Je suis Coffee

User talk:Primefac

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

Lotfi A. Zadeh[edit]

Hi: Just a heads up: someone just added September 6th as a death date for Zadeh, citing in their edit summary the Berkeley Initiative for Soft Computing, but I've checked there and see no mention of it, and there are no hits on Google or Google News. As before, it's certainly possible that he died, but there's no RS as of yet to confirm it. I've notified the editor who added the date that they need a citation from an impeccable source, so we'll see if that nips this in the bud.

I just wanted to let you know in case this becomes another runaway situation like before. Thanks, Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:07, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

The first editor to put it in the article (this time), Gizgalasi, cited this as the source. As I pointed out, that's just a comment posted to a discussion board, and therefore not a reliable source. Now, an Azerbaijan source has picked up on that report -- supposedly from the same person here. This is still not reliable, certainly, to report a death - we should wait for a recognized news outlet before including it in the article.
But the dam has burst. I've now removed it three times. I think it's time to fully protect the article until we have a reliable report. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:52, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
One week protection should do it. I've put it back on my watchlist as well. Primefac (talk) 11:26, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you once again. I continue to monitor the situation. More news reports, but all of them Azerbaijaini, and all of them based on the reports from that one "family friend". I've reached out to Zadeh's research assistant for information. Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:06, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks again for your assistance on this. I hope I don't have to call on you again for a similar problem elsewhere. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:57, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
No worries, feel free to ping me whenever if the need arises. Primefac (talk) 11:54, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Lotfi A. Zadeh[edit]

Hello. Why you are reverted my last edit ? He is He passed away in September 6. --Baskervill (talk) 12:04, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Baskervill, I did not revert anyone. This is a question for the talk page. Primefac (talk) 12:07, 7 September 2017 (UTC)


You just deleted a page based on a copyright violation that actually was a mirror of Wikipedia, congratulations for that. Thank you. Appah Rao (talk) 20:30, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Appah Rao, if you're copying directly from a Wikipedia mirror (i.e. Wikipedia itself) then it shouldn't be on its own page. While I admit that in this case G12 is not applicable, A10 certainly is valid and I have no intention of undeleting the page. Primefac (talk) 11:51, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Is this a violation of a Tban?[edit]

On 22 July 2017 a Tban was imposed on myself and JJbers. Neither one of us are allowed to edit any article regarding Connecticut until after 22 Jan 2018. I found this on the Westport CT article dated 28 August 2017:,_Connecticut&diff=797704146&oldid=797679671 FYI Thank you, ——→StephenTS42 (talk) 03:55, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

StephenTS42, WP:BANEX gives exemptions for reverting vandalism, which is what that edit appears to be. Primefac (talk) 15:02, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Primefac Thank for your answer. It could also appear that the edit immediately prior to the reversion, (by editor was done so to give licence for the reversion by the banned editor, JJBers.
Can the editor be wiki checked, or otherwise investigated? I suspect evasion here and yet I hope I am wrong. It would be a good thing to know it wasn't (evasion). Thank you! ——→StephenTS42 (talk) 21:36, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
If you really think that he might be vandalising while logged out in order to circumvent his TBAN by reverting vandalism you're welcome to take it up at SPI. Quite frankly I'm surprised I even had to write that sentence, because that's a very strange way to go about things.
I do thank you for bringing this to my attention so that I could look over it, but I'm fairly certain there's nothing actionable here. Primefac (talk) 18:27, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Primefac I trust your judgement and will drop the stick here. Thank you for your time.——→StephenTS42 (talk) 14:06, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Bumping this, Primefac already covered why I did it. While I don't think Stephen did it, but the address locates to Norwalk, Connecticut... —JJBers 18:08, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats[edit]

Dear Primefac, the information in European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats was taken from the original PRESS RELEASE, intended for free republishing! This information was repeated dozens of times on different web-sites. Isn't it free? --Perohanych (talk) 16:49, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Perohanych, according to their website, their press releases are copyrighted, and their "release" clause is not compatible with Wikipedia. Thus, it cannot be copied directly to Wikipedia. Primefac (talk) 17:42, 8 September 2017 (UTC)


Never seen one before. Should it be in stale draft space? Legacypac (talk) 16:22, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Legacypac, given that there does not appear to be a shortname for the Doctrinaires, the template itself is rather useless, so I've deleted it as G13 (since it is a valid deletion criteria). Primefac (talk) 23:02, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
I tend to use G2 for blank (or those that just repeat the title) pages and G11, G3 etc as applicable so they are not subject to wasting effort with REFUND. Thanks Legacypac (talk) 02:54, 10 September 2017 (UTC)


He might still be smarting under the outcome of this. I think there would be a boomerang. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:29, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Re: Premature AfD closure[edit]

I have concerns beyond the premature closure. I'm also wondering how someone who edits boy-band articles and discographies suddenly comes to an AfD over an article totally out of their typical scope of editing to close it. Looks hinky (and vaguely familiar) to me. -- ψλ 16:04, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

I've seen them make quite a few relists at AFD, at least enough to know that they're fairly competent in their closures/relistings. If you're concerned about something nefarious, I suggest WP:ANI (though I also suggest some serious evidence). Primefac (talk) 18:40, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Ref tag RfC close[edit]

Hi -- you closed this RfC saying it had already come into effect, but unless I misunderstood the RfC it was saying that <references /> would automatically generate columns where there were more than ten footnotes. That's not happening at History of scientific ice drilling; do I have the wrong end of the stick? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:49, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Mike Christie, it looks like (based on the phab ticket) that the devs were waiting for the RFC to close before proceeding, and it should be rolling out tomorrow. Might take a day or two to percolate through the system, though. Primefac (talk) 01:00, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Got it; thanks. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:05, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

VR Concept[edit]

Primefac, I have started one contribution for VR Concept, it was deleted by you through speedy process. I am a new writer here and have been overwhelmed to see so many rules initially.
There is one question according to writing an article concerning 2 versions for different languages.
I planning to write 2 articles about software in English version, but notable sources I able attached and link them to the article (at reference area of article) are only written in Russian and located in Runet media and blog zone. Is it possible to use it for notation to write an article in English?
(Vitality ru (talk) 08:53, 11 September 2017 (UTC))

Vitality ru, while English sources are preferred (because this is the English Wikipedia) there is nothing wrong with using Russian sources (or sources in any language, for that matter). Just remember that they need to be reliable sources.
Your article was deleted because it was copied directly from another website. This is not allowed, and any content added to Wikipedia must be written in the editor's own words. When you go to rewrite the article, I highly suggest you use the Article Wizard to create Draft, which will be reviewed by experienced editors after submission. Primefac (talk) 15:43, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to OTRS[edit]

I'm very happy to see that you applied and have been granted status as an OTRS agent. I have watched your contributions to help desk over the years and assume you will be able to hit the ground running.

I put together some case studies you might wish to review: Case studies

I hope you'll find them helpful, but I'd also be interested in your feedback on them as a new agent; we need to do work on training and this is my first stab at creating some training materials.

The OTRS software is not exactly media wiki, you may not have any issues but I'd be happy to walk you through some of the features if you'd like.

I used TeamSpeak recently and prefer it to IRC part because I'm a slow typist so I like being able to communicate via speech while still having the ability to use tax for links and other reasons.

If you don't know this app I'm not the expert on it but Cameron can help. I assume you were subscribed to the OTRS mailing list so you should have received a comment from Cameron regarding teen speak this morning but let me know if you need more information. I hope to spend some time there during this week and would love to work with you on handling some tickets.--S Philbrick(Talk) 17:12, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

I be up in your comments, stealin' yer case studies. TJWtalk 17:20, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
TJW, I hope you find them helpful, and would appreciate feedback and comments.--S Philbrick(Talk) 17:47, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

User:This is Paul[edit]

I'm glad you were able to unblock him. But does he know it? EEng 18:30, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

I would assume so, given that the UTRS closing process resulted in an email sent. Primefac (talk) 18:31, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

My first OTRS request[edit]

If you would like to hit the ground running, I have a vague recollection that something was rolled out recently applying to all editors even unregistered ones that would do something like pop-ups. I didn't pay close attention because I've been happy with pop-ups but I think that feature is what this person is complaining about. My guess is there is a way to turn it off but I don't recall all the details and I'm betting that you do.

ticket:2017090410002317 --S Philbrick(Talk) 19:28, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Re:Draft:Ejembi John Onah[edit]

I have edited the article under the above subject addressing all the issues that were raised by the previous reviewers especially formatting of references. Please assist to take a look before I resubmit. TerungwaSamuel (talk) 02:23, 12 September 2017 (UTC)


Hi, Primefac, Thanks for writing out User:Primefac/revdel.js. I am waiting for oppurtunitie(s) to test the script.That being said, (now that we have a community consensus), what's the next step to integrate this with Twinkle?As a side-note, I feel your script would be more comfortable to use, in the float-box pattern used by Evad's XFD closer or Twinkle itself!Regards:)Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 14:02, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

I made this mostly as a stop-gap until Twinkle could be updated. I believe (based on the discussions) that the update to TW will enable a user to specifically select which revisions to delete (similar to selecting edits when reporting a user to WP:AN3). I'm not a TW dev, and so I honestly have no intention of working towards integrating this, but I'll look into making it more all-in-one (javascript has some odd limitations, hence the box-then-box-then-box-etc). Primefac (talk) 14:05, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Seeking support for proposed Wikiproject Quantum Mechanics[edit]

Hi, thanks for all your contributions! I'm reaching out to members of the community who might be interested in a Wikiproject dedicated to QM. The goal is to create articles which can be read and understood by laypersons but that also thoroughly present the technical details of the subject. As it stands now, too many QM articles feature ledes filled with jargon and lack introduction or overview sections.

I hope you'll support the proposal and contribute as a member when the time comes.


Informata ob Iniquitatum (talk) 22:21, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

the photo of Goguryeo emprie crown[edit]

Why did you put "Commenting out" at my photo? I took this photo in NATIONAL MESEUM OF KOREA 2010-06-10.I have the copy right for this.I aks CS OF NAtiONAL MESEUM OF KOREA about the copyright of photo,they said that I have the copyright of the photo as i took it myself.You can see some more relics of Goguryeo in my blog ,if you are interested in ^^.Thanks.Richeaglenoble (talk) 08:54, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

The user re-inserted and re-uploaded the same copyrighted image at File:Goguryeo empire golden crown.jpg in which I have deleted under the same F9 criteria. Alex ShihTalk 09:00, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Richeaglenoble, the issue is that you do have the copyright to those images, and by placing them on your blog you've essentially said "these photos are mine". This is why we cannot have them on Wikipedia. That being said, you can still release it to be used on Wikipedia by placing a "copyleft" notice on your blog post. This will show that the image is acceptable for hosting on Wikipedia. More information about copyleft notices and donating images to Wikipedia can be found at WP:DONATEIMAGE. Please let me know if you have any further questions. Primefac (talk) 11:59, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
@Richeaglenoble: I don't get it -- you claim to have taken the photo on 2010-06-10, but you also link a page of a blog that you claim is yours, half of whose text (the top half) appears to consist of commentary on the content of this photo, but said blog post is dated "2008/11/02 10:55". Did you initially have a different photo there and replace it when you took the new photo 19 months later? Also, the photo includes an inlaid label in Simplified Chinese, which really looks like the image was scanned from a book. If you were the blogger who wrote the post in Korean, as well as the one who took the original photo, why would you include a tag in Simplified Chinese in your Korean blog post? Forgive me if I am mistaken, but when Koreans use Hanja they would write the character wikt:饰#Korean as wikt:飾#Korean, no? I think it's much more likely that you had a book in your possession that was in Chinese, and was meant for consumption by people in Mainland China, and you scanned the image, text and all, and put it on your blog, not thinking that nine years later it would undermine your claim on Wikipedia to have taken the photo in a museum.
Additionally, one of the other images on the blog (the one labelled "신라의 절풍 장식") appears to have been taken on an archeological dig, as no museum would display an artifact of that type lying in soil like that. Are you claiming to have taken that photo as well? That photo, and the top two photos (in one image file, the top half of which you put on Wikipedia), are clearly of a different quality than the rest of the photos, and it really looks like the reason for that is these three photos having been scanned from a book (or perhaps a much older book than the other ones). If you scan an image from a book by someone else, you do not own the copyright on it, and you are technically running afoul of copyright law if you post it on your blog with an implicit or explicit claim that it is yours. Most blog hosts don't care, but Wikipedia definitely does, and you are not allowed do this on Wikipedia.
On top of this, even if the questionable story you tell above is completely accurate, you did still upload this image with the claim that you own the copyright on it because you were the one who scanned it from the book you found it in, and still now have not agreed to or requested its deletion in light of your having "come to the light" with regard to copyright claims. This makes it really difficult to take your word on it when you claim that this is not the case with the other image you are arguing over.
(By the way, I've archived the blog in question, and taken screen-caps offline, because if there's one part of this story that I don't necessarily have reason to doubt yet, it's that you are the author of that blog, and that you might try to remove the incriminatory text embedded in the image now that I have pointed it out here.)
Hijiri 88 (やや) 22:20, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Re:Draft Ejembi John Onah[edit]

Once more thank you so much Primefac for the interest on the above subject article; draft Ejembi John Onah as you review it for consideration for undeletion based on the note from Dodger67 to you and your earlier contribution to move the article to draft space to be worked on: As you advised earlier via channel chart forum; the reference among others was reformatted to fulfill one of the criterion for notability academics according to wiki:

"The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources. To count towards satisfying Criterion 1, citations need to occur in peer-reviewed scholarly publications such as journals or academic books". The reference as in the article contains highly impact peer review journal with several citations independent of the subject which are verifiable from reliable sources apart from other noteworthy causes of the subject as detailed in the article. Once more thank you for your consideration as your response to the request for undeletion is awaited as you review it.

Ejembi12 (talk) 09:55, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

AN close[edit]

Ha! I bet you expected the worst when you saw the thread name!

Good close, and I note with some annoying smug satisfaction that I mentioned that I couldn't imagine there ever being consensus for anything back on 28 August. I'm here because you didn't sign your close, which probably isn't required but is so common that people will end up searching the history to find out. On the off chance you didn't sign it intentionally, I didn't want to note who did it without checking with you first. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:28, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Whoops! Thanks a ton, Floquenbeam. Half of the closure templates auto-sign (such as {{RM top}}), so I sometimes forget to do so. Primefac (talk) 15:48, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
[1] and edits to that page. Legacypac (talk) 18:39, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorted magazine[edit]

Sorted magazine and original website[1] were first created and launched in the United Kingdom in 2004[2] by Brighton publisher Russell Church.[3] The title was geared to the lads' mag market but failed to establish a strong enough demographic share, with the debut edition overestimating its potential popularity with a 250,000 print run. The original Sorted magazine folded after just four editions leaving staff jobless and unpaid.[4] In 2007, a south coast neighbour of Russell Church saw an opportunity to relaunch Sorted magazine as a Christian evangelistic title aimed at reclaiming a place in the lads' mag marketplace. With a team of publishing professionals on board the new look Sorted magazine achieved some circulation success[5] during the post-Leveson Inquiry period where both advertisers and readers seemed to be seeking publications with strong moral credentials. DolphinCentre (talk) 22:54, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

A pair of socks?[edit]

About the Ejembi John Onah issue, I suspect, but don't know how to prove, that we might have a pair of socks: Ejembi12 and TerungwaSamuel. Sorry to keep dragging you into this issue. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:47, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Aye, no worries Dodger67. I've blocked Terungwa and left Ejembi a note. Primefac (talk) 13:12, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to Admin confidence survey[edit]


Beginning in September 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-harassment tool team will be conducting a survey to gauge how well tools, training, and information exists to assist English Wikipedia administrators in recognizing and mitigating things like sockpuppetry, vandalism, and harassment.

The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your individual response will not be made public. This survey will be integral for our team to determine how to better support administrators.

To take the survey sign up here and we will send you a link to the form.

We really appreciate your input!

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

For the Anti-harassment tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorted magazine[edit]

Children's entertainer Steven Legg has a historic evangelist tactic of turning established brands into mock versions so as to promote Christianity. In the public domain you will find The Son, which is a mock version of Murdoch's tabloid The Sun. Likewise, Legg produced a version of the global magazine Liberty, only removing the 'y' and replacing it with an 'i' and using it to promote Christianity. In relation to our dispute here on Wikipedia, it's important to acknowledge that Russell Church first founded the brand Sorted magazine and that Legg and Church are close neighbours. Littlehampton and Brighton are only a few miles apart. Steve Legg's Christian version of the brand did indeed achieve some circulation increases directly after and during the Leveson Inquiry and a renewed public demand for ethical journalism. A team of secular media professionals helped steer Sorted magazine into the mainstream on the back of this. Two of the Directors of Son Christian Media Limited were former employees of News Corp. Russell Church deserves recognition as the founder publisher. Just because his reputation has suffered attacked and he is a serial bankrupt does not mean his achievements should be ignored in relation to Sorted. The original domain name "" was used to present the magazine online during the beginning of the move away from print to digital. Russell Church was aware of the growing interest in online and digital gaming, and the launch edition used to be available free with x box gaming software. DolphinCentre (talk) 16:17, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

DolphinCentre, I am not denying any of what you say. The issue is that we're an encyclopedia, not an indiscriminate listing of every fact about everything. So let's break down what you've just posted:
  • Is it relevant to the magazine that Legg is a children's entertainer?  No.
  • Is it relevant to the magazine that Legg has a historic evangelist tactics of turning established brands into mock versions ?  No.
  • Is it relevant to the magazine about The Son or Liberti?  No.
  • Is the use of A team of secular media professionals relevant to the article?  No, because that's the "inner workings" of a company and aren't particularly relevant to the overall workings.
  • Is it relevant to the magazine that Church founded it in 2004?  Yes, which is why I rewrote it a second time to put events in chronological order. As he is not a notable individual, though, his own personal history is irrelevant to the article.
  • If there can be a definite tie between the Leveson Inquiry and the increase in circulation of the '07 version of Sorted, then I would have no issues including that information. However, correlating increased sales with "post-Leveson Inquiry journalism" without those references is original research and not allowed.
  • Is the "original" domain name relevant to the article?  No, because the current website is different.
  • Is Brighton's proximity to Littlehampton relevant?  No; taking the name of a failed magazine because you happened to see it in a newsstand could have happened between Brighton/Littlehampton or London/Glasgow. Proximity matters nothing. The inclusion of the localities of the two gentlemen were included mostly to provide some minor background of where they came from (as opposed to making it a "neighbour steals idea" story that was in the original version).
Hopefully this will clear up why we're at such loggerheads over this article. If there are further points you would like to discuss, please let me know. Primefac (talk) 16:25, 16 September 2017 (UTC) odd edit conflict, definitely never pressed "save" and thus missed a bit of text. Primefac (talk) 16:35, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
1/ is on cover of both.
Looking at it now and it leads to Sorted magazine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DolphinCentre (talkcontribs) 16:30, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
DolphinCentre, I've seen covers with,, and The actual, final destination is the last one, so that's the one we use as the website. It's like how WP:VPP leads to Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) - I type the former because it's shorter, but the end destination is always going to be "Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)". Primefac (talk) 16:37, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The publishing industries own trade journal Press Gazette provides proof of acknowledged circulation increase. Citation was removed during this re-edit episode and suggest it is restored. Press Gazette is a reliable source and relevant to a Wikipedia entry about a magazine and its freak circulation increase post Leveson. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DolphinCentre (talkcontribs) 16:40, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
DolphinCentre, you'll forgive me if the references are starting to blur together, but which reference specifically in the old version of the page talked about Leveson? I genuinely cannot find it. Primefac (talk) 16:46, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Where have you seen those covers please?
Google image search. Search for "sorted magazine" and every image for six pages is a magazine header. Primefac (talk) 16:46, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
I am sorry but I believe you have a bias conflict of interest in this. Can you please reveal if you know either or both of the subjects of this Wikipedia article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DolphinCentre (talkcontribs) 16:43, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
I'm trying to make the article more neutral, and that means I have a conflict of interest? I will admit, I was approached by Legg to sort this out, but I actually told him to let me handle it instead of being his proxy. Primefac (talk) 16:46, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Okay. Well, I have looked at all the Google image covers as you suggested, and assure you that they all feature the domain name as originally referenced: "" Will also search Press Gazette again for original citation. Thanks for being polite.

SMILE!! 16 Sept 2017[edit]

A cup of coffee for you![edit]

Cup-o-coffee-simple.svg  :) BigSugarDaddy 16:11, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

RD1 on Wildlife Justice Commission[edit]

Could you rev del the copyvio on this before I PROD/AfD it? Thanks. Starts at the initial creation through my removal. Sorry to bother, but per my pet peeve about nominating something for AfD before the rev del has been done, I'd prefer not to wait on the template :) TonyBallioni (talk) 17:20, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

 Done. Primefac (talk) 17:21, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

I indeed occasionally move promising but abandoned userspace pages into Draft and/or AfC. Occasionally these pages get accepted as is, while others can be readily fixed and accepted. Legacypac (talk) 22:39, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

About a deletion[edit]

Hi Primefac. I'm not clear on the reasons for this revdeletion, however, considering almost all the content remains, and especially that these edits were all made by (as it turns out) a sock of the LTA himself, perhaps they could be undeleted? The small part of the content that was removed by this deletion doesn't seem to be particularly secret. Thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 10:47, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Tireless Contributor Barnstar Hires.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For the first time in a long time, I don't dread looking at the info EN Q expecting that the the backlog is probably up 25 from the last time I looked at it. I knew you'd be a great addition so thanks for your contributions S Philbrick(Talk) 14:08, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Liza Koshy[edit]

Dear Primefac, may I please see the original (deleted) article(s) about her to see if there are any old refs there that should be added to the current article? Thanks. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:25, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Other than IMDb, the only refs were [2], [3], and [4]. Primefac (talk) 11:17, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:29, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

BTW, due to the AfD, I was unable to bring the article to DYK. Is it eligible? Thanks for any advice. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:32, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

I have no idea how DYK works, so you'd have to ask them. Primefac (talk) 19:34, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

How old the account should be[edit]

dear I want to know how old my account is for any post. RamboRock (talk) 14:57, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Hey RamboRock. These kinds of permissions are not "posts", nor any type of official appointment. They're simply additional tools that most editors don't need in order to contribute to Wikipedia, and which in most cases have a potential to be abused or accidentally misused in a way that could make a big mess. For that reason they are usually reserved only for editors who are more experienced (usually several months or more of actively editing), and who demonstrate a need to use these types of tools in particular ways. GMGtalk 15:00, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much for giving me the right path and correct guidelines. RamboRock (talk) 15:05, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Vyaghra Gotra[edit]

Thanks a lot for guidance. can you review my article Vyaghra Gotra. I did not find the article in google.Singh1995virat (talk) 12:28, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Singh1995virat, I do not do page reviews. Please be patient; it will be reviewed in due time. Primefac (talk) 12:48, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Mug shot publishing industry[edit]

Primefac, Yea, the reason would be, I put in the work to update it, the article links to the actual bill and is very much reliable. Secondly I find it absurd that you let poisoned weasel wording sit idle for years by user mugshots, but pop up out of nowhere, not to add or contribute, but change a link. Seems slightly minute, absurd, and very much an unnecessary change. 9:00, 22 September 2017 (MST) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheHandOfQueenErotica (talkcontribs) 16:00, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Sure, other than the fact that Wikipedia is based on reliable sources. If a source isn't reliable (and most blogs are not reliable) then it needs to be replaced with a better source. What I do with my time or how I make my edits is of no matter when it comes to making a single improvement to a page. Primefac (talk) 16:05, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Non-circular template link[edit]

Regarding [5], Template:Infobox person is a link which can be displayed when the template is used so it isn't circular in usage just because the code is in the template itself. I don't use XFDcloser. Does it have a bug which needs fixing or was it used incorrectly? Many template pages can produce links to themselves. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:05, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

PrimeHunter, that's very interesting. Definitely something weird with the script itself. I'll let Evad know. Primefac (talk) 17:10, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
It isn't even a redirect as the edit summary indicates. It's a selflink if processed on the page itself where it will produce bold text instead of linking. Selflinks are often deliberate even if they aren't transcluded elsewhere. I wonder whether the script used WhatLinksHere for Template:Infobox adult biography, found Template:Infobox person because it displays {{Film- and television-related infobox templates}} which has the link, but couldn't find the link in the source of Template:Infobox person and picked/suggested another link instead. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:15, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
That's likely the case, and I hadn't thought about that aspect. Primefac (talk) 17:17, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Dunedin Public Library (Florida)[edit]

I was informed that my draft submission was deleted for copyright infringement. I work at the library we are writing the page for and the person who wrote the history is literally sitting right next to me and has expressed permission to use her words. I would like the opportunity to include her sources and do whatever I have to do to show that there is no infringement. Starting this process from scratch makes no sense. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AZimmermanDunedin (talkcontribs) 17:39, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

AZimmermanDunedin, currently the website where the content was taken from is under copyright, and we cannot take verbal release of text. Please see WP:DONATETEXT for more information about releasing text to Wikipedia. If the proper releases are given, I have no issues with restoring the content. Primefac (talk) 17:41, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Raja Pratap Singh[edit]

Hello primefac, can you review my article.Singh1995virat (talk) 19:44, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I do not do reviews by request. Please be patient, and your page will be reviewed in due time. Primefac (talk) 19:46, 23 September 2017 (UTC)