Jump to content

User talk:Diannaa/Archive 28

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27Archive 28Archive 29Archive 30→Archive 35

BK Chicken fries

Dianna, the editor who you just reverted on BK Chicken Fries article is using my real, full name as an account. this goes way beyond wiki-stalking into real world stalking. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 19:33, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

I will find out if a bureaucrat can delete the acct, -- Dianna (talk) 00:08, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

For fixing the issue with Junebea1 without the need for sanctions, a user whom most of us appeared to have given up on. Well done! :)

Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 17:18, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Sincere thanks dude ~! -- Dianna (talk) 23:50, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Talk page protection.

I think you jumped the gun a bit on this protect. In the history I count seven edits by two different IPs as vandalism. As this is a talk page, I don't think there is enough vandalism to warrant protection. Talk pages should only be protected in the cases of severe vandalism (WP:PP), and (my own words) far worse vandalism than you would see in article space. Thank you for you excellent work on wikipedia. Martin451 (talk) 23:03, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

  • I think Diannaa knows what the guidelines are for protecting article talk pages. Your assessment may be different, but she's the admin making the call. And there's something else: I saw just one positive IP contribution, the semi-protection is only for a few days, and discussion seems not to have abated. In other words, I agree with her call. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 23:16, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks Drmies. Obviously I disagree with you Martin, or I would not have protected the page. It's only for the weekend, not long-term, and now people can have a serious discussion without vandalistic posts getting in the way. Any IPs or other unconfirmed users can make their posts when protection expires. Thank you for the feedback. -- Dianna (talk) 23:55, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

WP:GOCE May backlog drive awards

The Modest Barnstar
Thanks for copy editing more than 4000 words during the Guild of Copy Editors May 2013 backlog elimination drive. Your continued presence in the Guild is greatly appreciated! —Torchiest talkedits 03:48, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
The Guild of Copy Editors' Award – Leaderboard award – Longest Article – 4th Place
This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Diannaa for copy editing a 7,090-word article–4th Place–during the Guild of Copy Editors' May 2013 Backlog Elimination Drive. Many thanks for your help! All the best, Miniapolis 19:43, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Dianna (talk) 19:48, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

The Guild of Copy Editors' Award – Leaderboard award – 5K Article – 3rd Place (tie)
This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Diannaa for copy editing a 5K article for a 3rd-place tie during the Guild of Copy Editors' May 2013 Backlog Elimination Drive. My great pleasure! All the best, Miniapolis 19:43, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Protection at Turkey 2013 Protest talk page

Hi Diannaa! I don't think I've seen you around before, so nice to meet you. I am working a bit on the 2013 protests in Turkey article and noticed you had protected the talk page for several days due to vandalism. The talk page has been quite quiet and I was wondering if you would be okay with removing the protection to see if the level of vandalism remains manageable. Having worked a lot of breaking news articles, I have had great experiences with random visitors to articles dropping sources and asking useful questions about verifiability and neutrality. I'd love to keep that openness going at the Turkey article if it's possible. Please let me know what you think. Best, Ocaasi Ocaasi t | c 17:22, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Well since this is the second request to unprotect, and my intention was to just cover it through the weekend, I am going to go ahead and lift the protection now. Best, -- Dianna (talk) 18:32, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

The other range contribs tool

Hi Dianna. Hope you are well. Thanks for all your effort volunteering here at Wikipedia. And a BIG thanks for the copyediting work. It is much appreciated. I saw your post at ANI helping Bish with a rangeblock and mentioning the rangecontribs tool was down. It's been down for a while and will end up over at WP:LABS. There's another rangecontribs tool that HelloAnnyong (talk · contribs) wrote a year or 2 ago. You can find it at tools:~helloannyong/range/. I just tried it and it works, but it took about 5 minutes to return the results so it's really slow. Just thought you might find it useful. Kind regards. 64.40.54.184 (talk) 01:33, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi 64! Thanks so much for the link. -- Dianna (talk) 01:45, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Selena Gomez When the Sun Goes Down.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Selena Gomez When the Sun Goes Down.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:09, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Request for the deletion of Orphaned non - free revisions

Hello madam. Hereby, i am requesting you to delete this Eega poster file's Orphaned non - free revisions. Regards, Raghusri (talk) 12:53, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

I will do this tomorrow, because that's when the discussion at Deletion Review is due to close. Wikipedia:Deletion review -- Dianna (talk) 13:27, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you so much madam, for the quicker response regarding the Closure of FFD, DRL and ONFR's of Eega poster and one thing i want to remember you i.e., When i requested you for the closure of one FFD sometime ago, you said that you are new to such things and one of the other admin's will do that thing . But, after seeing the recent closure of Eega poster FFD and Eega and Naan Ee merged film poster DRL, i was Stunned. I hope you will participate in FFD closures in future likewise you did yesterday and have a very nice day and happy editing. Regards, Raghusri (talk) 10:54, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Raghusri. -- Dianna (talk) 14:01, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
But you might have noticed that I did not get it right on my first attempt: Diff of Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2013 May 29 - oh snap! -- Dianna (talk) 19:25, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
O.K. Now i understood. Actually i didn't checked those revisions but after seeing now i think : No problem mam, mistakes are common for anybody. I appreciate your justification :). So please feel free to close such discussions in future too. Hope you will do so. Regards, Raghusri (talk) 12:14, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

I just saw your GA nomination of Nazi Germany pop up--huge thanks for taking on an article so complicated and exhausting. If nobody beats me to it, I'll give it a review this weekend. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:21, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Khazar2! -- Dianna (talk) 13:27, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Re:Big Fish poster

Hello, I reverted to my version because I personally think that versions with credits are better than the ones with no credits. Also, If think that your version is better its ok, you can revert. Regards ----Plea$ant 1623 ✉ 19:02, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

I am not interested in edit warring over images; the whole reason I uploaded an image was to stop an edit war. Better you should self-revert. -- Dianna (talk) 19:11, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

1st SS Panzer Division Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler

Recently, the name of the article above was changed by redirect move from 1st SS Division Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler to 1st SS Division Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler. The move is really not correct, if moved-it should be moved to last official name of the unit: 1st SS Panzer Division Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler. I tried to move it to this last official name for the unit but it was already listed as a past redirect to the article. It also brothers me that this move was done without discussion. I would ask you to look into the matter and give your opinion. Thanks, Kierzek (talk) 15:35, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: I did just add a section as to this on the article talk page. Kierzek (talk) 15:45, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
The article can be moved over the redirect if that's what is decided, but I think you need an admin to make that kind of move. Complicated moves are best left to those who have experience. I am going to post some remarks at the article talk page. Best, -- Dianna (talk) 18:48, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, see my latest thoughts on the matter, in reply to your own. Kierzek (talk) 15:35, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, replied there -- Dianna (talk) 15:49, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
I believe all parties are now in agreement as to what the article should be renamed. Might you be able to implement the changes? I know you are not wearing your admin hat as to this article. So let me know. Thanks, Kierzek (talk) 15:50, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
I think it's uncontroversial enough that I can do it myself. Move succeeded! Now i will look for double redirects to clean up. -- Dianna (talk) 16:03, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, it looks good. Kierzek (talk) 16:44, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Requested for the deletion of Orphaned non - free revisions

Hello Dianna. Hereby, i request you to delete the Orphaned non - free revisions for the following file : Nenokkadine film poster. Regards, Raghusri (talk) 12:26, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Done! -- Dianna (talk) 13:54, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you Dianna. Raghusri (talk) 12:29, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Zimmerman...again

Since you dealt with this user before, I am "looping" you in on this one. User:Zimmermanh1997/User:Hollisz is back, yet again, this time with a new account (User:Zman9000) and two new edits to the WICL page (his favorite haunt). I'm leaving this one up to you, but I think a block for all accounts and his range (if possible) is due. If not his range, a block of his IP would work, he primarily uses User:98.204.145.138. He obviously isn't getting the idea of Wikipedia...or doesn't care. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 16:29, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi NeutalHomer. No one has used the IP since Feb, so I am not inclined to block it. I will block Zman9000 as a duck sock. -- Dianna (talk) 16:34, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Even though the User:Zimmermanh1997 and User:Hollisz accounts haven't been used in awhile, do you think they warrant an indef block as well, along with his other sock User:Do Not Delete? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 16:43, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Let's wait and see what Drmies has to say. I'm not sure what's the usual practice here -- Dianna (talk) 16:52, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Okie Dokie. I am going to take me a bit of a nap (rain here is making me sleepy), so if I am not around for questions or whatever, I will respond when I get up. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 17:00, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Lenin

We edit conflicted on both article and talk page. Looks like you made the change and I took the credit. Sorry! :) Rivertorch (talk) 22:58, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't care about the glory. -- Dianna (talk) 23:00, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Heh. If I'd known there was dough involved, I'd have run the RfA gauntlet years ago. Rivertorch (talk) 23:05, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Well, sometimes people give me cookies! but so far no actual money -- Dianna (talk) 23:15, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Diannaa, thank you very much letting me know that someone took care of this. Have a great weekend. :) --76.189.109.155 (talk) 05:34, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Re: Move of 1984 Anti-Sikh Riots to 1984 Anti-Sikh Pogroms

Hi Dianna, I think as an experienced editor you may be well place to take an objective view on this. I fear that the 1984 Anti-Sikh Riots article is under WP:Censorship. I have uncovered hundereds of research papers and references that refer to these events as not riots but indeed as pogroms, see here , but there appears to be resistance against this. Perhaps you could intervene? Wikipedia, is not only an encyclopedia, but a beacon for the Freedom of Expression. ThanksSH 07:43, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi SH. I think you should open a Request for Comment to get more input into the discussion. Instructions are at WP:RFC. If you would like to go ahead with this and need any help getting this started, please let me know. -- Dianna (talk) 15:44, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Ok will do. ThanksSH 10:55, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

James Ferguson, Lord Pitfour

Hi Diannaa, thank you for your comments at the review for James Ferguson, Lord Pitfour. I have done some work on it and wondered if you would take another look once you have time, please? Thanks. SagaciousPhil - Chat 11:34, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi! I will look this afternoon and get back to you. -- Dianna (talk) 17:33, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you so much for all the work you've done on the article, Diannaa; it looks so much better now and is vastly improved. I hadn't realised the sfn template should also be used for web and newspaper refs, so this has also taught me a lot as well. I really appreciate your help (it has made me realise how dreadful some of the other articles I've done are!). SagaciousPhil - Chat 08:03, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Good Article Barnstar
For your contributions to bring the vital article Nazi Germany to Good Article status, despite the complexity of the topic and the controversies surrounding it. This article is viewed by an average of 7500 readers a day, and hundreds of thousands per month--I wish you could get credit for a dozen GAs for revising an article like this one! Thanks for all you do. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:36, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
An additional thanks to Diannaa for leading the charge as to getting the article there, along with Khazar2. Cheers, Kierzek (talk) 13:43, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
My pleasure. And Diannaa, I don't know if this is one you're interested in tackling, but I'm hoping to bring The Holocaust to GA status some time before the end of the year. (If I'm feeling really ambitious after, I may also work on Auschwitz.) If you're interested in collaborating on it, I'd be glad to have help and/or input--you've got a lot more experience than me writing on Holocaust-related topics. Thanks again, -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:56, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you so much! -- Dianna (talk) 15:35, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
I already feel pretty good. This is a really big deal, trust me on this -- Dianna (talk) 16:01, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Ralph Bouverie Deedes

Hi - I notice that you have declined my request for speedy deletion of Ralph Deedes which wrote in error. On reflection please can I suggest that it would be correct to move Ralph Bouverie Deedes to Ralph Deedes, the latter being the more appropriate article name. Again apologies for causing this confusion in the first place. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 18:46, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure this is a good idea, as the two sources I am able to view list him as Ralph Bouverie Deedes. -- Dianna (talk) 21:28, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
OK. Fair enough. Thanks for giving this thought. Dormskirk (talk) 21:33, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Call of the Wild request

Hi Diannaa, I have a small period to devote more time to editing and am trying to get some articles through review. I'd very much like to finish up Call of the Wild and wondered if you'd be willing to hold my back on the ref style Br'er Rabbit used (I admit, I'm not great with it!). My feeling is that a deal is a deal and I've not forgotten about the page, but life intervened in a big way. Once I've revisited the sources, copyedited, maybe taken to the PR, I'll nom for FAC and at that time will try to figure out how to co-nom him, as that was the deal. So, basically I need someone to watch over my shoulder in case I really make a mess of the SFNs if you'd be willing. Thanks, Victoria (talk) 01:40, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Victoria. A co-nom would have to be an honourary one, I suppose! I would be glad to help you prep the article but I don't have much experience at FA so would likely not be much help with the actual nomination process. I will look at the article when I get back from work and see where we are are at. Best wishes, -- Dianna (talk) 14:20, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks a lot Diannaa. I'm fairly slow, so no rush at all. First I have to re-read the sources, so that will take a bit of time. But if I find new sources, will need help in formatting them. And honestly would like to have another person on board since my ... um ... collaborator can't collaborate, so to speak. He does deserve credit for work done, but that can be figured out later. Victoria (talk) 14:44, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Sure, I will watch-list and can format stuff for you as you add it in. I can help with the initial copy edits too if you like, but not to FA level professional prose. -- Dianna (talk) 19:16, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

A question about Wikipedia rules

Hi Diannaa, I have a question.

Ok, so I "know" there are no rules that validates the deletion of content due to article size, especially when the content is fully relevant to the topic, supported by credible sources, does not effect any copyright violation and is not repetitive. But I don't know if I know it all (although I've read many Wikipedia:XXXX articles). So my question is: are there any such rules that validates the deletion of content due to article size?

The issue is that there is an editor bent on opposing my past edits on the grounds that it is stretching the length of the article, even though there is already a good plan in place to slash the size of the article. But this actually conflict goes all the way back to about a month ago when I reverted a chunk of his/her edits on the ground that they distorted the key messages as presented in the cited sources. For example, he/her changed: "they were vulnerable to attacks from Soviet infantry equipped with improvised anti-tank weapons at very close range" to "they were subject to swarming attacks" (→ Human wave attack rings a bell). And recently I opposed some more of his/her edits for the same reason. But recently, he/her now tries to insist that the summary generalization, which often distorts the key message, is worth the resultant reduction in size (but then there are other ways to rephrase these passages and still achieve a slash in the size).

The whole thing has degraded into a senseless conflict with no core. I plan to go ahead and effect massive changes to the article, which will mostly include fixing his/her incorrect edits. But before that I want to be certain that I have not gone against any rule regarding size in the past, since that is the only thing he could possible accuse me for. (In the past few weeks, the article has added about 20 KB of readable prose mostly due to my edits, and I've been blamed for the size-crisis. A blame I accept, since it is true.)

Thank you for salvaging the mess I made at LSSAH. (I read a footnote in a book by Zetterling that mentioned the division's old name was LAH, so I went ahead and edited it without consulting with others or even thinking it through). EyeTruth (talk) 05:45, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello EyeTruth. I have read over the material at Talk:Battle of Kursk. What you seem to be asking me is whether or not it is okay for you to ignore other editors who are trying to improve the page and proceed unilaterally because you think you know best. My answer to you is no, it it most definitely not okay for you to do that. You need to cooperate and work with the other editors who are improving the article. If it's not possible for you to do that I suggest you move on and edit a different article. -- Dianna (talk) 19:49, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for chipping in your opinion. Since you claim to have read over Talk:Battle of Kursk, can you please point out how I have not been cooperating with the other editors? Please do so. Granted, I often question the reasoning behind their suggestions, but if it harbours even a modicum of sense I concede, which is the case most of the time but not always. Do you think being scrutinous is the same as not cooperating? Original research, no matter the cause for it, has no place in Wikipedia. To introduce such things in the name of compacting the article is just not right. While your opinion is very much welcomed, you really didn't provide an answer to my question. EyeTruth (talk) 22:21, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
My 2 cents: Eyetruth, as to article size please see: Wikipedia:Article size and as for the latter, it comes down to what is WP:Consensus for the article. Kierzek (talk) 20:33, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you User:Kierzek. I know about the article size guidelines. If you read Talk:Battle of Kursk carefully, you will realize that the long discussion over the article size was just one long episode of discombobulation that was totally uncalled for. Once the core issue became clear, a decision followed immediately. The article size is no more the issue. It is about an editor writing the way they deem appropriate, even though it distorts the key messages of the respective sources, and when you try to correct it, they start holding a grudge. And given the current mood, if I go in to make any changes now, I could be accused of inflating the article, even for the slightest increase. But I'm not planning on expanding the article, as I already assured the other editors on the talkpage that I will not expand anything until at least the splitting is completed. So here I am trying to make sure that such a hollow reason can never be used against me. I hope you understand my flow, because from what I see, Diannaa completely missed it. BTW, Thanks for the latter link, that helps a bit. EyeTruth (talk) 22:21, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
I do not think I missed the point, EyeTruth, which is that you are asking my permission / confirmation for something, in order to have it to refer back to later if you get into trouble on the page. I have refused to give such permission / confirmation. By the way, could you please list here and on your user page any user names you have edited under before? Several posts indicate that you are a long-time editor but your edit count and account creation date do not jive with that. -- Dianna (talk) 22:47, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
I wasn't asking for any permission. I see you're trying to think ahead but what you just asserted above is way overly presumptuous. You guessed it wrong. I only wanted to be able to proclaim to anyone, without a single doubt, that I'm not violating any guidelines by fixing original research materials even if they lead to any size increment. But as far as I know and have read, I think I'm good to roll. Also, I'm not a long-time editor. Once again, you've jumped to conclusion (joking, ignore that nagging). I edited for a few months back in 2008 before leaving "permanently", although I still came around once in a while as an anonymous. I returned a few month ago and may probably be gone in a few months. On my return, I couldn't log back into my old account, either the password is wrong or the username or both, and recovery through email is not an option thanks to Genius Hillard. I'm certain my old username was something like "EyeXXXX" in it, or maybe it was "iXXX." I was never able to pin down my login details, not when there are a shedload of usernames to keep track of. So, why are you asking? EyeTruth (talk) 01:11, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Because several of your posts indicate that you are a long-time or returning editor. -- Dianna (talk) 02:20, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
I don't think I have totalled 6000 edits under my belt yet. "Returning editor" will be more correct. Although you left me nonplussed with your wonderful assessment three posts above, I sincerely hope we didn't get off to a bad start. Peace. EyeTruth (talk) 04:15, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Review of a page

Hi Dianne, First of all, since this is one of my first steps on Wiki i am not sure if this the way to go about contacting you. So please correct and guide me on this. Secondly, I would want a review of the following page that I have created. Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lupin Pharmaceuticals Inc. (LPI)

And finally, how do I sign myself with 4 Earthbillion (talk) 07:28, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

User:Earthbillion

Hello User:Earthbillion, and welcome to Wikipedia. I think you have figured out how the signature works! Someone who specialises in new articles will come along and evaluate your new article for you. I don't specialise in that particular task. But it looks to me like pretty much everything was copied word for word from the press release. You need to re-word everything and put it in your own words, as the way it stands right now the article may be deleted as a copyright violation. -- Dianna (talk) 14:15, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

RQ for the DLT of ONFR's

Hello dianna, how are you? Hereby, my request is to delete the ONFR's of the following files : Eega poster, 1 (Nenokkadine) film poster. Regards, Raghusri (talk) 11:00, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

 Done -- Dianna (talk) 13:12, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello dianna, thank you for the deletion of ONFR's in Eega poster but you forgot to delete the ONFR's in 1 (Nenokkadine) film poster. So please delete them. Have a nice day. Regards, Raghusri (talk) 12:19, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
All done! Sorry for the delay. -- User:Diannaa (talk) 14:15, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you so much Dianna and its O.K., i can understand and no need to say sorry. Happy editing. Regards, Raghusri (talk) 10:57, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Blitz

Hi Diannaa,

I was wondering if you would mind giving me your opinion on my copy edits in this blitz.

Thanks, Matty.007 20:18, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Matty.007. I am all wiki'd out for the time being and will get to this tonight or tomorrow after work. Best, -- User:Diannaa (talk) 21:28, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Matty.007 18:39, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Replied on your talk page. -- User:Diannaa (talk) 03:11, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Phil Rice

The article Phil Rice has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article. The nominator also raised the following concern:

All biographies of living people created after March 18, 2010, must have references.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 23:07, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Editor you once warned for NPA is now out of control

I'm contacting you due to a warning you gave to User:Flagrantedelicto back in January. He correctly sought mediation for a content dispute he has against myself and two other editors. An editor he contacted for a third opinion posted on Flagrantedelicto's talk page say he would try to help. I gave an encouraging word to the third party on Flagrantedelicto's talk page; he said he would seek other third parties after Flagrantedelicto expressed that myself and another editor had not been fair during the content dispute. The issue seemed done and we were waiting for further commentary.

Out of nowhere, Flagrantedelicto started up again on his own talk page with no provocation at all, he mocked me for quoting Stephen Jay Gould during my encouraging message, claimed that I would never have taken corrective action on the article in question on my own accord and [accused User:Toddy1 of being dishonest about his (her?) religious beliefs (as though that's anyone's business). I already tried earlier today to ask him not to mock other editors and he/she doesn't seem to care. I notice per his talk page that you're not the only one who has warned them about personal attacks. I'm bringing this to you directly rather than an RFC/U or noticeboard due to the nature of the latest outburst on his talk page. Perhaps he/she will listen to you given that you've warned this user before, so I would like to request your attention if you have the time - mediation of the content dispute will be difficult with this sort of behavior constantly. MezzoMezzo (talk) 12:20, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

I apologize if I've caught you at a time when you're busy or if you didn't appreciate the random note on your talk page. Unfortunately, the user has been repeating the same conduct across multiple talk pages from the time I first notified you up until a few hours ago; unless you have been monitoring the issue and would prefer to handle it yourself, I'd like to start going formally through the resolution process stated at WP:CONDUCTDISPUTE. This user's incredible rudeness - I've only seen two or three other cases like this in my six years of editing - has brought editing of the article where this all began to a standstill, in addition to simply being insulting and demeaning. MezzoMezzo (talk) 02:42, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for not responding, MezzoMezzo. Your request did indeed catch me in a period when I don't have much editing time and have several commitments already. To be honest I don't have any experience in dispute resolution and only tried to help with your initial post at ANI because it was the weekend, when few admins are around. Best of luck with other avenues of dispute resolution. Regards, -- Diannaa (talk) 03:16, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
I'm very, very sorry - in the end, Wikipedia does need to take a backseat to personal needs. I will go down the formal route; hopefully this will help in addressing everyone's concerns. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:41, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
If you're interested (and do find a little bit of time), I opened a thread at ANI as the guy's comments in the last three days alone are unbelievable. I'm just letting you know since I mentioned the "I don't like your attitude" comment he made to you back in January, and my attempt to see mediation first. MezzoMezzo (talk) 08:04, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Call of the Wild

This edit summary made me laugh. Thanks for fixing. I've just tested visual editor and see that elements like that can't be edited, so at least that's done. I meant to stop by earlier to reply to you but got pulled away during the weekend. I'd welcome any copyediting help - I have a hard time achieving FAC standards and I've seen your work, it's good. As I've said, this will be a slow burn, but it's a nice page and I'd like to finish it up. Victoria (talk) 21:33, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Victoria, thanks for the positive feedback! The {{quote box}} template is actually quite versatile, allowing us to centre the text or align left or right or all kinds of other options. I'd be happy to assist with copy edits and will try not to get in your way. Best, -- User:Diannaa (talk) 21:47, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

The Editor In Question

Hello Dianaa,

I suppose I shall introduce (or perhaps re-introduce) myself as the editor who is supposedly "out of control", or so I have been labelled...lol Since I received this notice from WP user MezzoMezzo, I would like to advocate on my own behalf. First of all, I am hardly out of control. To prove this, I would appreciate it if you very carefully read all the exchanges between myself and the editors in question in the Muawiyah I Talk Page. See http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Muawiyah_I. It is comprised of rather lengthy exchanges, but please see if you could take the time to go through it as thoroughly as you can.

As for the three editors, there are really two who have been applying partiality and double standards toward my contributions to the article. The third editor (Johnleeds1) and I had resolved our differences of perspectives. We had some engrossing (even intense) exchanges but resolved them in the manner that it was ideally meant to be: Mutually. You can observe this for yourself. WP editor Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider has been formally requested by me to mediate in the matter. He is now well aware of the situation, I believe. Please get his feedback as well. --Flagrantedelicto (talk) 00:06, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Daniel Vineyards

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:04, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Request for revision delete (in history)

Hi, I am requesting to delete the history of the page: fr:Grand Lycée Franco-Libanais since it contains bad words from students and insults to the manager of the school. We have claimed to block this page from updates but how can we do to delete the history? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.126.21.12 (talk) 15:20, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

The page is on the French wiki, and I am not an administrator there, so I cannot help you. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:35, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Thank you but can you lead me to a French administrator page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.126.12.173 (talk) 05:33, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

You could try posting your question at fr:Wikipédia:Bulletin des administrateurs. Sorry for the delay in replying. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:59, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Diannaa. You have new messages at Matty.007's talk page.
Message added 16:03, 18 June 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Matty.007 16:03, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Battle of Brody (1941) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • few kilometers.{{sfn|Sołonin|2007|p=379}} On 29 June the corps had 32{sfn|Sołonin|2007|pp=261–262}} tanks remaining out of the original 453.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:24, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Battle of Brody (1941) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Soviet action of the battle, as it cut off supply lines of the German armoured spearhead (the 11th Panzer Division. However, this was not exploited by Soviet command, who failed to

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:37, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Brody (1941), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Salient (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:57, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Guatemalan IP is disrupting again.

190.106.222.66 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is disrupting Wikipedia again by making unsourced changes and linking dates. Erick (talk) 18:42, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

I have blocked 24 hours for vandalism, as the disruptive activity has continued in spite of multiple warnings. Sorry for the delay in responding. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:55, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Can you rangeblock him/her once again. S/he is using at least 190.106.222.64 (talk · contribs), 190.106.222.66 (talk · contribs) and 190.106.222.69 (talk · contribs) at the same time. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:53, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Blitz 2

Hi again Diannaa,

I was copy editing Buda Castle, but when I saved it, there was an edit conflict. What should I do if another editor who is not in the guild has finished editing the article? Do i get the word count, or half?

Thanks, Matty.007 20:33, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Matty.007. I think you should post your question on the Drive talk page and get opinions from the drive coordinators. Some kind of split is usual, iirc. We do have two templates, {{GOCEinuse}} and {{GOCEeffort}}, that you could try using in the future to prevent this sort of problem -- Diannaa (talk) 20:39, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Do I put the tags on the talk page or the actual page. Thanks, Matty.007 16:21, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
Put them on the actual page, so that when people are selecting articles to work on they will notice right away. {{GOCEinuse}} is designed for use while you are actively editing, and {{GOCEeffort}} is good for when you think an article will be a multi-day project. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:01, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Matty.007 17:47, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Database server lag

Sorry that you're the one I've chosen to spam, but are you getting a message like "Due to high database server lag, changes newer than 1,031 seconds may not appear in this list.", or is it just my confused internet? :) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 19:39, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Everyone's getting it if you're getting it. It's not all that unusual. (It's a message generated at the Wikimedia end, not anything to do with your ISP or their internet connectivity or your computer.) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:43, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
My watch-list is also taking longer than usual to load. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:51, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Madurai Airport

http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Madurai_Airport&diff=561046654&oldid=561021342

All the article in this page has been directly copied from copy righted materials for example http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Madurai_Airport&diff=561046654&oldid=561021342

Please delete the contents which copy right twoo http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Madurai_AirportNaanmahan (talk) 03:46, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:AlanisMorissette-Unsent.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:AlanisMorissette-Unsent.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:00, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Tiruchirapalli International Airport

Please save this page Diff of Tiruchirappalli International Airport

User from ip 78 and 178 keep on deleting the article by stating "not necessary at all"

Save this page Tiruchirappalli International Airport Naanmahan (talk) 08:31, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

This information has been copied from another place on the internet. You can't do that. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:38, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Fuck GA Review

I've expanded the lede/intro sect per your recommendation, above, perhaps you could have another look? — Cirt (talk) 22:15, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

 Done--Diannaa (talk) 22:17, 23 June 2013 (UTC) I have placed it under "Words and linguistics" but it could just as easily go under "Works". Please feel free to move it to the other group if you don't agree with this placement. Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 22:29, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks very much for your thorough GA Review, most appreciated! — Cirt (talk) 22:37, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27Archive 28Archive 29Archive 30→Archive 35

WP:GOCE June 2013 blitz award

The Cleanup Barnstar
For cleaning up more than 6000 words during the Guild of Copy Editors June 2013 blitz, you've earned this award along with the gratitude of the GOCE. Thanks! —Torchiest talkedits 22:44, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

I have two related questions. First, can you give out awards for the modest and first four minors? That would be the five names above mine when ordered by grand total. Second, would you be willing to close the coordinator election page in a week? Normally, it wouldn't be an issue, but since I am going to be continuing as lead, and there has been a tiny bit of contention, I think it would be helpful for a neutral party to make things official. Thanks for your help. —Torchiest talkedits 22:44, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar! Sure, I can help with the other two tasks. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:46, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

FFD

Have a look at this massive close. AnomieBot must've been smoking a bit after that one! This day's FFDs aren't looking like such an easy deal. Any thoughts or suggestions? I was thinking maybe I should just vote on each one so I could absolve myself of the responsibility of ever closing them. INeverCry 19:34, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Wow, that's huge, you are awesome. I had to stop helping at FFD and PUF; the stress was getting to me and it was sucking all the fun out of editing. And there's an IP who is going around adding talk pages to all the listings at PUF, effectively doubling the admin workload. And anyone who proposes to close those Star Trek deletion discussions had better have a pretty thick skin, bound to take some heat either way. I will poke around and do some of the easier closures -- Diannaa (talk) 19:48, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
I think I've picked all the low-hanging fruit, but if you can find some, you're welcome to it. Most of what's left is from higher up on the trees, and, as you say, it takes an adventurous soul to go for those. I close a few of those now and then. As for the IP, he's just helping me add to my admin stats without realizing it. In any event, very few people besides us spend any time thinking about FFD and PUF backlogs, so I guess they're not too urgent.

Bringing an article like this one to GA or FA would be worth all the FFDs and PUFs ever filed put together. It takes a truly awesome person to bring aticles like that or this to GA/FA. INeverCry 20:22, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

I have found a couple easier closes already (over at PUF). Nazi Germany is a double whammy, as it was my WP:Core contest entry. My last entry (Bob Hope) won me a cool ₤30 at Amazon.uk, which I used to buy books to get Rudolf Hess up to GA. If I win another prize, I will use it to buy more wiki-related source material. It's win-win. Doing photo deletions is necessary work, but improving Nazi Germany and other core content is so important, work of lasting value that people will be using as a resource for years to come. It was so scary and hard (who the hell do I think I am to take on such an important project?) but with some marvellous feedback from User:Nick-D and others at the peer review and on the talk page, I think we ended up with a pretty good result. I will think about the May 23 problem and will let you know my opinion in the next day or two. Thank you so much for your kind words. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:34, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, those keeps are a bit of a pain. I'm spoiled from DelReqHandler on Commons; we have a keep button which does the whole keep process for us just as quickly as the delete button deletes. Perhaps we'll have a keep button here someday; I'll leave it to the technical wizards, who are, on average, 10 or 15 years younger than me. INeverCry 21:31, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
I have been thinking about the Star Trek images and I think they need to be kept. This type of game-changing mass nomination would really require an RFC or wider community input. The images have been here for many years, the first one I checked has been here for eight years, and the others have similar history. If the nominator wants to change the rules of NFCC this is not the way to do it. My opinion: Keep. It is possible to do a mass Keep-close on the daily nomination page using a text editor search and replace in Notepad++. Search for the string ]]==== and substitute ]]====\n{{subst:ffd top|Keep: This type of rule-changing mass nomination requires an RFC and/or wider community input, as it goes against long-standing interpretations of the non-free content criteria.}} ~~~~\n and do a similar trick at the bottom: {{subst:ffd bottom}}\n====[[ while watching out for the already-closed discussions elsewhere on the page and being sure to add the final ffd-bottom. I have tested this out and it works. That would take care of the daily pages (there's 22 more such nominations on the May 22 page), and then all that would remain to be done is the {{oldffdfull}} templates on the individual file pages. Please let me know your opinion on whether you agree with my suggested close or not, for starters, and then we can work together on the paperwork aspect if you like. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:09, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
What would Mr. Nimoy do? Would it be possible to do the RFC first, and close these based on the decision reached there? It's not like anyone else will be in a hurry to close them, so having them sit there a while wouldn't be a big problem. If you want to keep them right away though, we could use AWB to remove the ffd tags from the images and add {{oldffdfull}} to the talkpages. INeverCry 22:48, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
It would be up to the guy who wants to see them deleted to start the RFC, in my opinion. If you know how to do the AWB step I could do the other step (closing the nominations). -- Diannaa (talk) 23:00, 24 June 2013 (UTC) Here is a possible wording:

Keep: This rule-changing mass nomination is contrary to the long-standing way the community has interpreted the NFCC. If the nominator wishes for the site-wide policy regarding the use of this type of image to be changed, a community-wide RFC would be a more appropriate venue.

There's no rush, I am going to think about this overnight. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:31, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. There's only 303 images in the 3 ST images cats involved, so it shouldn't be too hard to skip around and edit the ones with ffd tags in AWB. There may be a few uncatted images, but that can be checked pretty quickly with popups after I'm done with AWB. INeverCry 23:43, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Okay, sounds great. I am off to the gym now; ttyl. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:47, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
This does not really seem to be a change of any rules. In the documentation for {{Infobox television episode}}, it says that such images often are inappropriate, and files like those have been deleted for ages when taken to FFD. --Stefan2 (talk) 08:20, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
I realise that it's within a strict interpretation of the rules. Otherwise he would not be able to nominate them. But it's not the way people have been interpreting the rules all these years. What's next? Album covers? Movie posters? Pics of soap opera characters? by his strict definition of NFCC none of these qualify either. I am not interested in participating in stripping the wiki of all these images, because I don't agree that they need to be deleted. The only way I am going to close the mass nomination is if the images are kept. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:24, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
We have 100+ ffds here with half keep and half delete votes from the few people who've commented. I can't see anyone closing these as delete any time soon as they are, if ever. I think keeping them and allowing the nominator or anyone else who's interested to open an RFC is the safe and responsible choice. This could affect many other files, and so more community involvement is needed than can be had at a limited venue like ffd. INeverCry 15:30, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
If these are closed, someone would likely take them to WP:DRV regardless of how the FFDs are closed, but maybe that's a good outcome since it would mean that more (and other) people will see them. I don't think that posting hundreds of FFD requests about images like this is a good idea as it makes it difficult to discuss anything about them, and it becomes more of a copy & paste task. There were a couple of Simpsons images at DRV last year after a similar set of hundreds of FFDs, with varying outcome. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:32, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
The offshoot of that fiasco is that User:SchuminWeb retired. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:49, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Michael Pliuskaitis

Hi, Diannaa! It's been a while; I remember your help and advice with real gratitude. I find myself not knowing which way to turn, thought of you. The article on Michael Pliuskaitis (which I have had nothing to do with) was created by a user called Snowswimmer; the gist of the article is that the subject was prosecuted and banned from coaching while working at the Snow Swimming club (or team, or whatever), apparently now run by his ex-wife. What I don't know is whether that is (1) a COI problem, (2) a username problem, (3) an attack page problem, (4) something for ANI or (5) none of the above? What, if any, are your thoughts? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:07, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi J-lan. A quick look at the article indicates that the legal problems are not why the guy is notable; he had a career in swimming both before and after the ban. In my opinion the article would survive a trip to WP:AFD in its present form. The reverse-chronological order of the material gives undue weight to the legal issues. I have put the material in chronological order and removed a couple of points that are not covered by the quoted sources. I will watch-list and will put a custom COI message on the userpage of Snowswimmer. Thanks for notifying me. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:49, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for that, which of course I could have done myself if only I had been able to decide what was the proper course to take. Till soon, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:44, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Arms of Canada

Thanks for adding the original official version of the svg back! I was looking for it and couldn't find it. In fact, I still can't find it using the search function... In any event, that could have saved me quite a bit of trouble. Thanks again. trackratte (talk) 19:19, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Trackratte. There's a related thread at User talk:Moonriddengirl#Non-free file needs to be undeleted. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:25, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your info. Since I am a new user, please forgive me. Next time, please don't delete the files. It would be my pleasure if you could inform me about it and then I could provide those necessary information about the file. Thanks a lot. BenisonPBaby 08:18, 30 June 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benisonpanthaplackal (talk • contribs)

A barnstar for you!

The Teamwork Barnstar
For helping to finally clean Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Darius Dhlomo. Wizardman 19:55, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Wizardman! Let's do another drive real soon. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:58, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good; for now I'll just be trying to clear WP:SCV and WP:CP, so July I won't worry about CCI much. I'll look for another big one to do in August; any you have in mind? Wizardman 20:16, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
It might be fun to tackle another totally huge one, if you know which ones those might be. Or we could do Racepacket or Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20130330 or Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20100307. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:30, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Racepacket would be a good one to do. There's also a couple CCIs with only 10 or so articles to fix. Granted those are ones added some time ago, so working with article updates would be tough on those. Wizardman 15:07, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Epeefleche is a big one. There's not as many articles as our last project, but there's a huge number of diffs to be checked. That one might make a good group project. I will work on Racepacket over the summer, in fact I am checking one of the articles right now. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:13, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
I'm familiar with Epeefleeche as a big baseball guy, so that would work for me. For the next project let's just wrap up Racepacket first; doing a small project in between larger ones would probably be best so we don't get overwhelmed. In the meantime I'm also going to try and knock most CCIs to under 1,000 articles. Granted for many that's just knocking out low-hanging fruit, but it's something (there's 15 currently FWIW) Wizardman 16:59, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
That's awesome W. Thnaks for keeping me in the loop. -- Diannaa (talk) 17:05, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Quick question

Hi Diannaa, a short while ago, you did the GA review for James Ferguson, Lord Pitfour, which was very much appreciated as I feel it helped me learn a lot. For instance, I hadn't been aware book citations should not have access dates. I'm now going through another article I created trying to correct the refs to the same format as Lord Pitfour. Could you tell me, if a citation is a book but retrieved via an online archive, should I include a retrieval date for that? I'm sorry to bother you and hope you don't mind me asking; I do try to do things correctly with articles and always feel it's better to ask if I'm unsure. SagaciousPhil - Chat 08:57, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Phil. If the only place a resource exists is online then we should include an access date, as the url may change and presumably the content could change too. Therefore the access date serves to identify which version of the page you used. If the book exists in print and people could access it the old-fashioned way, we don't need an access date, as the ISBN and other publication info can be used to verify which edition you used. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:30, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, your reply is much appreciated; I find it's a fascinating learning curve and, hopefully, it helps me improve as I pick up each new thing! Thank you once again. SagaciousPhil - Chat 13:49, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

About that IP-hopper

Hi Dianna. Per 1 and 2, what should I do about that IP-hopper? Can I send report to admins instead of admins' noticeboards? Because he/she will return and will appear again. Your suggestion? Zyma (talk) 19:35, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

The board where you posted is heavily watched and will usually get good results. Posting there will also tend to attract more page-watchers to the targeted set of articles. You can also post on individual admin pages (such as myself, if I seem to be around). Repeated blocks do get results, we just have to be patient. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:56, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
That's helpful. Thanks. Zyma (talk) 11:53, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

You wrote at User talk:Charmlet "The text in the criticism section of the former article Banality of evil appears to have been lifted verbatim from this site" however when I looked at the site in question, it has a date of October 2012 and appears that the text has been copied from Wikipedia, rather than to Wikipedia, is there an earlier version you've come across that pre-dates the existence of the text on en.wp ? Thanks, Nick (talk) 12:29, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Nick. I thought the essay was dated 2008, but it's not. I am unable to find an alternate source with a 2008 date, so I guess I was wrong. @Charmlet: take note, I was wrong -- Diannaa (talk) 19:10, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
Hmm. I could've sworn I saw 2008 on the essay too... This is weird. @Worm That Turned:, you can probably readd it then... This is making my brain hurt. ~Charmlet -talk- 19:12, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
So I am not going crazy? You saw it too? Unfortunately the Wayback Machine does not have the page archived :/ -- Diannaa (talk) 19:16, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Catholic Church and Nazi Germany

Hello Diannaa - Because I noted your fine work on Nazi Germany I request your assistance regarding the Article The Catholic Church and Nazi Germany. An editor by the name, Binksternet, today "rolled back" weeks of diligent work by several editors (four in all) who were working in collaboration to resolve a number of issues. Good progress was being made when this sudden "roll back" discarded weeks of hard, earnest and collaborative effort. Please check its Talk page and offer input. Thank you.Integrtiyandhonesty (talk) 16:48, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't have the time or interest to work on that article. Just a quick note though, that without the additional content the article is 22,524 words and 507 kB (more than double the recommended limit!), so adding more content is the opposite of what should be happening there right now. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:26, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sant'Anna di Stazzema massacre may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • SS-[[Unterscharführer]]), Alfred Concina (b. 1919, former SS-Unterscharführer), Ludwig Goering (b. 1923, former SS-[[Rottenführer]] (who confessed to killing twenty women),<ref>[http://www.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:26, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Harmandir Sahib

Hi, User User:Singhprince is making changes (esp. name) in the Harmandir Sahib article without citing any (reliable) source and providing his own version of translation of word Har. I am almost sure he/she is also doing same thing while using IP without logging in by using this User:198.91.189.99 ip address. Style and language used by both users is almost same. For example- The English spelling now more accurately reflects the spelling in Punjabi and English spelling now match Gurmukhi spelling. Probably it's a same user or they are related to each other. Can you please look into this matter and perform check user or something like that. Thanks Theman244 (talk) 20:36, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

I am not a check-user, so I can't help you. Regardless, no check-user will link a named account with an IP, as the user's geographic location would then be publicly identified. Please use the article talk page to discuss the proposed edits and the reason why you don't think they are acceptable. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:56, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

TYVM

Again... --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:26, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Request for the deletion of Orphaned non-free revision

Hello Dianna. How are you? Please delete the ONFR of the following file : Eega poster. Regards, Raghusri (talk) 13:04, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello Raghusri, I am well. I have done the deletion for you. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:42, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
It's good to hear that you are well. Thank you so much Dianna for the Deletion. Have a Joyful day. Regards, Raghusri (talk) 13:07, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Birds eye view of Detroit

I really hope you didn't mind me stepping in with a restoration. I don't get the impression you did, mind you. =) I specialise in restoring lithographs and engravings (and the occasional photo), so I tend to jump in when I see one with minor flaws I know everyone else will harp on (such as the pencil marks). =) Anyway, just wanted to say something, because it's really great having others interested in the kind of stuff I do, and I really don't want my attempts to help out with the nominations at FPC come off as rude and make you feel unwelcome. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:03, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

No, of course I don't mind. Thanks for asking. This was my first post there, and I did not transclude it properly right away, because the instructions to do so are way over on the right and do not appear on my screen because I am zoomed in. I didn't notice until the next day that I had messed up! ha ha. I just chanced upon the image when people were talking about the decline of Detroit on a noticeboard recently, and thought it quite compelling. You did some super excellent work and I thank you. There's a lot of good photos of urban decay at Flickr, especially interesting are the ones of Detroit, http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=urban%20decay%20detroit. There's a photo essay at http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1882089,00.html (this was originally in Time Magazine some years ago and is how I got interested in the topic of urban decay in the US. So very different from where I live). It's also really interesting to look at Google satellite views of Detroit. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:24, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
Aye, I remember Amtraking around Northeast America a couple years ago. It's fascinating, albeit rather sad in many ways. Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:19, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Helpme User: Dave Chisnal

Hello Diannaa, I had written the response earlier on, but apparently, it did not go through. I just wanted to let you know that my editor replaced your response with my response, in case you receive a notification. We addressed the same issue, so it does not really matter. --JustBerry (talk) 00:08, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for letting me know. The advice to the user was the same, that's the main thing. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:24, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Help..

Hi Diannaa, could you help me to delete this file on en.wiki. A free version is already available on commons. Thanks! :) — иz нίpнόp ʜᴇʟᴘ! 10:55, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ranking Update. Why is this a free version? Doesn't the copyright belong to the Football Association of Malaysia? -- Diannaa (talk) 14:07, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Because I create it and do some improvements there. :) — иz нίpнόp ʜᴇʟᴘ! 16:59, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
The copyright is owned by the Football Association of Malaysia, not yourself. If you made improvements, that's nice, but they still own the underlying copyright. -- Diannaa (talk) 17:01, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Ok, nevermind then. — иz нίpнόp ʜᴇʟᴘ! 17:03, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Bad news

The Magic 8 Rangeblock-Calculator has some bad news: It appears that tons of collateral damage would occur by the two IPs used in the past 10 days alone. It could affect up to 268435456 users, which as I said, is excess collateral damage, it's probably better to just RBI, minus the blocking. The real issue is that it is incredibly dynamic or else people at the company continually change the IP address used. Either or, it would cause too much collateral damage. Thanks for the help. WT101 (Chat • Count) 17:53, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for checking out this angle. – Diannaa (talk) 18:59, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Diannaa, if I were to request a rangeblock, what should the maximum number of affected users be? The range 12.0.0.0/8 has many IPs used by a banned user, Jonathan Yip. This one is much lighter than yesterday, with only 16777216 users having the possibility of being blocked, far less than yesterday. Any advice? WT101 (Chat • Count) 12:51, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
A range block of that size would not go through; it's over the permitted range block limit. I don't think we're allowed to block ranges larger than /16 (65536 potential IPs), and even that would be done only rarely. Potentially a range block that size could take out an entire country. – Diannaa (talk) 23:34, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your help at Talk:Goblin shark. I'll let you know in case more trouble starts after the block expires.--Mr Fink (talk) 01:39, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Glad to help. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:39, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

RQ for the DLN of ONFR's of the Files

Hello Dianna. Please delete the ONFR's of the following files : Yevadu poster, 1 (Nenokkadine) film poster. Regards, Raghusri (talk) 13:46, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Okay, R. I will do it right away. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:49, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you so much Dianna for the instant response. Have a very Joyful day. Regards, Raghusri (talk) 10:59, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Harry "Killer" Kizirian

Thank you for your review. I just wanted to clarify some things.

  1. ) I have talked about his injuries in a detailed manner quite a few times. (e.g. "During a skirmish, Kizirian received many injuries, which included shell fragments in his shoulders and arms." or "The Japanese Special Naval Landing Forces that confronted Kizirian shot him in the legs and abdomen."; the latter is reaffirmed by the Navy Cross citation)
  2. ) I removed accessdates. They are repetitively used and almost pointless to have them. Especially when the accessdates all have one date. Also, the date format is now consistent.
  3. ) Unfortunately I do not have the dates for the paragraph after he was injured. However, the injury is already stated as June 11 and I made a clarification with the next paragraph by starting it off with "After making a recovery..."
Thanks! I will go over it when I get back from the gym, so please feel free to add further tweeks in the next 2 hours or so while I am offline. Thanks for your prompt attention to this review. ttyl -- Diannaa (talk) 19:50, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Okay thank you!!! :) Proudbolsahye (talk) 20:09, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dianaa, thank you once again for your help and nomination of Harry Kizirian. I submitted George Juskalian's article for A1 review, would you mind taking a look over it? I fixed the issues raised by Nick-D. (Heres the link to the nomination: [1]) Thanks in advance. Proudbolsahye (talk) 19:31, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I am going to have to decline. I want to get back to Oskar Schindler, which I am trying to prep for GA. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:48, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Rangeblock for Zombie433

Hi, he's managed to evade the block and was last known to be editing as 79.214.235.29 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). GiantSnowman 14:25, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

79.214.223.82/18. Everything in this range seems to be football related so is likely the same abuser. Blocking range for 2 weeks. Thanks, GS -- Diannaa (talk) 19:10, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Yep, he's 99% football with the off edit to horro films / heavy metal music. Thanks for this! GiantSnowman 21:42, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Okay, thanx for keeping me in the loop. ttyl -- Diannaa (talk) 21:53, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Operation Winter '94

Hi! I seem to remember you copyedited several articles for me a while ago and thought to ask if you could have a look at the Operation Winter '94? It is currently undergoing a FAR and, quite predictably, prose quality needs some more work. I'd appreciate it if you could at least sort out any major issues there, if you can spare some time. Thanks!--Tomobe03 (talk) 14:37, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I am going to have to decline. I want to get back to Oskar Schindler, which I am trying to prep for GA. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:48, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
No worries, just thought to ask. Thanks anyway!--Tomobe03 (talk) 19:49, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Rangeblock request (...again)

Once again. Erick (talk) 04:27, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done 190.106.222.64/24 - blocked for one week. -- Diannaa (talk) 04:42, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

(sigh). Erick (talk) 06:37, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Same range, two more weeks. Sorry for the delay in replying; the new notification system does not work well on a busy page. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:38, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Detroit FPC

Midsummer can be a slow month at FPC; it's probably worth trying this one again in a couple weeks. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:33, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good. Maybe you should nominate it this time, as you're better known in the images dept. :) What do you think? Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 18:00, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Why don't we co-nominate it, to make sure you get credit for finding it? Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:47, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Sure, Adam. That's a good idea. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:48, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Agoston Laszlo.jpg

Hi Diannaa,

thanks for reviewing my uploads. I used these pics with valid copyright licensing tag that refer to this page http://moltopera.hu/en/sajto/sajto/sajtofoto/blog

These are pressphotos, free to use in any medium. In the very first line you may read: "The photos below are free to use with naming the source (www.moltopera.com)" After this you may find the Creative Commons 3.0 Unported Licenc - logo, but I got 3 warnings in the last days in connection with these images.

Could you help me what did I miss?

Cheers

Golax — Preceding unsigned comment added by Golax (talk • contribs) 09:41, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

The source blog shows a compatible cc-by-3.0 license, so the deletion nominations were a mistake. I have removed the deletion templates and everything should be okay now. Since there's a copy of File:Agoston Laszlo.jpg on the Commons (as File:Ágoston László.jpg), the local copy will be deleted now. Sorry about the mistake. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:55, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

No problem, thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Golax (talk • contribs) 06:11, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Request for the deletion of an Orphaned non-free revision

Hello Dainna :)

How are you ?

Please delete the Orphaned non-free revision for the following file : 1 (Nenokkadine) film poster.jpg

Regards,

Raghusri (talk) 11:16, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Good morning! Task is done. Hope you are well -- Diannaa (talk) 14:13, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Yes, i am fine, thank you. Thank you for the Deletion. Have a nice day. Raghusri (talk) 10:45, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Non-free files

Hello! How are you? Please tell me if there is any way to use a photo which is nonfree. Is it possible in a legal way? I want to use a photo of an English page in my language's page.Wikitranser (talk) 21:16, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello Wikitranser! You should ask this question on the wiki where you propose to use the file. Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 21:24, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Core Contest

The Barnstar of National Merit
I hereby award this Barnstar of National Merit to Diannaa for achieving third prize in the Core Contest in April 2013 for work on Nazi Germany. A wikimedia UK person will be in contact to send off an Amazon voucher for £55. Well done! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:03, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
this WikiAward was given to Diannaa by Cas Liber (talk · contribs) on 06:03, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Damdami Taksal

Hi Diannaa, could you add the above page to your watchlist? Your impartial actions would be appreciated. It's the usual emotional nonsense associated with India related articles. Thanks SH 11:43, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Sikh-H. All this material has been directly copied from various sources in violation of copyright law. I have cleaned it and will watch-list. Regards, -- Diannaa (talk) 14:26, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Dianna, I am really concerend about this editor. It's like a slow creep. At Diet in Sikhism he added some complete garbage which I had to removed. I'm quite dubious about the iron utensil section there as well as well as the references used. I think he's quoted references without them actually refering to any of the text. I hate to sound to go against WP:AGF, but my experience of some of the open fanaticm I encounter on Sikh related articles has made me very wary.. Thanks SH 08:25, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Also, I am very dubious about the references being quoted in this section. I think WP:Reliable maybe a case here, in that the books exist but there is no refernce to the subject. Thanks SH 08:54, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
...and one last point, I'm also concerened about WP:Weasel, here is a good example. Numerous others elsewhere. Thanks SH 09:25, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
If the material is not in the source, it should be removed. I am unable to access the Google book links provided in Akhand Kirtani Jatha. There's several serious problems with this article, and I will put some notes on the talk page there. The website http://www.philtar.ac.uk/ appears to be a reliable source as it is affiliated with the University of Cumbria. For help evaluating sources, you could try the WP:RSN.

As you may know, admin User:Qwyrxian has been doing quite a bit of work moderating discussions on castes in India and perhaps it is time for you to solicit his help as he has been specialising in helping to develop our content on related material to a high encyclopedic standard -- Diannaa (talk) 14:58, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Will do. Like everyone nowadays we're all super busy with real lives, but nevertheless, thanks for your help. 16:19, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
I have done some preliminary clean-up on the one article, I hope that helps. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:23, 21 July 2013 (UTC) It's hard to maintain the entire collection because your chosen topic area does tend to attract editors with fringe views and a tenuous grasp of Wikipedia sourcing requirements. So budgeting your time becomes critical. It might be useful to prioritise your work based on the importance ratings assigned to the Sikhism articles by the Wikipedia:WikiProject Sikhism while balancing the availability of source material and the number of page views the articles are receiving. You are also doing some excellent work locating and removing material sourced to biased or unreliable sources. I wish I could help more but I am not in a position to assess the reliability of the sources. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:32, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Diannaa. You have new messages at Jetstreamer's talk page.
Message added 18:46, 18 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jetstreamer Talk 18:46, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Image Deletion

Hi, you deleted File:Protesters at Stubber's Greeb Bog, Walsall.jpg as I was on holiday. I can get a permission email sorted now. Can the file be put back or do I need to re-upload it? The Yowser (talk) 15:17, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Y! I hope you had a great holiday. The procedure is that the OTRS team member will review the email and match it up with the deleted file and undelete the file if everything necessary is present in the email that they receive. The best way to ensure this happens in a timely fashion is to make sure that the exact file name where they can locate the deleted image is included in the email. Also make sure the original photographer indicates the specific compatible license under which they are releasing the file. Please be patient, as (like so many areas of the wiki) the OTRS team is facing serious backlogs and it might take up to a month for your request to be actioned. Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 15:25, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

NFCR

The Admin's Barnstar
Thanks for helping cleanup NFCR Werieth (talk) 20:12, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
PS can you take a look at Wikipedia:Non-free content review#Bradley Joseph and close it? Thanks. Werieth (talk) 20:12, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the barnstar! I have already looked over that deletion discussion and will not be the one to close it, so sorry. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:32, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bird's Eye View of Detroit redux

Figured it was time. It's ready for you to sign as co-nominator when you're on. =) (And sorry this message was so late: I forgot to hit "save".) Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:33, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Adam! -- Diannaa (talk) 14:01, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

thank you

Thank you for deleting (empty) Category:English early modern boy actors . — Robert Greer (talk) 18:34, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Glad to help -- Diannaa (talk) 19:28, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Gann acad.JPG)

Thanks for uploading File:Gann acad.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 06:22, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:SpringBreakersPoster.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:SpringBreakersPoster.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 08:06, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Addis Ababa Bole International Airport

Hi,

It looks like the full protection you established at Addis Ababa Bole International Airport has had its intended effect, with a discussion involving the two editors (and many others) coming to a consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports. At the least, I think the danger of edit warring is past and the block can be ended early. —Alex (ASHill | talk | contribs) 11:59, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to The Canadian Hearing Society may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • for [[Deaf]] and [[hard of hearing]] people in Ontario. Services include sign language instruction (in both [[ASL]] and [[Quebec Sign Language | LSQ]], interpreter services, [[Deafblind]] intervenors,

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:24, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Dam Dami Taksal

Hi Dianna, please can you help. I'm getting quite fed up of Jujjhars behaviour. Damdami Taksal is a case in this. He appears to be adding information that violates the WP:NPOV and WP:Reliable rules . He just doesn't get what wikipedia is. I think he may have English language problems. Thanks SH 07:36, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi SH. I will look closer when I get back from work. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:25, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi again Sikh-history. I have no way of evaluating this document because I don't even know what I am looking at. Who wrote it? Who published it? Is it a religious tract, or an essay, or what? The only thing I have that tells me this is not a reliable source is your word. Hence my reluctance to get involved; I don't really understand what it is that I am looking at. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:54, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
His last post on your talk page leads me to believe that he is prepared to back down on including this content. But he has added a weasel word which I have flagged. I am unable to view the source (Encyclopedia of Sikhism, page 57) -- Diannaa (talk) 20:16, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Definitely an issue of WP:Competence. I think he means well, but doesn't posses the ability or command of English to do it. Thanks SH 14:57, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
I'm going to get some more editors to look at this, but his use of English is incredibly poor. Take a look here . Thanks SH 06:42, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Frederik Stang, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christiania (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:06, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Film Album Art

Hello Diannaa,

I recently saw you you removing the album art from Once Upon ay Time in Mumbai Dobaara! saying that album covers belong only on an article about that album, not about the film. Well as a matter of fact it is a soundtrack, not a music album. I assume you're not an Indian, therefore you might not be aware of the fact that Filmi or Bollywood Songs are extremely popular and the album art was included so that commentary could me made on it after critic-reviews (it is just released). If you still think that removing it was important please redirect me to a policy that says so. Your cooperation in the matter will be of extreme help since you're an ADMIN. :) Better yet I can discuss it on the talk page. I urge you to add it till the matter is resolved. I only have 7 days

Regards

---$oHƎM ❊  আড্ডা  13:47, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello Sohambanerjee. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Film#Soundtrack says that "WikiProject Film consensus is against having cover images in the album infoboxes in the film article. The poster image in the film infobox is sufficient for identification of the topic, and cover images in the film article's album infoboxes is considered extraneous." Extraneous images are against the Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria (an official Wikipedia policy with legal implications) that calls for minimal use of images. Specifically, including a non-free album cover of the soundtrack violates Policy #3a - Minimal usage: multiple images are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information. In order for a second non-free image to be included in the article, the image itself (not the soundrack) would have to be discussed in the article. And the image would have to convey information that it's not possible to provide using words alone (NFCC #1). -- Diannaa (talk) 14:15, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bird's Eye View of Detroit redux

If you haven't noticed, we've passed the five vote point, and are thus likely to get a featured picture out of this. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:34, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes! I saw that. My first one! -- Diannaa (talk) 01:48, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Fair use

Hi, I noticed that you just closed a group of fair use discussions for articles that are listed in Template:Bullying. I was just wondering your opinion on an undeletion review for the file we used in Suicide of Rehtaeh Parsons. I still have a copy on my hard drive. I could upload and put it through review again citing consensus of the others that were kept. Thoughts?--Canoe1967 (talk) 16:26, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Canoe1967. Here's a link to the deletion discussion: Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2013 April 13#File:Rehtaeh Parsons.jpg. Digging around I see that the photo you uploaded is now owned by the Canadian Press as seen in its recent use in the Globe and Mail, which means it is no longer available to us, even for fair use, and would qualify for F7 speedy deletion. The one User:Anna Frodesiak uploaded was a black and white side view displaying a tattoo on her arm. You might try a deletion review on that revision. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:48, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
It was supplied to the Globe from CP but CP has it as "Rehtaeh Parsons is shown in a handout photo from the Facebook tribute page 'Angel Rehtaeh.' (HO/THE CANADIAN PRESS)" It was probably taken by the family or friends that would still hold the copyright. I don't wish to email them for permission though. With fair use I don't think the copyright owner matters as long as we are not infringing on the commercial value by cropping and reducing.--Canoe1967 (talk) 18:49, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
You are risking an F7 deletion if you upload that photo, as the Globe and Mail article states the image is owned by the Canadian Press. There's really no grey area on this point. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:54, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
No problem. I found a few more on her Facebook memorial. I am not sure if we should use the tattoo one or select another. I think the tattoo one was changed out because some editors found it as not the best likeness of her. This one looks pretty good. I could crop, reduce it and then upload. If anyone wants to review it as fair use then we can go that route again. Your taste may be better than mine if you would like to select another. If it does lose in review then I may just email the family.--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:09, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
That photo is a lot more telling than the one with the tattoo imo. The family could likely identify the photographer and help you get an OTRS ticket in place should someone challenge the upload. But it's best not to bother them unless you absolutely have to. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:22, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
The whole area is complex and controversial. The articles are about the suicides, not the people, thus Fair Use is potentially a very awkward rationale for using a copyright picture. It would be wise to consult with WMF Legal prior to making an upload since it is WMF which is put at potential risk by any potential misuse of copyright. There are times that what one wishes to do may not be lawful use. This is why I nominated these pictures for discussion in the first place. I am not, however, about to get involved in any argument about them, nor pursue them to the ends of the earth. Fiddle Faddle 21:29, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Too late. File:Rethaeh Parsons 2009 c r .jpg. Fair use review next?--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:37, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

It's a charming picture, but, as previously, I believe you misunderstand the nature of the article for which you seek to justify Fair Use. But that is my last word on the matter (0.9 probability) Fiddle Faddle 22:12, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

The reason I closed the discussions as Keep is because the cases had been sitting idle for over two months with no administrator willing to delete the files. There's no point leaving the cases open any longer under those circumstances; if no one has deleted the files after two months there's already legal implications; we are hosting the files like it or not if not a man jack among us is willing to delete them. Interested talk page watchers can find the PUF cases at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2013 May 20, starting with Amanda Todd. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:53, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

I think it was a reasonable decision to close the discussions, but disagree with your actual closure thinking as stated above. We do need bravery at times. I wish you had been more brave, but see clearly why you were not. Even so I am not about to go on and on about the matter. They do not meet the Fair Use criteria, but people seem unwilling to deal with that. I still feel WMF Legal should be involved, but I had no response from them when I tried to alert them. Thus I concluded that they are uninterested, or busy, or having a donut, or something. IN my lfe this is unimportant. I still think it has WMF implications. Sometimes they need to handle points of legality rather than leave it to the sometimes well versed, other times less well versed, community. But it is their great social experiment, not mine :) Fiddle Faddle 22:09, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
They should probably all be deleted though, as was File:Caylee anthony.jpg. Please see the rationale at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 July 8#File:Caylee anthony.jpg. I am going to walk the dog and will think about this some more. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:15, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
WP:SUICIDES may assist your deliberations. It is an essay, of course, so carries only intellectual weight, not guideline or policy weight. Fiddle Faddle 22:29, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
@Timtrent: Note also that if you disagree with the presence of a non-free file that WP:PUF is the wrong venue. They should have been listed at WP:FFD or tagged as F7 deletions. I think the best course of action right now is to list them as F7 deletions, as failing criterion #1 and #8. The photos don't increase our understanding of the reasons for these deaths, and tell us nothing that could not be described in words alone. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:40, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
I accept that I had probably listed them in an incorrect location. They are, however, "Possibly unfree files" but your comment means that they are far more than that (less than that?) as well. What I have never understood about WIkipedia is our collective inability to migrate a listing in one forum to the better forum. We have invented a better bureaucracy than the British Raj invented for the Indian Railways. The question is "Who will list them?" And I was hoping to suggest that you might do so, primarily because you are uninvolved with the topic (or so I believe) and made the closure, albeit one I disagree with, in a valid manner for the incorrect location? I am willing to list them myself but may be seen to be in some manner biased against the pictures when I am actually biased pro Wikipedia, if you follow me. Fiddle Faddle 07:53, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
I will list them myself if that's the decision I make. Sorry I didn't make that clear. I am just in no hurry to do so and am waiting for additional comments that might affect my decision. -- 09:14, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
I have no issue with that at all. It requires consideration. I am not into knee-jerk nominations over this. I was going to allow some time to pass for all of us to reflect on the matter anyway. Fiddle Faddle 09:17, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
  • "I wish you had been more brave, but see clearly why you were not." I read this as calling the closing admin 'gutless'. You may wish to redact your statement and apologize.--Canoe1967 (talk) 11:17, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
That is somewhat harsh. Wikipedia is a world where admins who take a brave position are often chastised by others, sometimes all the way to Arbcom. History shows that unusual outcomes can happen during this process, often highly undesirable. Thus I wish Diannaa had been more brave, but, in view of the potential firestorm that could have ensued I see clearly why it was not the route chosen. No offence was intended. It is, however, a non apology to apologise thus: "if offence has been taken" because that puts the onus on the person who has been offended. It was absolutely not my intent for you to interpret my words as you have, but I also cannot control your interpretation.
I wish all admins exhibited bravery at all times. It is, however, unusual to see it. Wikipedia is not a kind place, as your interpretation of my words has illustrated. So I apologise that my words were capable of misinterpretation, but I do not apologise for the open spirit in which they had been uttered. I hope you understand better the thinking behind them. Fiddle Faddle 11:43, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Do you wish to redact your statements then or should we escalate to a drama forum?--Canoe1967 (talk) 12:09, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Let's do something different. If Dianaa wishes to redact them or wishes me to redact them, let's do that. It is Diannaa's talk page after all. It's kind of you to be protective, but let us ask the editor concerned if they require protection. There was no attack here, no ill will, no malice, no lack of assumption of good faith. This is all getting rather off the original topic, isn't it? There is nothing to fight over here, so please let us not conjure a battle out of thin air. Maybe you would like to make a suggestion of the way my thoughts might have been better phrased. If I like it and agree with it then I will adopt it. Fiddle Faddle 12:23, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Do you wish to redact your statements then or should we escalate to a drama forum?--Canoe1967 (talk) 12:09, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
I refer you to my answer given after you asked the identical question previously. It remains as valid now as it did when I replied first. I intend to wait for Diannaa's wishes and will do as Diannaa asks. I really do not understand why you appear to be creating a battle where none exists. If Diannaa asks me to edit what I have said then I will edit it. If you wish to go to some forum or other and make a drama out of nothing at all then you have every right to do that, but it is Diannaa's talk page and I would expect their wishes to be paramount. It feels at present as if you are forgetting to assume good faith on my part, which is a shame. Fiddle Faddle 14:05, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

You wish me to assume good faith after you call a very respected admin gutless? Get real.--Canoe1967 (talk) 14:55, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Please do not ever put words into my mouth. You are the only person who has used this word in this discussion. I would not dream of doing so. It is not in the smallest degree what I meant, nor is it what I mean. I have taken great care to explain my thinking. I will now await Diannaa's thoughts. You have taken up weapons on Diannaa's behalf, something that is not a problem of itself, but you appear not to be listening to my replies. So let me be as clear as it is possible to be: If Diannaa wishes me to vary the wording and make an apology, I will do so. And yes, I absolutely require you to (continue to) assume good faith. This is a distracting and rather weird battle. Fiddle Faddle 15:11, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gutless Seems all I did was paraphrase your attack on the admin. If I were her, I wouldn't even bother responding to your BS. I would just hat the thread as closed and ask you to move along to a forum that may actually listen to your rude input. You have stated that you are contacting the WMF about the issue. They will reply that "it is a local issue that should be handled by consensus at en:wp but if we are made aware of an image through a DCMA takedown notice then we may act then." We decide on our fair use guidelines not the WMF. If you wish to seek consensus to change them then go find the correct forum and stop attacking admin for following the existing ones.--Canoe1967 (talk) 15:30, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Two points here. The first is that I am not in any way attacking Diannaa. The second is that Wikipedia editors must work within whatever laws exist regulating copyright. Consensus may decide upon behaviour within those laws, but it may not decide on behaviour to break those laws.
I really do think our correspondence is at an end, now, yours and mine. I have been very careful to respond to you in a pleasant and even tone, with great politeness. In return you are becoming increasingly strident, putting words into my mouth and now deploying the letters 'BS' which I have assumed you mean to use as shorthand for 'bullshit'. The behaviour you are exhibiting towards me is not pleasant, and it is not a productive correspondence to continue.
I will, as I have said repeatedly, await Diannaa's wishes. I have also communicated with them by email to say so. Theirs is the talk page, and theirs is the request I will abide by. Fiddle Faddle 15:41, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
I consider BS as meaning 'bad statements' the same as I consider claiming lack of bravery as calling an admin gutless which is an attack. I don't consider that as being very pleasant on your part. You still may wish to redact your BS. Wikipedia does not have copyright laws. We have policy based on those laws. If you feel that policy is not being followed then this is not the correct forum. You created a huge raft of deletion reviews in the wrong forum. They were ignored by most because you refused to accept previous consensus. Admin came along and closed them. You then called her gutless on her talk page for closing disruptive requests.--Canoe1967 (talk) 16:02, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for not responding sooner. We had a thunderstorm and the dog was freaking out all night, so I had to sleep in. I did find some of Timtrent's remarks offensive and overly aggressive, and I have sent him an email with the details as to which ones and why. I did it via email in an effort to shut down the drama. Thank you to Canoe for your kind words ("very respected admin"). It's nice to get some positive feedback. Also thanks for jumping in to defend me. -- Diannaa (talk) 17:22, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Diannaa and I have spoken by email. As is customary I will not reveal their comments to me. I will, however, quote relevant sections of mine to them:

"I accept that you found my words upsetting and offensive. I hope you will accept that no offence, nor any form of threat, was intended. I felt we were engaging in a useful dialogue, but I see I was sadly mistaken. Since I am the one who wrote the words this is my issue, not yours. My role in writing them should have been to make them clearer, and to seek to ensure no offence or other items were implied, and that no scope for offence was present.

I apologise unreservedly for causing you offence and alarm and to feel threatened. I understand now, having read your comments [in private email], what did this, and I wish that were not so.

To be as clear as I am able: I am not acting aggressively towards you, nor am I seeking to make you feel in the smallest way uncomfortable. No threats of any description were intended, though I see now how you interpreted them as such and that they were capable of being interpreted as such, Again this is my issue, not yours.

May we reset the clock and the relationship?"

Should Diannaa wish to redact any statements of mine on this talk page they are free to do so with my blessing, or to ask me to do so. May I suggest a private email to avoid increasing the problem? I mentioned redaction in my email but it was not discussed in the reply. I am happy to do so myself, though, in view of the mess here, feel I may be less well qualified to do so than Diannaa. Fiddle Faddle 08:31, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

List of credentials in psychology article help

Hi Diannaa. Thanks for your help in looking at the List of credentials in psychology article. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc (talk) 14:52, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Glad to help. -- Diannaa (talk) 17:30, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa,

I am fairly new to Wikipedia, so please excuse me if I am placing this message in the wrong place or otherwise incorrectly. I see that there is a message for (about) me regarding edits to "Lists of credentials in psychology." I have received comments from Wikiklrsc as well. Your comments re: your edits were that you removed "unencyclopedic and unsourced material, and Wikiklrsc has commented that I am engaging in POV writing (which I assume means point-of-view) and OR writing (which I assume means original research). I will research these terms as best I can and will appreciate any guidance you would be willing to give me. On "Lists of credentials in psychology," however, it seems you have removed a number of edits I made for which I have in fact provided valid citation. It seems you did understand the bit about "levels" and did not reinsert them, and the matter of credentials vs. acronyms seems to need less explaining than it did because you put the full names of the degrees and licenses first. That much seems to be a harmonious move in the same direction. I will be making some more edits which I hope you will find reasonable. I plan to re-insert some of the license types you deleted, and I plan to re-insert some information on initialisms vs. the credentials themselves, but thanks to you, I think less of it is necessary now. Please consider this a friendly note. If you could write back to confirm you received this message and let me know whether I've communicated with you in a proper manner, I would appreciate it. Thank you and best regards, Ritten Wright — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ritten Wright (talk • contribs) 23:04, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Amon Goeth

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Amon Goeth you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 06:16, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Query

Hi Diannaa. I just went to chase down a comment I left on your page and it was archived. But in my reading, it looks like your archive is a bit out of kilter. To wit:

Archive 25 January 2013
Archive 26 February 2013–March 2013
Archive 27 April 2013–June 2013
Archive 28 June 2013–July 2013
Archive 29 August 2013–

Archive 28 is empty. And July 2013 is in Archive 27 ! Maybe it's intentional and I'm missing something obvious. Maybe it's in process. Best wishes. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc (talk) 17:05, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh snap. I will fix that right now. -- Diannaa (talk) 17:07, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
I have placed April and May in #27 and June and July in #28. #29 is empty. We were talking about List of credentials in psychology and the discussion is now parked at User talk:Diannaa/Archive 28#List of credentials in psychology article help. -- Diannaa (talk) 17:34, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, Diannaa. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc (talk) 02:51, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Clearing the last few stubborns

Any chance of helping clear up the persitent 'stubborns'

stuff that makes my page too wide
[6=1&templates_no=Protected+generic+image+name%0D%0ACopy+to+Wikimedia+Commons%0D%0ADeleted+on+Commons%0D%0ADo+not+move+to+Commons%0D%0AKeep+local%0D%0Adb-nowcommons%0D%0ANow+Commons+%0D%0Apuf%0D%0Affd%0D%0Absr+%0D%0Adi-no+source%0D%0Adi-no+license%0D%0Adi-no+permission%0D%0AFile+at+CCI%0D%0ANon-free+in+US+%0D%0AFree+in+US+media%0D%0A%0D%0Aimagewatermark%0D%0APD-NJGov%0D%0APD-Italy%0D%0AVector+version+available%0D%0APp-template%0D%0APp-protected%0D%0AOTRS+pending%0D%0AOTRS+received%0D%0Am-cropped%0D%0Ac-uploaded%0D%0Aconvert+to+SVG+and+copy+to+Wikimedia+Commons%0D%0Aout+of+copyright+in&ext_image_data=1&file_usage_data=1]

on this query ? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello Shakespeare Fan. I have no idea what you want done to these files. One of the results (File:Wikiversity-logo-35px.png) is protected as it is in use on the main page, and therefore has to be kept locally. ????????? -- Diannaa (talk) 23:50, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
Ideally the files should be Commons, the main page items are excepted as such, although surely Commons should have project logos for all WMF projects? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:52, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
The Wikiversity logo is already on the Commons. File:Chasam Sofer.jpg has two different images and needs to be split. File:Button external.png is not in use, but it's admin-only, and should not be moved. File:Example.gif is admins only, it can't be moved. File:Replace this image1.svg is obsolete; but it really should be here, not on the Commons. File:Example.png is admin-only; it needs to stay here. I could go on, but almost all have solid reasons why they can't be moved. Sorry. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:02, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Glenane.jpg

Diannaa you deleted this file but I think there's been a miscommunication. There was no concensus for deletion with two votes in favour and two against. Ultimately the only thing wrong with the file was that Darius (talk) was in error by not having a source listed for the file. He's a hard working Wikipedian and I know he would have sorted that out if he was given the opportunity. Everything else regarding the image was sorted out. It had been deleted from two other articles to make it stand alone on the Glenanne barracks bombing where it undoubtedly passes all criteria for non free use.

Would you consider undeleting it? SonofSetanta (talk) 11:55, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

There were actually two images in this file. The oldest one was a very dark scan of a newspaper photo that was uploaded by DagosNavy in May 2008. Revisions of that image were deleted already in December 2011. The second photo was better, it was uploaded by The Thunderer in August 2008. But the image did not have source information and therefore qualifies for F4 speedy deletion and fails to meet criterion #10 of the NFCC. I did look online and was unable to locate a source that pre-dated the upload in August 2008. If you wish to pursue this further please feel free to list it at deletion review. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:22, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
I was the uploader in August 2008. The source was "Ryder, Chris. The Ulster Defence Regiment: An Instrument of Peace?, 1991 ISBN 0-413-64800-1". I have a current permission from Chris Ryder to use any of the images in his book. He's actually looking for his original files at the moment to see if he can provide an even better image because that one was scanned directly from the book. If I can prove I have the proof to use the image will you undelete it? SonofSetanta (talk) 14:31, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
The best way to proceed if the original photographer is willing to release the image under license to us is to arrange for him to send an email directly to the OTRS team. Instructions for how to do this and what he needs to include in the email can be found at Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries. Please provide a page number where the image appears in the book as I am unable to locate it in the book using Google snippet view. Thanks. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:09, 29 July 2013 (UTC) When you get the page number please just add it to the file description page as the file has now been restored. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:39, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for restoring the image and thank you for all your guidance in the matter. SonofSetanta (talk) 10:24, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Now that I've looked I find I got my books wrong. It isn't in Ryder, it's in Potter's "Testimony of Courage" which means, although the origin is the same (a scan by me) I don't actually have permission to use the image, which is probably why I chose the "historic image" licence. I'll change the source but unfortunately can't claim it to be a free image. I'm sorry if I misled you. SonofSetanta (talk) 10:35, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

This is quite odd. According to Google Books, a search within Potter's "Testimony of Courage" for the word "Glenane" returns no results. The table of contents indicates that 1991 is barely covered, and I can't find any photographs in the book at all besides the front cover. I find it odd that the source was never stated throughout the FFD discussion, but was only asserted to an admin after deletion, and even then the source has changed. Are we sure that this photo is from this book? Without something clearer, I suspect the original deletion for having no clear source was correct. – Quadell (talk) 12:42, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

It could simply be that you've spelt it incorrectly. It's "Glenanne". Potter doesn't have a stand alone reference for Glenanne in his index. Instead it is indexed under UDR/2UDR/Glenanne Company pp351-5. The image of the destroyed base can be found facing p211 (image left) and is the bottom one of two on the page; the upper one being a soldier looking into a bomb crater at Ballydugan Road (Downpatrick) where four soldiers from 3 UDR were killed by a bomb. I am happy to scan the images with adjacent page, along with the index entry and send them to you as proof. I did confirm at Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2013_July_19#File:Glenane.jpg that it was a new image but the subject of the source didn't come up until the very end of the discussion and before I replied the image was deleted. I had however checked both Ryder and Potter and found the image in Potter so unless there was another instance of it on the web when I uploaded the image, that's where it came from. The source hasn't changed; I simply made a mistake in my recollection, possibly because I have been discussing the release of images with Chris Ryder last week (author of "The Ulster Defence Regiment, an Instrument of Peace?"). From my own perspective I am disappointed that a copyright editor is again coaching his/her words in such a way as to call my veracity into question. Apart from this being an absolute disregard for WP:GOODFAITH do you really think I have nothing better to do on Wikipedia than to play games with you in order to put the wiki in an invidious position as regards copyright on images I upload? I respectfully suggest you adopt a different tone with me Sir/Madam. You will find that I am a hard working Wikipedian who will bend over backwards to accommodate and to learn new things about policy on the wiki. I trust I make myself perfectly clear?
As for the original deletion - it was incorrect. Had the image been left intact for another 24 hours I would have inputted the source myself. I did change it to the correct one today, didn't I? I did come back to this page and declare I had made a mistake didn't I? SonofSetanta (talk) 13:16, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Ah, "Glenanne"... I see. I was using the spelling used in the file name and description, but not the one used in the article name and source. My mistake. Your clear details about the location of the image in the book are very helpful, and allay my concerns. (Diannaa, I have no further problems with the image.)
In regards to WP:GOODFAITH and my suspicions: I've found it very common, in articles on national or ethnic disputes, for one side or the other to employ questionable means to try to keep images that make their own side look good, and to use every justification imaginable to try to have deleted whatever images make their side look bad. I suppose I was succumbing to this assumption. But you're right, I should assume good faith. You've done nothing to lead me to think you've been dishonest, and though I don't apologize for looking at this image very carefully, I do apologize for casting aspersions on your veracity. – Quadell (talk) 13:34, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
I make the same mistake myself, even though I've been to the village God knows how many times. I'm not on any "sides" in any conflict sir. I have a third level education and consider myself to be a neutral as regards the Northern Ireland Troubles (despite being from there and residing there) but I do recognise, as you point out, that not everyone has the same easy attitude towards it as I do. I'm also very pleased to tell you that User:DagosNavy in my experience is also, apart from being Argentinian, a neutral as far as Northern Ireland is concerned. No, the reason DagosNavy and I were so keen to keep the file is because it appears to be the only one we can lay our hands on at the moment, despite contacting a few parties privately. Nothwithstanding all of that I can understand your concern, particularly when so many of my images have come under scrutiny recently. I accept your apology unreservedly however and hope we've both learned something from the discussion. SonofSetanta (talk) 14:15, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Requested Articles

Hi! I am trying to reinvigorate Wikipedia:WikiProject Requested Articles, which, if I get enough pointers that there is some interest, I will re-design, with a design similar to Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors, involving drives, to decrease the number of articles listed in the various subpages, and blue link blitzes, involving editors removing all created pages. I am planning, with sufficient interest, to make requested articles 'stricter', i.e. you have to provide two reliable sources, and write a short note explaining why the requested article is notable. There would be a reward system, involving adapted barnstars, similar to the Guild of Copy Editors have here and here. If you have any questions about my aim, or want to indicate that you would sign up to the WikiProject, please say so on my talk page. Thanks! Matty.007 16:36, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lac La Biche, Alberta, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Whitefish and Voyageur (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Wannsee Conference may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • minutes prepared and widely circulated", said Longerich.{{sfn|Longerich|2010|pp=306, 310}} }} Their presence at the meeting also ensured that all those present were accomplices and accessories

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:20, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Auschwitz

Hi Diannaa,

I've decided to warm up for my Holocaust-to-GA project by trying to bring Auschwitz concentration camp to GA. I imagine you've got plenty of your own projects going--I saw Wannsee Conference on the nomination page today--but I thought I'd ping you on the off chance you were interested in collaborating. Hope all's well for you, and thanks for your continued great contributions to the GA project, -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:22, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Khazar2! I don't actually have a lot of resources available for that article but I will have a look anyways and see what I can do to help out. Maybe some of the Auschwitz-specific material is available on intra-library loan. What books do you already have on hand? Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 01:38, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
I don't have anything Auschwitz-specific on hand either, but the article already seems pretty solid in its referencing. My hope is that this is going to be more a question of filling in or clarifying some uncited or missing points rather than a total overhaul, and so a combination of general Holocaust works, Google Books, etc. will see me through. I'm only just beginning on this, though, so this may look different when I'm deeper into double-checking.
Anyway, I'd be glad for any suggestions or contributions you could offer--thanks! -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:57, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
I have put in an ILL request for Rees, Laurence (2005). Auschwitz: A New History. The other Rees title is not available in Alberta for intra-library loan. I am also getting Steinbacher, Sybille (2005) Auschwitz, A History sent over. It looks like Longerich has extensive material and it is available locally so that's good news. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:15, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Sounds terrific. I'm just finishing up another project, but hope to keep doing checks and polishes on this for the next few days. After that it'll have my full attention. -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:30, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bird's Eye View of Detroit redux
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Bird's eye view of Detroit, Michigan, 1889 - . Calvert Lithographing Co..jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 07:48, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks A! (Thanks, eh?) -- Diannaa (talk) 13:49, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Innisfail Alberta

Thanks for the fix - always appreciated. (Nimoy AND Gretzky? LOVE your page) Jmg38 (talk) 07:51, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I used to have a pic of Anne Frank, too, for Courage, but we no longer have a free image of her. Nevermind, I have found a substitute. Thanks for the visit. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:38, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Guidance on an FFD

Greetings, Diannaa. There's a discussion at AN regarding a FFD I closed. I'm contacting you because you have closed contested FFD discussions recently. Any input or guidance would be appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 20:33, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Quadell. Thank you for informing me. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:04, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Diannaa/Archive_28&oldid=1151042055"