protect myself from bots) Would love to hear from you either on Wikipedia talk or via email. Thank you for your time!

P.S. I grew up using Wikipedia and would love to have the opportunity to contribute back to this community-powered knowledge base. Speaking with you would be greatly advantageous. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingalandydy (talkcontribs) 04:50, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

@Kingalandydy: I'll use email since you're probably more comfortable there. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 05:33, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

January 2019[edit]

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Out of Time (album) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Dan56 (talk) 04:07, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Category:Christian anarchists by nationality has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:Christian anarchists by nationality, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. czar 22:15, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Category:Albums arranged by John Fogerty has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:Albums arranged by John Fogerty, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 04:41, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 21[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2010 Tonight Show conflict, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Late Show (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:47, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

File:Viva el amor.jpg[edit]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 17:59, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Eminem - Kamikaze.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eminem - Kamikaze.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:29, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Western Sahara 2011 date[edit]

Both the Bir Lehlou and Tifariti list the date of transfer for the capital as 2011. Either these two sourced articles are wrong or the article you reverted my good faith edits in is wrong, there is no in between. Dermato1 05:36, 1 February 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dermato1 (talkcontribs)

@Dermato1: On this article, references 8 and 9 support 2008. I don't see any source claiming 2011. Do you have one? ―Justin (koavf)TCM 05:52, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
if there are better sources for 2008, that is fine, but it should be changed on both city pages then. I was originally going off of those. Dermato1 06:01, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
@Dermato1: Neither of those articles have sources for that claim. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 06:23, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Glam[edit]

Oh, THAT is ridiculous. We categorize glam metal as a parent genre to glam rock? Forgive me for the coarseness, but frankly, that's bullshit. Despite their similarity in names, they are totally separate in style. I'd love to know whose idea this was. dannymusiceditor oops 02:49, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

@DannyMusicEditor: It's the other way around. Just like how heavy metal is a subgenre of rock music. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 02:54, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
Then why do - screw it, never mind. dannymusiceditor oops 02:56, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
@DannyMusicEditor: It's because ―Justin (koavf)TCM 02:57, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
That's becoming the answer to everything here. Because. *insert upside down smiley face emoji here* Do you at least see the absurdity of putting an R.E.M song in the same category as those by Motley Crue, even if it's in line with policy, technically? dannymusiceditor oops 03:01, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
@DannyMusicEditor: Do sources say they are the same genre? ―Justin (koavf)TCM 03:05, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
Are you asking if the song is cited as both genres or if sources say glam rock and glam metal are the same? "Crush with Eyeliner" is cited as glam rock, and now glam metal with the reliable source you added. The two genres, however, are not the same thing. dannymusiceditor oops 03:08, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
@DannyMusicEditor: I didn't add any sources to that article. My question is "Does Song 1 have a source saying it is Genre X and does Song 2 also have a source saying it's Genre X?" ―Justin (koavf)TCM 03:10, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

───────────────────────── My apologies, I thought this was you. Anyway, yes, I do happen to have an example to share. I didn't mention one from Motley Crue before, but let's take Kickstart My Heart as an example. Both this and Crush with Eyeliner are cited as glam metal but are quite obviously different. I know how policy typically works on these things, but you asked. Face-wink.svg dannymusiceditor oops 03:23, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

My picture[edit]

It's actually a jacket and tie, not a suit..the pants were a different color. (I realize that I'm a primary source, and you may not be able to accept my comment. :-) ) Funnily, you're the second person today to assume I'm wearing a suit when I'm not... --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:05, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: Duly noted! ―Justin (koavf)TCM 16:14, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. A little thing, perhaps, but what are we here for if not accuracy? :-)
Incidentally, I did want to tell you that I did end up looking at some of the Reddit threads, and saw some of your comments about me in one of them, and wanted to say thanks for the kind words. It's nice to hear, especially as you're someone whose work and editing philosophy I've always respected. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:19, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: No problem. Being white guys in our mid-30s on the Internet, we're pretty well insulated from the most vicious stuff but the Internet can still be a really gross place sometimes. I honestly don't know how sensitive of a guy you are or how interested you are in seeing a bunch of strangers talking about you but it can just be a surreal and off-putting experience. I decided to err on the side of letting you know and standing up for my fellow Wikipedian. Thanks for the kind words yourself, S. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 00:33, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Category:Infinite Zero compilation albums has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:Infinite Zero compilation albums, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:10, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Jytdog[edit]

Jytdog has been banned by the Arbitration Committee. Eschoryii (talk) 16:33, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

@Eschoryii: I saw that, thanks. I think that's unfortunate because I think he was trying to do good ultimately but went way too far. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 16:44, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Aliases of 76.66[edit]

Ambox warning orange.svg Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Aliases of 76.66, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Aliases of 76.66 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Aliases of 76.66 during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Huon (talk) 00:42, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

File:John Mellencamp - Other People's Stuff.jpg[edit]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:00, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 11[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Committee of the Whole (United States House of Representatives), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Speaker of the House of Representatives (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Unexplained edit reversion of a good faith edit[edit]

Using a handwritten summary on this edit would have made better sense. For one thing, there was nothing in the automated summary that said that the edit kept the fix that I made to the link pointing to Gnik Nus. Because of that, had it been someone less observant than myself, it is possible that they may have ended up reverting your edit back without realising that the edit you made kept the fix. And it was an unexplained reversion of a good faith edit. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 09:00, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

@C.Syde65: A fair request. A proper edit summary would be "WP:DASH". See also MOS:NBSP. Thank you for your note. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 09:03, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:WPSANFRAN[edit]

A tag has been placed on Template:WPSANFRAN requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

G4: The template Template:WikiProject San Francisco was deleted and this was created a few years later as the same template. Couldn't tag G4 as the deletion log does not show the discussion it was based on.

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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Gonnym (talk) 12:17, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Silenced[edit]

If you had read my edit summary you would not have left your absurd edit summary. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 07:17, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

@Rui Gabriel Correia: What is this in reference to...? ―Justin (koavf)TCM 07:27, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Userboxes[edit]

You might want to remove this from your userboxes.
Documentation
For the wikibreak template, see Template:User mental health.
Editors can experiment in this template's sandbox (create | mirror) and testcases (create) pages.
Subpages of this page.
Thanks, Mstrojny (talk) 18:24, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

@Mstrojny:  Done Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 18:53, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

River Arts District[edit]

One of your edits removed the official web site. Was there something wrong with it?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:49, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

@Vchimpanzee: I was just an idiot about porting the official site over to d:Q61793431. It is fixed now. Thanks for writing and auditing my work. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 21:06, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
I thought that's what happened. I should have reported it.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:10, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
@Vchimpanzee: You didn't do anything negligent: I did. Thanks again for being diligent and reaching out to me. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 21:15, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
I guess the logic was you knew what you were doing, and whatever you did with Wikidata would automatically repair itself.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:23, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Nice redirect![edit]

Hey!

I noticed you made a really cool redirect from The Dowie Dens o’ Yarrow to Baby Shark. Unfortunately, since that doesn't make sense, I changed the redirect so it leads to The Dowie Dens o Yarrow.

Hope you don't mind! Hecseur (talk) 02:29, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

@Hecseur: I don't at all, as it's a better target. I was going to read "Baby Shark" and see if there was an article for the folk song but evidently there is and you already fixed it. Your solution is definitely superior but why do you say that it makes no sense? The folk song is a basis for the pop song.Justin (koavf)TCM 02:30, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
I am an idiot. Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 02:33, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
I was about to comment about how I got culturally enriched by learning that Baby Shark was inspired by The Dowie Dens o’ Yarrow, but you edit-conflict-beat me to it hahaha. Cheers mate. Hecseur (talk) 02:39, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Please see my proposal to speedily rename a category[edit]

CFD trout for you[edit]

Rainbow trout transparent.png Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something silly.

... for your mislabelling of a merge proposal as "delete" at WP:Categories for discussion/Log/2019_February_6#Category:American_Jewish_conservatives, and your failure to list the merge targets .

As explained on my talk, you could do so easily with the help of WP:TWINKLE. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:31, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.17[edit]

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Hello Koavf,

News
Discussions of interest
  • Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
  • {{db-blankdraft}} was merged into G13 (Discussion)
  • A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
  • There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.
Reminders
  • NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.
NPP Tools Report
  • Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
  • copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
  • The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828
Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.


Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

HotNewHipHop[edit]

Would you be willing to weigh in this discussion regarding HotNewHipHop should be count as an reliable source or not. If you want to. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 20:46, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Talk:Orchid Bay, Belize[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Talk:Orchid Bay, Belize requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. DGG ( talk ) 04:22, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Office Space (Milton/SNL shorts) listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Office Space (Milton/SNL shorts). Since you had some involvement with the Office Space (Milton/SNL shorts) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Goveganplease (talk) 01:00, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Google Stadia[edit]

Ambox current red.svgOn 20 March 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Google Stadia, which you created. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

165.16.94.87 (talk) 21:40, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

File:Bad Suns - Mystic Truth.jpg[edit]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 17:59, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

File:R.E.M. - Live at the Borderline 1991.jpg[edit]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:00, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Nice![edit]

Good to see that you're still maintaining your own templates! Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 20:18, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

@Woshiyiweizhongguoren: It's a team effort and I'm in it for the long haul. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 04:42, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Nice! 2[edit]

You demand I format the ref and then when I find it doesn't support the info but I finish it anyway you claim I was doing something that I was not]. A real jerk move on your part. Do not post on my talk page again. MarnetteD|Talk 06:51, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@MarnetteD: You used a script to mark a live link as dead; then said that therefore since it's incorrectly marked as dead, it doesn't need to be formatted beyond a bare URI; then you formatted it and left it in the article even tho it's irrelevant. Have I got that correct? ―Justin (koavf)TCM 06:54, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Additionally, I'm not obliged to fix your errors or to complete anything here: it's actually a totally legitimate thing to mark problems and move on to something else. This is a perfect example of why I don't use ReFill and other tools that are error prone and that can't adequately fill in citation templates. You may want to reconsider your editing and how many incorrect edits you've made with these tools. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 06:55, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Nope that is not the order that things happened but I wouldn't expect accuracy from you in this situation. MarnetteD|Talk 06:59, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
@MarnetteD: So what is the correct order? ―Justin (koavf)TCM 15:36, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Category:Portuguese discoveries has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:Portuguese discoveries, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:08, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Best of Everything track listing[edit]

I would like a specific reason as to what is wrong with the track listing template format, I'm still confused as to why you undo my edits — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ballstothewallcabral (talkcontribs) 13:41, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

@Ballstothewallcabral: I posted about this on your talk page to discuss but numbered lists are standard and there is already an established style on this page. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 16:34, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Please stop using {{sub}}[edit]

Hi Koavf, please stop converting sub html to templates such as {{sub}}. There is a style guide for chemical articles Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Chemistry that should be followed, and this uses <sub>. Any bulk changes are likely to be controversial, and should be discussed on project pages first before making. For example Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals. In the mean time I will be undoing these changes you made. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:50, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

@Graeme Bartlett: Per Help:HTML in wikitext, we shouldn't use HTML. I don't see anything at the linked page encouraging HTML tags. What am I missing? ―Justin (koavf)TCM 00:15, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
If you look at the wikitext in the MOS page you will see it uses the sub and sup tags, not templates. The talk pages I pointed you to were where mass changes should be proposed first. In the recent past there have been people who want to use <math> or <chem> or {{chem|}} to markup chemical formulae. THe people jsut started mass editing and then had to be stopped. The new ways of formatting all have had disadvantages that lead to rejection. For one page it can be tried out, but when doing all pages, the whole big picture needs to be examined. Before converting to templates, you must make sure that the editors that edit this text are happy with any mass changes. The tools that generate, edit or use these formats must be in alignment. Also note that AWB should not be used to edit pages in such a way that there is no visible difference. So cosmetic editing could be combined with spelling correction for example. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:33, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
@Graeme Bartlett: You don't need prior approval for non-controversial changes but do you have in mind what could possibly be the advantages of just these two HTML tags? ―Justin (koavf)TCM 04:55, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
The problem will be that you don't know ahead of time what will be controversial. Fixing up clear mistakes will not be controversial if you get it right. But changes to thousands of pages is probably going to be controversial. For example some were annoyed when I changed ndash template to – with AWB. So I disabled the rule. There are advantages in not using templates. There is less processing burden, and you will not hit the limit on number of template expansions. Using templates makes it harder to understand what is happening, as you would have to understand the template as well as its use. Templates have some extra risk of vandalism in bulk. For many templates the advantage of using them outweighs the problems, but for simple sub and sup there seems to be no advantage to use. Instead of discussing the particulars on your talk page though, it should be on a project talk page so that more will participate. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:47, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
@Graeme Bartlett: It is on the talk page as I started a thread. Your point about max templates is definitely a concern but is really only relevant for a small handful of articles like water or carbon. Otherwise, I'm not sure that {{sub|2}} is really much harder to understand than <sub>2</sub>. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 06:52, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, I will be more specific there! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:10, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

"established style"[edit]

I don't understand the "established style", what is the point? the articles look better with the template. Please give me a fair and legitimate reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ballstothewallcabral (talkcontribs) 15:45, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

@Ballstothewallcabral: Saying that it looks better is purely subjective: I don't think it does. Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Album article style advice suggests that {{track listing}} can be used but that track listings should generally be numbered lists. If an article has an established style (e.g. a numbered list) for several years, changing it to the track listing template has no value other than making it look the way that you prefer. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 15:53, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Navigation[edit]

Oh man! If you feel strongly about it. I probably should not have done my brainstorming hair rising idea I gues and revert all the work I did. I will explain what it was supposed to be though. It’s a real world navigating timeline that I thought of regarding DC’s real world significant history. I boldly tried it but I am not surprised if it going against what other editors think useful. Anyway the navigating would have inside the link as it noted. If you just clicked on it and it should be able to give a comic book history tour. Jhenderson 777 17:08, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

@Jhenderson777: I'm all for bold ideas but I just still don't understand what this is... Maybe propose it at WT:COMICS and folks there can give feedback? ―Justin (koavf)TCM 17:58, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Thaks for the advice. I certainly will do it for more opinions that I respect of. Even though the WikiProject is only half-alive. I admit that what I am doing is different. But yeah there is a method to my madness...I believe. Jhenderson 777 00:12, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

"Scripts not encoded in Unicode"?[edit]

With particular regard to International maritime signal flags: what are "Scripts not encoded in Unicode"? Is that article considered a script? What does "not encoded in Unicode" mean, and how is that significant? ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:02, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

@J. Johnson: The Unicode Standard is responsible for creating lists of characters in various writing systems. Semaphore, maritime flags, Morse code, etc. are all performative ways to communicate that can be encoded in text as well and Unicode have not yet done that with maritime signal flags. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 22:19, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
So you are saying that signal flags are forms of "script" -- that is, character sets? Unicode was invented to standardize the specification in digital media of characters used in writing systems, and signal flags are not writing systems. Sure, people sometimes spell out names using signal flags (more in the nature of being cute than being serious), but neither the various flags them selves nor the several systems of using flags constitute system of writing. Do you perhaps have some information the Unicode Consortium is considering encoding signal flags? ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 00:56, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
@J. Johnson: I don't but they also encode a lot of things that aren't standard human scripts like Morse code signals, Braille, emoji, symbols, etc. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 00:59, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Originally they added the Zapf Dingbats because the was an accepted typeface ("script"), but not always consistently encoded. And I can sort of see Morse code (although "Morse" code has variants! and I wonder how they handle quintuple-wide "characters"), but— Braille?? A visual form of Braille doesn't make sense, as it is expressly designed for non-visual representation. Perhaps so sighted people can talk about Braille characters?
Which is sort of how I feel about "maritime" flags. They can be used to spell out words but (aside from purely frivolous uses) they are generally used in the limited context of a signaling system; they are quite unsuited for any kind of typography. If they get "Unicoded" (a concept I find appalling) they would be rightfully categorized as such. But unless and until that happens, to state they not "Unicoded" is such an unexpected statement of what is so obvious it does not need statement – sort of like saying these flags are not carved of the side of Great Pyramid — that it is, at the least, surprising, and violates (per WP:ASTONISH) the Principle of least astonishment. So I would feel better if the various signal flags were not categorized as "not encoded". But I leave that to your discretion, as I need to get back to studying some seismology. ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:59, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
@J. Johnson: But Unicode and font systems aren't just for sight! It's worth encoding Braille digitally so (e.g.) it can be searched and indexed. And additionally, so we can talk about Braille directly in text without using images. Or transmitting web pages as text which uses up far less bandwidth than scans of Braille pages, etc. Lots of reasons immediately come to mind. As far as removing maritime flags from the category, I totally respect the decision--it was a little bold of me to add it. But I sincerely hope that Unicode does assign code points for these flags. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 00:10, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Okay, I can see a case for Braille, particularly for talking about Braille "characters". That's not quite analogous with signal flags (at least for the standard ICS flags) because we refer to them by name, not by some lower-level code (and never mind that there are digital encodings for Braille). But perhaps close enough. My astonishment was due in part by not understanding what was meant by "script" (something internal to Wikipedia, like a template?), and the "not encoded in Unicode" bit. "Encoded" meanss that something has been put into a coded form. "lacking a Unicode encoding", in the sense that Unicode lacks a way of encoding, be would clearer. I would urge that the category be renamed accordingly. And perhaps a better term than "scripts" could be found. ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 18:05, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
@J. Johnson: Riiiiiiite. That makes more sense: yes, "scripts" here are not programming language-style scripts used by computers, nor are they words written for characters in plays but writing systems. And in the case of things like Morse code, they are encodings of encodings of spoken or written language. It gets mind-bending thinking about converting thought → speech → writing → Morse code → digital type. Even in the case of maritime flags, imagine a ship log that includes a table of such flags or if someone has a drawing of them in running text. It would be valuable to have a standardized, encoded way to index, store, display, and search these glyphs in documents and databases. Agreed that they are not a script but they are an encoding system for language and like other such systems that are not strictly speaking a writing system (a la Braille or emoji) and I think can and should be encoded in Unicode. You are correct that calling them a "script" is really not accurate. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 19:01, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Well, signal flags (and here I restrict that to the ICS) do not encode written text (except as a special case), let alone speech; they encode signals. Ships logs – more specifically, their communications logs — do not include drawings, images, or glyphs of a signal flags observed or raised; they log signals received or sent. Such signals transcend any specific language, and even signaling methods (such as flaghoist, semaphore, or flashing light). Note that such signals are not limited to single flags. E.g., "F" (Foxtrot) and "FO1" (Foxtrot Oscar One) are each distinct signals whose meaning is Code specific (e.g., the ICS, Marryat's, etc.) and even which edition (e.g.: ICS 1872, 1890, 1931, 1969, 2005). Encoding signals would be like encoding the words in a dictionary. Encoding flags (individually or in combination) is rather pointless as that is done adequately with the assigned Latin character.
Are you amenable to revising the Category name? ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:11, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
@J. Johnson: If you proposed a rename at WP:CFD, I would probably give a weak support. I could be talked into a few positions, really. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 20:13, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
I was hoping you would do it.[Imagine a suitable emoji here.] Well, perhaps I'll have a little more time for that in a couple of weeks. ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk)

Please see my proposal to speedily merge the category[edit]

MfD nomination of Portal:Western Sahara[edit]

Ambox warning orange.svg Portal:Western Sahara, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Western Sahara and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Western Sahara during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Legacypac (talk) 20:38, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

YouTube videos as citations for music videos[edit]

I have been going through the WP:RS/N archive to see if I can find the answer to the following question:

Can a youtube video be a reference to prove the existence of the video?

To me that sounds like WP:OR and WP:PROMO, but I see it all the time in our articles on songs and musicians. I have tried deleting them, but some editors say, yes, it's okay; but most say no, definitely not.

I posted about it here on WP:RS/N:

Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_256#YouTube_official_music_video_as_a_reference_for_that_video

But the answer is a little inconclusive, and no one else commented.

However, I noticed that you deleted the youtube and other similar sources I too thought should be deleted, and so far it stuck, so I am thinking it is indeed okay.

If someone tries to put those back and say it's okay, how would you respond. Because I want to start making edits like you have, but I want to be sure policy supports that.

(I made a similar post about this here: User_talk:Blueboar#YouTube_videos_as_citations_for_music_videos)

--David Tornheim (talk) 01:06, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

@David Tornheim: Generally, self-published sources are really only valid for claims about oneself and even then, they can be controversial (e.g. an actress lying about her age). Also, I would never cite a store like Amazon or iTunes. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 01:14, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
I have spent a lot of time trying to remove the Maroon 5 music videos that are advertised throughout our site this way, when I first discovered IP's sticking them in, then other bands, etc. when I see them. But new IPs keep showing up and restoring the advertising. Any suggestion on what can be done? Would you be interested in helping me and others get rid of this kind of advertising of music videos--that appears rampant throughout the site? It seems like you are interested it already based on that edit. --David Tornheim (talk) 03:07, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
@David Tornheim: I am interested in that to be sure. Unfortunately, I think the solution would be on pages about a certain song, have an external link (i.e. not use YouTube as a source) and on list pages like discographies, not have those types of links at all. If you see a persistent problem, I would recommend posting to a forum like WT:ALBUM, and then escalate to something like WP:RFC if you feel like a site-wide discussion is needed. 03:49, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

I have created some more missing persons in countries categories[edit]

Hi, I see that you have created talk pages and added images to some categories that I have created. I am impressed with what you have done. Are you able you able to create more images and and on to some talk pages that I have created. I would really like it if you would as you are very good at it. Davidgoodheart (talk) 04:44, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

@Davidgoodheart: Thanks for the kind words and for what you do to make the encyclopedia better. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 05:13, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Can you please added images to the talk pages of Category:Missing person cases in Turkey, Category:Missing person cases in Africa, Category:Missing person cases in South America, and Category:Missing person cases in Egypt. Davidgoodheart (talk) 05:18, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Great! That was really quick how about Category:Missing person cases in Uganda, and Category:Missing person cases in Nigeria. Davidgoodheart (talk) 05:25, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks can you still do Category:Missing person cases in Belgium? I created the page, it just now need an image to go with it. Davidgoodheart (talk) 05:34, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, can you please make some talk pages for these categories Category:Missing person cases in Mississippi, and Category:Missing person cases in Idaho, and Category:Missing person cases in Haiti. Davidgoodheart (talk) 04:23, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, please make some talk pages for these categories Category:Missing person cases in Louisiana, Category:Missing person cases in South Dakota, and Category:Missing person cases in South Carolina. Davidgoodheart (talk) 04:38, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, could you please make talk pages for these Categories Category:Missing person cases in New Hampshire and Category:Missing person cases in Montana. Davidgoodheart (talk) 21:20, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, can you please make talk pages for Categories Category:Missing person cases in Washington, D.C., Category:Missing person cases in Wyoming, and Category:Missing person cases in Rhode Island. Davidgoodheart (talk) 06:13, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Richard Evans (artist) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Richard Evans (artist) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Evans (artist) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:48, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm sorry about this – it looks as if your 2006 redirect got hijacked a couple of times and eventually turned into this. If I'd been more alert I'd have checked the page history before I nominated it for deletion, and not sent you this notice. Best regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:54, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
@Justlettersandnumbers: No worries, man. Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 03:45, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

The Massacree[edit]

Rainbow trout transparent.png Whack!
You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something silly.

You're hereby invited to the RM discussion at Talk:Alice's Restaurant Massacree. —BarrelProof (talk) 21:03, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Category:Friends has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:Friends, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:35, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Anarchist Somalia listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Anarchist Somalia. Since you had some involvement with the Anarchist Somalia redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  01:10, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Talk:List of Doris Day songs[edit]

As a matter of curiosity what happens to a talk page if you move it? If you hadn't added the other two projects (which I won't comment on or alter), I would have turned into to a redirect with the comment, 'Repointed as per article name space' keeping the whole thing in line with WP thinking. --Richhoncho (talk) 10:36, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

@Richhoncho: Can you reword that? ―Justin (koavf)TCM 18:52, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
When an automatic page move is made, both the article name space and the talk page is redirected. Why should this redirect be any different because you created it? --Richhoncho (talk) 19:04, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
@Richhoncho: Me moving a page in on way determines if a redirect should be created. If you have something in mind, you need to tell me what it is--I can't figure out what your point is or why you are posting here. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 20:10, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
I would redirect the talk page the same as the article namespace. It's an r from an alternative title, no talk should appear on the talk page? You been drinking, buddy? I have spelt it out clearly already. --Richhoncho (talk) 21:05, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
@Richhoncho: Is this what you want? Why did this involve me--you could have easily done this edit yourself. I have no idea what "no talk should appear on the talk page" or "in line with WP thinking" mean. That has nothing to do with drug use: it's you being obscure. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 21:08, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
Perhaps if you hadn't reverted my edit I wouldn't have found it necessary to come to your talk page. Would have suited me fine. --Richhoncho (talk) 21:56, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
@Richhoncho: I don't know what you want from me: please be explicit about it and maybe I can help you. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 23:04, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
I can only assume at this stage that is your intention to play silly buggers, as exemplified by the further changes you have made to the talk page. So let me ask you the question? What point having the projects on a redirect page (from an alternative title) if it repoints to another talk page? You are confusing yourself. The projects are redundant because all discussions, comments and whatever should be on the talk page of the actual article. Don't bother to respond, you really are being contradictory and making yourself look silly. Not on my time --Richhoncho (talk) 00:04, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
@Richhoncho: Not 100% sure what a silly bugger is but if I were pressed on it, I would say asking a question on someone's talk page and then saying, "No, no don't answer it" would be Exhibit A. I'm happy to help you if you can just explain what you need but I don't know what it is. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Agreed that "all discussions, comments and whatever should be on the talk page of the actual article", hence the redirect. The "point" of having "projects" (project banners?) on a redirect talk page is just to include them in Category:Redirect-Class articles and its appropriate subcategories. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 00:26, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
So give me an example (historical) of where you have moved a page and then added projects to where the article was orginally sited? --Richhoncho (talk) 08:48, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

───────────────────────── @Richhoncho: I'm sure that I have before many times but no examples immediately come to mind. If you genuinely need a diff, the easiest way for me to find one would probably be to go thru Category:NA-Class Western Sahara articles where I'm sure I've done that multiple times. Not sure what your point is again. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 19:33, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Why?[edit]

What possible benefit does this edit serve? --- Coffeeandcrumbs 02:06, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

@Coffeeandcrumbs: Per WP:REDLINKS, plausible redlinks should be made. Per WP:SOURCE, not all things should be sourced. Which part is confusing? ―Justin (koavf)TCM 02:11, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
The part where people have removed the section because it is not sourced. It has been challenged and you are removing the source that supports it. If something is missing from the source, I am happy to add a source for that single item. Go to ITN where someone is advocating pulling the article from the Main Page or deleting this section.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 02:20, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
@Coffeeandcrumbs: I don't know what "go to ITN" means. Please provide a link and I can discuss there. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 02:27, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
WP:ITN/C. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 02:28, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Gabriel Lorca[edit]

Hello, Koavf. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Gabriel Lorca".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Lapablo (talk) 19:25, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.18[edit]

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Hello Koavf,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

Niharika Kohli, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:

  • Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
  • Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.
Reliable Sources for NPP

Rosguill has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.

Backlog drive coming soon

Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.

News
Discussions of interest

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250


Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

In The End[edit]

Regarding [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_the_End_(album).

  1. I see that you added the bonus track without references. Why is this acceptable?
  2. Do you consider http://cranberriesworld.com/2019/04/25/all-over-now-demo-as-bonus-track-for-japan-album/ to be a reliable source for the bonus track?
  3. Why did you revert the template I added? Is it discouraged? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phistuck (talkcontribs)
@Phistuck: The reference is the album but for very obscure editions, it is definitely better to have a third party source. Generally speaking, a fan's site wouldn't be a reliable source because there is no process of editorial review or fact checking. I removed the template because I don't like it and there's already an established style in the form of a list. Thanks for posting and adding to the encyclopedia. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 19:12, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
@Koavf: Well, not liking it is not a good reason to revert it. Both of the forms are prevalent (I actually see my form more often, personally) and I find mine more readable (for me and for others), because -
  1. I feel like most people do not care about the non-standard edition, therefore it makes sense to have it hidden and togglable.
  2. The odd-and-even row backgrounds are sometimes easier to grasp.
I feel like most of your revert was unwarranted. PhistucK (talk) 16:42, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
@Phistuck: But liking the template is no reason to add it. I find it ugly and distracting. Plus, collapsible content is inaccessible, which is why that is deprecated at {{track listing}}. If you don't want to read the name of a song, I guess you need to just glance over it. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 16:48, 20 May 2019 (UTC)