Jump to content

User talk:Mdann52/Archive 25

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 20Archive 23Archive 24Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27Archive 30
Archive 20Archive 23Archive 24Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27Archive 30

15:15, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kevin Slawin has been accepted

Kevin Slawin, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 13:21, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Removing the entire section makes no sense. We could keep the same references and trim it with "Bass is married to Josh Klausner. They have two children and reside in the West Village, Manhattan, New York City." Would she object to that? I don't see why Wikipedia has to be censored even further for this woman.Zigzig20s (talk) 13:10, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

@Zigzig20s: There are reasons why I went for the whole section as opposed to just retracting it, which are detailed in an OTRS ticket. This is the minimum sensible measure that can be taken, considering what I have been told - let's leave it as there are real life issues involved here. Mdann52 (talk) 15:47, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Where is the OTRS ticket? Wikipedia is not censored.Zigzig20s (talk) 15:51, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
@Zigzig20s: Ticket:2015092510016893 Mdann52 (talk) 15:55, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
I've never used that website and don't have an account. What does it say? However, all the info I added to her article is in the public domain. Anybody can google her and find the articles with this info. It's not private information. It should not be censored.Zigzig20s (talk) 15:57, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
@Zigzig20s: There is a difference between censorship and not including all information, please learn the difference. However, there are reasons why this was removed under BLPPRIVACY, I'd asked you respected them. Mdann52 (talk) 15:59, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Which reasons? It is in the public domain. It's not private information. It is completely standard to have a section with husband, children, residence, if that's all been published in the press. I don't see why there should be an exception for this woman, especially after she let the press publish articles about it...Zigzig20s (talk) 16:03, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

@Zigzig20s: unfortunately, I'm not able to details these - per meta:Access to nonpublic information policy, this information is not releasable outside OTRS. However, trust me, I don't take actions such as this unless a very good reason is mentioned, and I feel this passes my threshold for this sort of action. Mdann52 (talk) 16:07, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry but there needs to be a reason given if this woman is the only person on Wikipedia to decide to censor her own page, after letting the press publish multiple articles about her husband, children, residence. It's not standard procedure at all. She would be the only exception in the history of Wikipedia as far as I know! Why did she not censor the press btw?Zigzig20s (talk) 16:11, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
I can guarantee this is not the only case where this has happened, I've been involved with similar cases in the past. This is not "

woman ... decid[ing] to censor her own page" by the way. Mdann52 (talk) 16:17, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

I believe you need to give us a reason. Anybody can claim to have access to special information and censor articles...Do you have a close connection with this woman?Zigzig20s (talk) 16:22, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
I've given you a reason - that there are real life issues, and because of these removing the material is needed. I have no connection with them whatsoever before I picked up on this email. Mdann52 (talk) 16:26, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Is the real life issue that she does not like it? Why did she like it when she was boasting about it in the press?Zigzig20s (talk) 16:31, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
If that was the reason, then I would not remove it at all. Mdann52 (talk) 16:32, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Is this censorship permanent, or temporary? I would understand if she asked all newspapers to delete their weblinks with this info (or redact the info she deems unseemly), and if she did the same by destroying all copies of such articles in libraries across the country...but what is the point if anybody can google her and find this info in 30 seconds?Zigzig20s (talk) 16:38, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
I hate to insist, but if you simply google her name, her third and fourth google hits show her husband's name and her address. You don't even need to click on the google hits; it shows up on the main page. This is ridiculous.Zigzig20s (talk) 17:24, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Cleanup of "naked" Google Books?

Are you in a situation to look at this for a supervised bot?Naraht (talk) 14:50, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

@Naraht: I'll take a stab once I've finished my current bot run, can you link me to any discussion or details please? Mdann52 (talk) 16:40, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Just the original discussion at Wikipedia:Bot_requests#Cleanup of "naked" Google Books? Naraht (talk) 19:26, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

18:32, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:London Metropolitan University logo.png

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:35, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

16:29, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

16:02, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Panasonic Eneloop/Fujitsu batteries

Could you explain why you have removed the Fujitsu content from Eneloop? It is a fact that Panasonic does not make ANY Ni-MH products for years because they had to sell their Sanyo factories to Fujitsu (FDK). Which makes Eneloops for Panasonic now. All is well cited. This is important fact which must me served to public. (Behemot (talk) 00:10, 21 October 2015 (UTC))

Stop.

Stop edit warring over the thread, or you will end up blocked. It's fine open at the moment - Jimmy can easily shut it down if needed. WormTT(talk) 11:51, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

18:04, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

question about your thread-close-outcome preliminary-assessment

Hi again Mdann52, this time I'm not here for template-bugfixing.  ;-)

  Over at the thread WP:Requests_for_comment/User_names#1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR there have been several bangvotes during the last five weeks, and your assessment was that likely the end-result will be close-as-disallow. As you can see from my (unfortunately-volumnious) commentary therein, I disagree pretty strongly that is the correct outcome. Do you have a specific reason you think the close will be against the user-slash-username?

  To my wiki-eyes, at least, there is no firmly-policy-backed reason to disallow; most people are saying it is WP:UNCONF because they personally don't yet understand the "meaning" of the username-style. The equivalent scenario, of IPv6 editors with long names, seems to negate the too-confusing-stance; am I wrong about that? Similarly, some people are saying it is WP:COI, but again, that is a misreading of what the wiki-guideline actually says, methinks. Furthermore, in this specific case, 1Wiki8 is not using their username for that purpose... and we'd be able to tell, because the blockchain is public, and paid editing would be directly visible.[36] There is some 'money' at the bitcoin-address, worth roughly $3 (aka three United States dollars) after paying fees for conversion to a real-world currency; I presume that 'money' was added to make the bitcoin-address recognizable by the off-wiki software-toolchain that permits 1Wiki8 to secure their associated private key(s) and to perform digital signatures upon their on-wiki edits as needed, with maximum simplicity.

  Now, the mitigating grandfather-esque circumstances, are that because this is related to their off-wiki security-measures and security-practices (from what I can infer anyways), and the strength thereof, User:1Wiki8 aka User:1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR plans to exit stage right, rather than continue improving the suite of articles wikipedia has related to cryptocurrency, if they cannot achieve their desired level of maximal personal security (pageprot committed-WMF-identity is roughly 100 times less secure than crypto-hash-as-the-username ... which sounds like a lot until you realize that we're talking about a one-in-ten-million risk changing to a one-in-a-hundred-million risk factor). Still, it is a reason, and they've been here since 2005; this new username-change is linked to their past account on usertalk. Seems a shame to have the close be against them, and wikipedia lose another WP:EXPERT, simply on the basis of two discouraged-but-not-prohibited wiki-guidelines.

  I guess my question boils down to, can you please be more specific, on why you think 1Wiki8 is operating outside of policy? I do see the nose-count is against them, but closes aren't supposed to be about counting noses, and bangvotes aren't supposed to be votes, and all that. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 02:07, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

I see this has formally been closed now, so the matter is beyond argument now. My close was based upon a read through of the discussion and the policies/guidelines raised throughout it. Unfortunately, I can't be much more specific than that. Mdann52 (talk) 18:41, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
And personally, my guess would have been 3-to-1 that your reading would have matched the eventual outcome. Or at least 2-to-1. Not having a spare universe lying around to act as a control-experiment, I suppose we'll never know the exact percentage-likelihood. In any case, I don't think that a no-consensus-close means that the wiki-policy is now set in stone; I'm actually against that even in principle. Moreover, I expect that somebody will follow the lead of 1Wiki8, and begin using a long-crypt-hash username, either as their main account, or as a doppleganger when they want to sign messages. In which case, another RFCN will may well be opened up, particularly if the person is actively using their crypto-hash-username as a way to collect 'money' for editing. In the meantime, though, we'll have to see how User:1Wiki8 uses their liberty going forward, and if any other humans try a similar crypto-username. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 13:17, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

You asked for it

You're in, by unanimous consent: [37]. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:09, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Lists of airline destinations

Perhaps you saw that the AFD got closed. Would you mind using AWB to un-tag all the articles, as you used it to tag them? It's simply that User:Cyberbot I/AfD report is choked because there are suddenly tons and tons of pages with AFD templates that link to a closed discussion.

Had I come upon the AFD when it was still open, I would have said "speedy keep" on procedural grounds; there's always the chance that an article might have useful text that could be merged back into the parent article (I can imagine a well-cited paragraph, just a few sentences long, that summarises the destinations in a useful manner), and someone else's category mistake caused you to nominate Wings Air by accident. Were you to nominate a lot of these after checking each one (saying something like "I've checked them all, and none has anything useful for merging"), I would readily support deletion. Nyttend (talk) 12:48, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

@Nyttend: I'm waiting on Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Mdann52 bot 10 before I run this. AS for the second point, fair enough. Mdann52 (talk) 19:27, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
I assume you've seen the edits from this morning's run, such as this one. A good start, you might say. FYI. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 18:52, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
@Ultraexactzz: yup, I only tested one, forgetting that timestamps changed between templates! I've tweaked the regex and it should fix itself now. Mdann52 (talk) 19:10, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
Great. Thanks! UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 20:48, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Resilient Barnstar
Thanks for being so kind as to use your own bot to remove the AfD notices after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pages in Category:Lists of airline destinations was closed. Deryck C. 22:10, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

I wonder whether you read the whole discussion or just counted votes. --George Ho (talk) 04:15, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

@George Ho: I did, as with all deletions I close. Mdann52 (talk) 18:48, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

16:43, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Luka (song) page edits [Suzanne Vega song]

Hi, I added some information to the Luka (song) page. You deleted it as unsourced, despite the fact that in doing so you deleted also the two sources I used to support this paragraph! I have no intention of getting into an edit war with you so please can you explain your extraordinary actions.

User:Mdann52

Salim555 (talk) 21:22, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Guru Noel

I reported user Guru Noel for violation of 1RR here [44]. He accused us now of being part of a Saudi-Qatari scheme and ignored the fact he broke 1RR. EkoGraf (talk) 04:55, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

He now arguing he did not broke 1RR because he was restoring an article that was illegally deleted. :P EkoGraf (talk) 01:46, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
As soon as he got unblocked he again restored the alleged Daraa offensive article, claiming he added a source that confirms the offensive. The source (Farsnews, not accepted as RS), talks about regular individual operations taking place, but nothing about an organised offensive. You want to revert him again, or should I? EkoGraf (talk) 04:25, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Halyard Health Edits Question

Hello User:Mdann52,

I wanted to reach out about the recent changes for the Halyard Health page. I am looking to get guidance as to how to describe the products on their page in a way the fits the guidelines similar to the product section of the Johnson & Johnson page.

Additionally, this section was originally published by another user and has been in place for several years. Is there something that changed that made this section promotional that was not an issue previously? My goal was to update this section and the references. Any guidance on this would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks Corleone72091 (talk) 19:45, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

@Corleone72091: The main issue was the tone was not neutral, and while I admit other articles are not perfect, this one was a lot worse. Mdann52 (talk) 08:29, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your help! Corleone72091 (talk) 17:01, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

17:18, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Strange look of my candidate's page

Dear User:Mdann52 . It appears that page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2015/Candidates/Pldx1

doesn't look like the pages of the other candidates. May be I missed something, and I prefer ask for help rather experimenting on an election page.

Thanks in advance for your advice ! Pldx1 (talk) 14:18, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

@Pldx1: it was just a misplaced colon, as I see this as purely cosmetic I have fixed it. Mdann52 (talk) 16:38, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for that. Pldx1 (talk) 17:24, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

ACE

I think this page needs updating (not sure if you guys are the ones doing it or not). --kelapstick(bainuu) 17:33, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Barnstar of Diligence
For closing Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Ban appeals reform 2015, which I was starting to think was never going to happen. Thanks! Beeblebrox (talk) 19:14, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi , Request that the page "Milind Chittal" created by me is not deleted since he has all the credentials of being included.Fresh links for his achievements have been provided. Thanks, Sursadhana Sursadhana (talk) 04:50, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

19:39, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Help needed at DRN

You are receiving this message because you are signed up as a volunteer at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. We have a number of pending requests which need a volunteer to address them. Unless you are an inexperienced volunteer who is currently just watching DRN to learn our processes, please take a case. If you do not see yourself taking cases in the foreseeable future, please remove yourself from the volunteer list so that we can have a better idea of the size of our pool of volunteers; if you do see yourself taking cases, please watchlist the DRN page and keep an eye out to see if there are cases which are ready for a volunteer. We have recently had to refuse a number of cases because they were listed for days with no volunteer willing to take them, despite there being almost 150 volunteers listed on the volunteer page. Regards, TransporterMan (talk · contribs) (Current DRN coordinator) (Not watching this page) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:48, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Mass deletion on Admin Noticeboard

Hello Mdann52. Here you made a mass deletion of information from the Administrators' Noticeboard, including a section that I had opened on "Community discussion regarding disruptive edits to Heathenry-themed articles". This was a debate that was ongoing and awaiting an un-involved administrator to come along and state whether consensus had been achieved or not. As a result, I have manually restored the information to the Administrator's Noticeboard, I hope that that is okay by you. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:44, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Please do not archive ongoing discussions that occur on noticeboards. This is very disruptive. Liz Read! Talk! 11:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

20:26, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Don't spam me please

Dear Mdann52,

I hope you don't mind to not put me on any spam list you create on User:Mdann52/list or anywhere else ....Sicherlich Post 23:19, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

@Sicherlich: Apologies, this was an automatically generated list of all eligible accounts. There was an opt-out page announced. Note that this is not a permanent list - you are removed as soon as I send the message out. Mdann52 (talk) 13:44, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

SPI Clerk Application

Thank you for your interest in SPI clerking. At this time we are going to be removing your application as we have sufficient trainees for this round. We would invite you to re-apply down the road if you are interested further. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

@DeltaQuad: no problem, thanks a lot for letting me know! Mdann52 (talk) 19:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

File Deleted:BrihatNakshatra.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_talk:BrihatNakshatraBook.jpg Please take a look. I hope that Wikipedia has some means to send an email out before doing these deletions. What sort of proof are you looking for from me to say that I am the copyright owner of the book Brhat Nakshatra, the Cover image and everything in it...I am the author, and have also created that image Do I need to upload the Photoshop file? I hope this is the right place to ask this as I am not familiar with these talk pages. In case you are looking for a letter from the publisher, my wife can send one for you. She owns the firm Sagittarius Publications. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srath (talkcontribs) 17:21, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

@Srath:, please follow the steps outlined at WP:DCM. Mdann52 (talk) 19:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Please sign your messages

Thank you for this message. I will attempt to participate in the voting (especially as it lasts two weeks, leaving me enough time to read it).

Please sign your messages by hand. The mass delivery tool doesn't (yet). But I feel that human touch is important at the talk pages. Thanks! :-)

--Gryllida (talk) 22:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)