User talk:Jo-Jo Eumerus/Archive 26
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Jo-Jo Eumerus. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 20 | ← | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | → | Archive 30 |
Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 June 20#File:RIT Hockey.svg
Hi Jo-Jo Eumerus. Could you clarify the "no consensus" part of your close to Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 June 20#File:RIT Hockey.svg? There are quite a number of editors (as can be seen at WT:NFCC#Discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2017 June 23) who feel that a "no consensus" when it comes to non-free use does not default to "keep", but to "remove" or "delete". I also think that this is the case per WP:NFCCE because if a there is no clear consensus that a non-free use rationale is valid, then that means that the provider of the rationale failed to meet WP:NFCC#10c which in turn means the file's use non-free use fails WP:NFCCP. Individual seasons are perennial events in that they occur yearly and a team logo is the equivalent of a sponsor's logo when it is used in such a way. If the logo was used for the first time in that particular season, then perhaps it's non-free use could be justified; the source provided for the logo, however, is for the following season so it's not clear if it was used for the first time in 2009-2010. I am concerned that your close (without any clarification) might be interpreted as meaning that it's OK to use this logo in any individual season articles which may eventually be created. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:10, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
- Greetings, Marchjuly. LtPowers's argument was uncontested and would potentially put the file outside of the scope of WP:NFC#UUI §17, which deals with various flavours of "child entities". As you say it does not appear to be very clear what the logo is supposed to represent (and thus how NFC#UUI would apply to it); in such a case I would treat it as "no consensus". That particular DELREV isn't closed yet so I am wary of using it as a precedent just yet. I think the issue with such FFD discussions is that they generally don't get enough participation to cleanly sort out problems even when relisted. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:09, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for the reply. At issue was not only No. 17, but No. 14 of WP:NFC#UUI: that's the part about the perennial event logo use. Logos from (major) professional and college teams are almost never allowed to be used like this. I say "almost" because I've never seen a case where they were, but there may be an exception somewhere. In these articles, a PD logo or a wordmark is almost always used instead, unless their is a specific non-free season logo for the event. I did not contest LtPowers argument because I would've been basically repeating everything I said in my nomination; the word "season" in and of itself implies a particular period of time and the article's title and content specify that that time period is 2009-10. This is not a list article about all of the seasons of the team, but an article about one particular season.
- The rationale for not allowing non-free use in "individual seasons" does not just apply to sports, but to TV programs, etc. For example, the consensus has been that the NFCCP does not permit reusing the same logo for a particular show in each of the individual season articles for said show. An individual season-specific logo or cover art is used if they exist, but the default is not to use the main show's logo if they don't. Moreover, Lt.Powers made no attempt to address the No. 17 part of the nomination with respect to the season article, even though one other editor suggested that the file be removed from it as well.
- I understand your position about continuously relisting things over and over again, but FFDs can be closed after seven days and non-free files removed/deleted "if either a consensus to do so has been reached or no objections to deletion or removal have been raised". The first relisting was 16 days after the discussion was started. The relisting generated two additional comments, so I agree that relisting again probably would not have meant a ton of new comments. If the uploader feels that the use is justified, then they should've attempted to make their reasons clearer by improving the particular rationale since it is their responsibility to do so. Instead, they seemingly just copied and pasted the template for one use, and then changed the article parameter without addressing the differences between the different uses and the different articles. While this copy-and-paste post may be frequently used, it is a WP:JUSTONE argument in that it assumes that WP:NFCC#10c is the only criteria that needs to be met.
- Anyway, I'm not looking to re-debate all of this here on your user talk page. Does your "non-consensus" mean that the file's use in the season article cannot be re-discussed at FFD? Would it be acceptable for me to re-nominate the file for discussion for just that particular use or do I have to go though WP:DRV instead? -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:54, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
- Responding tomorrow as I am on the point of falling asleep. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 23:12, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
- OK, here I am. §14 deals with "perennial event" and "sponsoring company" and LtPowers' denial raises questions about whether it'd apply in the first place to this file. I just don't see a clear cut case either for or against the use of the file in that specific article, mainly due to there not being much discussion. I guess you could try listing it again at FFD following the WP:NPASR principle. The problem with relisting is that it seldom attracts more opinions at FFD. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:49, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for the NPSAR link; I will consider a way to reword my nomination so as to focus more on the individual season article. Would it be acceptable to add a {{Please see}} to the user talk pages of the two editors who commented in the FFD as well as to pages such as WT:NFCC, WP:MCQ and the talk pages of the WikiProjects listed on the file's talk page or would that be considered WP:CANVAS? -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:02, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
- Feel free. CANVASS is really a problem when you are seeking biased opinions, for example by posting only on talk pages of users who agreed with you or by wording the notice non-neutrally. I am personally not entirely convinced by my own close, but the standard I've always upheld here is "when in doubt, do not delete". Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:26, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
- Just some general thoughts about this. While I think the WP:PRESERVE standard is a really good one with respect to general editing and even possibly AfDs, I think the perculiarities of file use (particularly non-free content) are not very well suited to such an approach. Like with WP:COPYVIO and WP:BLP, removal/deletion should be preferred whenever there is any doubt about the content in question; in other words, there should be 100% certainty (or really close to 100% certainty) that there is no violation for the content to be retained. WP:NFCCP begins with the statement "There is no automatic entitlement to use non-free content in an article or elsewhere on Wikipedia", and WP:NFCCE further states "Note that it is the duty of users seeking to include or retain content to provide a valid rationale". This makes it clear, at least to me, that the burden is on those wanting to add/retain non-free content to clearly demonstrate its use complies with relevant policy; in other words, they have to clearly esablish a consensus for their position and that any questionable or unclear cases should result in deletion/removal. This does not mean the file can never be re-added or undeleted; it only means the the burden for establishing a consensus is still held by those who want to do so. When a "no consensus" is defaulted to "keep" in such cases, the burden is shifted from those who want to retain/keep the content to those who feel that its removal/deletion is warranted and thus essentially makes non-free use automatic by default. Please understand that I am not personally singling you out for criticism; I am only trying to elaborate on why I disagree with these types of closes in general when it comes to non-free files. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:54, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
- Feel free. CANVASS is really a problem when you are seeking biased opinions, for example by posting only on talk pages of users who agreed with you or by wording the notice non-neutrally. I am personally not entirely convinced by my own close, but the standard I've always upheld here is "when in doubt, do not delete". Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:26, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for the NPSAR link; I will consider a way to reword my nomination so as to focus more on the individual season article. Would it be acceptable to add a {{Please see}} to the user talk pages of the two editors who commented in the FFD as well as to pages such as WT:NFCC, WP:MCQ and the talk pages of the WikiProjects listed on the file's talk page or would that be considered WP:CANVAS? -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:02, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
- OK, here I am. §14 deals with "perennial event" and "sponsoring company" and LtPowers' denial raises questions about whether it'd apply in the first place to this file. I just don't see a clear cut case either for or against the use of the file in that specific article, mainly due to there not being much discussion. I guess you could try listing it again at FFD following the WP:NPASR principle. The problem with relisting is that it seldom attracts more opinions at FFD. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:49, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
- Responding tomorrow as I am on the point of falling asleep. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 23:12, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- There was a problem with maps on Wikimedia wikis that used <mapframe> when you clicked on the link to another map service. Open Street Map or Google Maps are examples of other map services. If you had marked a place on the map the marker would not be in the same place on the other map service. It was in the middle of the map. This has now been fixed. [1]
Changes this week
- Very old and inactive unpublished translations in the Content Translation database will be removed. This is because of technical maintenance. If you have not worked on a translation after 1 January 2016 you will lose it after 6 July. If you want to keep the unfinished translation you need to open it before 6 July with the Content Translation tool. You can continue working on it later. Translations that were started or have been worked on after 1 January 2016 will not be affected.
- There is no new Mediawiki version this week.
EventStreams is a new way to show activity on Wikimedia wikis. It works with the recent changes feed. It will do more things later. It will replace RCStream. Tools that use RCStream should move to EventStreams before 7 July. Tech News wrote about this in the 2017/07 issue. [2]
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
15:32, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
 | |
| volcanoes in South America | |
|---|---|
| ... you were recipient no. 1424 of Precious, a prize of QAI! |
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:20, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
CN Pakistan
Hi! You recently deleted List of programs broadcast by Cartoon Network (Pakistan). Can you please send the source code of the page? I will try to maintain it and add it in Cartoon Network (Pakistan). Similarly, what do you think what should be done for List of programs broadcast by Nickelodeon Pakistan and Nickelodeon (Pakistan), should the be merged too? Please reply, thanks! M. Billoo 07:43, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
- Greetings, @M.Billoo2000:. There is an archived version of the text here, no opinion on the other. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:50, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for your response. The link you sent has December 2016 version in desktop view and April 2017 version in mobile view😂 Well, I will manage. M. Billoo 16:22, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Hualca Hualca
Hello! Your submission of Hualca Hualca at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Kmwebber (talk) 19:14, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Porco (caldera)
On 7 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Porco (caldera), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Porco caldera in Bolivia, a major source of silver for the Inca, is now Bolivia's largest zinc mine? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Porco (caldera). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Porco (caldera)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
IronGargoyle (talk) 00:03, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Puchuldiza
On 7 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Puchuldiza, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Puchuldiza in Chile was the site of the first electricity generated from geothermal energy in South America? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Puchuldiza. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Puchuldiza), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 22:41, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
Discussion at File talk:PDO-Logo.svg#Previously Deleted File
You are invited to join the discussion at File talk:PDO-Logo.svg#Previously Deleted File. Marchjuly (talk) 09:24, 8 July 2017 (UTC) -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:24, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Chiliques
On 9 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Chiliques, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Chiliques volcano (pictured) is of cultural importance to the town of Socaire, Chile, where it was considered to be the source of water? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Chiliques. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Chiliques), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Alex ShihTalk) 00:02, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- There are sometimes links to pages about the same thing on other Wikimedia projects. A Wikipedia article about Berlin can link to the Wikivoyage guide or Wiktionary entry about Berlin. You can now see when that page has a badge. A badge could be the star that shows that an article is a featured article. [3]
Changes this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 11 July. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 12 July. It will be on all wikis from 13 July (calendar).
Meetings
- You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 11 July at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Future changes
- Mobile users will be able to edit Wikipedia without JavaScript. This will make it possible to edit the wikis from older mobile phones. This will probably happen on 18 July for most wikis. [4]
- We will not use Tidy on Wikimedia wikis in the future. It will be replaced by June 2018. It could be earlier. Editors will need to fix pages that could break. You can read the simplified instructions for editors.
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
15:07, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
Deletion of IObit
On July 7th, the article IObit is deleted. You can view it is an article about a software company. Why was it deleted while other similar article is still in wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eunice20170327 (talk • contribs) 06:25, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
- Greetings, @Eunice20170327:. Folks here thought that not enough other people talk about that company. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:59, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
@@Jo-Jo Eumerus:Thank you very much for your reply. Finally, I get a reponse from Talks. As you said, it is not proper to talk about the compan, then I'm a little confused why the article of Piriformis OK for display. By the way, I edited the article of Advanced SystemCare, a similar PC optimization tool to CCleaner which is also deleted. Hope we can find a way to display IObit in the right way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eunice20170327 (talk • contribs)
Bolivian tin belt
From your edits I think you might be interested in this new article: Bolivian tin belt. Mamayuco (talk) 03:56, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, but for personal reasons I'll probably need to draw down my wiki-work in the future. So I won't be working on such topics. That article seems interesting, although there are some odd things in it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:02, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
- @Mamayuco: Thanks for writing them geological articles, though. I am more a volcano (and ancient waterbody) focused person. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:07, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
A while back, but you closed as / and deleted it, I think the creator was already blocked. Now I see it's been recreated (even with the COI tag still at the top!) in draftspace; do you think the editors are the same? Hope all's well. Cheers! — fortunavelut luna 13:47, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
- Might be, the tone of the text is somewhat different though. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:08, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
McEwen Mining
Hello Jo-Jo Eumerus, You recently deleted the McEwen Mining page. Can you please send the source code, such that I re-create it and maintain it? Thank you in advance. Mihaela Iancu — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mihaela Iancu (talk • contribs) 19:10, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
- Greetings, @McEwen Mining:. Merely rewriting the page won't suffice - as noted in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/McEwen Mining there don't seem to be enough people talking about the company.
Also, you should probably ask for a change of your user name at WP:CHUS seeing as we frown on company named accounts.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:43, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Putana (volcano)
On 12 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Putana (volcano), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a plume of gas rises from fumaroles on Putana volcano? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Putana (volcano). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Putana (volcano)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Alex ShihTalk 00:02, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello Jo-Jo!
I had been working on the article Elizabeth Esther just this afternoon. I had found several reviews of her work in Publishers Weekly, Library Journal, a feminist journal and feel that this goes towards establishing CREATIVE. I do not believe that anyone had a chance to review the new sources and unfortunately, I was unable to !vote due to being called away from the computer for a few hours. In light of the work that I did, I would like to ask you to take another look at the article and give it more time for debate. Thanks! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:09, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- Greetings, @Megalibrarygirl: I've reverted close and deletion and relisted the discussion. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:58, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:34, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
Draft:Creately
Hi, Jo-Jo - considering this action, can you speedy the draft? Atsme📞📧 11:29, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
- Greetings, @Atsme: The draft is extremely similar but with some differences; I'll tag it for G4 for someone else to look at. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:01, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 15 July 2017
- News and notes: French chapter woes, new affiliates and more WMF team changes
- Featured content: Spectacular animals, Pine Trees screens, and more
- In the media: Concern about access and fairness, Foundation expenditures, and relationship to real-world politics and commerce
- Recent research: The chilling effect of surveillance on Wikipedia readers
- Gallery: A mix of patterns
- Humour: The Infobox Game
- Traffic report: Film, television and Internet phenomena reign with some room left over for America's birthday
- Technology report: New features in development; more breaking changes for scripts
- Wikicup: 2017 WikiCup round 3 wrap-up
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- "Wikimedia Labs" is now called "Cloud VPS". "Wikimedia Tool Labs" is now called "Wikimedia Toolforge". This is to help clarify the purpose of these services. [5]
Problems
- On some pages, the Table of Contents is not being shown. It will normally appear if you edit the page again. Investigation is currently ongoing. [6]
Changes this week
- The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 18 July. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 19 July. It will be on all wikis from 20 July (calendar).
Meetings
- You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 18 July at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
- You can join the next meeting with the Architecture committee. The topic this week is: Migrate to HTML5 section ids. [7] The meeting will be on 19 July at 21:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Future changes
- Page Previews, currently a Beta Feature, will be enabled for logged-out users for all remaining Wikipedias (with the exception of English and German) the week of 24 July. An A/B test will be run on English Wikipedia to collect data before approaching the community for further discussion. [8]
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
22:59, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello. I intend to recreate this page starting from Bgwhite's revision located here. The multiple reliable sources in the revision plus this RS from 2013 establish general notability and address at least one delete !voters concerns from the AFD.--v/r - TP 01:10, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- @TParis: Reading the deletion arguments it seems like lack of sources was not the principal concern with the article. Sure that this RS addresses the other concerns? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:42, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- The primary concern was self-promotion of a fringe theorist. And it wasn't a valid policy based reason, editing could've resolved that. He meets GNG.--v/r - TP 16:05, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- No skin off my back if you write a new article, although others may renominate it for deletion. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:45, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- The primary concern was self-promotion of a fringe theorist. And it wasn't a valid policy based reason, editing could've resolved that. He meets GNG.--v/r - TP 16:05, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
'Open Access in' articles
Hi
I understand that almost all the 'Open Access in' articles have been deleted over the past month, please could you move them to User:Filippo Morsiani's so he can work on them? Both the articles that you deleted and the previously deleted articles. All the red links on Wikipedia:WikiProject_United_Nations/Open_Access_Descriptions are articles that have been deleted.
Many thanks
--John Cummings (talk) 15:35, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- Greetings, @John Cummings:. My impression is that most of these were copied from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/communication-and-information/portals-and-platforms/goap/access-by-region/europe-and-north-america/finland/ and related pages with near-insignificant editing; I am afraid at the amount of work needed to undelete and move all this stiff so maybe you can work with that text? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:39, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Jo-Jo Eumerus, there was a significant amount of editing (40+ hours) done to the text after it had been added. Is it possible to give me the ability to to undelete and move the pages myself? --John Cummings (talk) 17:37, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- The editing histories I inspected do not agree with your statement - aside for minor edits the text was mostly unmodified from the sources. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:43, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Jo-Jo Eumerus, there was a significant amount of editing (40+ hours) done to the text after it had been added. Is it possible to give me the ability to to undelete and move the pages myself? --John Cummings (talk) 17:37, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- The editing was done before saving also there are some articles with a significant amount of editing done to them, some less so. Can you suggest a way I can get them undeleted to work on them? --John Cummings (talk) 21:50, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
Jo-Jo, would you mind if I undeleted the pages and moved them into sandboxes so they could be worked on until they're ready for mainspace? It would be a shame to lose the edits already made (which don't show up since they were made offline). Nev1 (talk) 22:17, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- No I don't mind. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:10, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you. @John Cummings: There are quite a few articles so I might not be able to move them all to user space in one go but I'll get started. Nev1 (talk) 16:59, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
- No I don't mind. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:10, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
non-free
Hi, I saw you did some of the "human review" files. Thanks for your help. You might like to note that "User:B/rescaledsidebar.js" (which I spotted in your common.js file) does not work properly on this sub cat - it leaves the template on the page, as it does not match the complex RegEx used - I've made a modified version and saved as User:Ronhjones/rescaledsidebar.js. I have altered the instructions on Category:Non-free files with orphaned versions more than 7 days old needing human review. Ronhjones (Talk) 23:05, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks! Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:33, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
Hi, I've just seen you've closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Berry (footballer). With only two !votes within a week, I really don't think long enough was given for a clear consensus to form. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:19, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
- Huh? I see 4 !votes... Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:31, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
- 3 if you include the nominator, plus one for redirect. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:35, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
- As a general rule, I use 3 as the minimum amount of opinions that I want before closing an AfD as anything other than "soft <whatever>", and I know others do as well. GiantSnowman's opinion was also that the article is not suited (yet) so I factored it in as well. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:42, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
- 3 if you include the nominator, plus one for redirect. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:35, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Antofagasta de la Sierra
On 23 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Antofagasta de la Sierra, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that renewed volcanic activity at Antofagasta de la Sierra could cause ash to rain down over hundreds of square kilometres of adjacent land? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Antofagasta de la Sierra. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Antofagasta de la Sierra), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Alex ShihTalk 00:12, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Colette Mazzucelli
Hi, I'm an admin who is also an OTRS volunteer. I've been handling VRTS ticket # 2016082710007096 initiated by the subject of the article Colette Mazzucelli, which you deleted a few days ago.
Apparently the version that was nominated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colette Mazzucelli was a 5-kilobyte article using material copied from a version early in 2016. As it stood, I agree that it deserved deletion.
However, if you look in the article's deleted history, you'll see that on 28 June 2016 the article was expanded to over 30K, and that was actually well-written, well-researched work. The person who did that, however, has been identified as a paid editor at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Susana Hodge. The article survived this way for over a year, until on 12 July 2017, Doc James reverted to an older 9-kilobyte version, removing all of that work because it violated Wikimedia:Terms of Use.
I cannot help but wonder, though, if the expanded version of the article had been nominated for deletion, would it had survived? I cannot be sure. There is good information in there, but the article would still need to pass WP:NACADEMIC. If it would have survived, it would definitely need a COI tag on it, though.
Would you be willing to let me restore it to draft space to see what can be done with it? ~Anachronist (talk) 16:53, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
- Sure, go ahead. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:53, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Deletion of "Manel (term)" page
I see that you closed out a discussion about proposed deletion of the page "Manel (term)," and I'd like to suggest that this decision be revisited and the page re-posted. The main complaint in the deletion discussion page is that the term is not sufficiently notable to warrant a Wikipedia entry because there isn't sufficient use of it in legitimate media sources (i.e. not Tumblr or Twitter), in sufficient depth and for any sustained period outside the month of May 2017.
Here are some credible sources that use this term, with coverage that spans over a sustained period, starting at least as early as Oct 2016 and continuing through July 2017: (1) There's an extensive discussion about the term in this July 5, 2017 Oxford Dictionaries blog post. https://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2017/07/on-the-radar-manel/ (2) This piece in the Financial Times from June 30, 2017 features an extensive discussion of manels. https://www.ft.com/content/6fc3e4ba-575b-11e7-9fed-c19e2700005f (3) This piece in Time Magazine from July 20, 2017 discusses the "no manel" pledge. http://time.com/4863700/women-leaders-work-equality/ (4) Manels are discussed in this Nov 2016 piece in the India edition of International Business News. http://www.ibtimes.co.in/international-mens-day-moobs-manel-here-are-some-male-words-you-should-know-704694 (5) This Oct 2016 piece in the New Statesman discusses the term. http://www.newstatesman.com/2016/10/guess-who-appeared-westminster-committee-women-parliament-all-male-panel-course (6) The term is discussed in March 20 2017 edition of Daily Nation http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Male-dominance-in-media-and-panels-Kenya/1056-3856934-8dd4x4z/index.html (7) May 2017 in Hindustan Times http://www.hindustantimes.com/opinion/no-woman-judge-on-triple-talaq-bench-reflects-poor-on-india-s-judiciary/story-zTM770WHDpx1lLTu8gNuPM.html
BionicWoman (talk) 03:06, 24 July 2017 (UTC)BionicWoman
A barnstar for you!
|
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar |
| Thank you for your kind comments about me, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elijah Daniel (2nd nomination). You didn't have to take the time to say that in your closing statement and I appreciate it. Sagecandor (talk) 03:37, 24 July 2017 (UTC) |
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- CSS in templates will be stored in a separate page in the future. This will make it easier to make templates look good on mobile devices. This now works on mediawiki.org and Wikitech. It will come to more wikis later. [9][10][11]
-
.mw-ui-constructivemodifier class is deprecated and has been removed. [12]
Changes later this week
- The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 25 July. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 26 July. It will be on all wikis from 27 July (calendar).
- It will be possible to restrict who can send you notifications on a wiki. This new feature will accessible in your preferences, in the Notifications tab, on Wednesday, July 26. Please see the documentation. [13]
Meetings
- You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 25 July at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
- You can join the Wikimedia Foundation July 2017 Metrics & Activities Meeting. The meeting is about how Wikipedia and the Wikimedia movement are perceived and understood by the world. The meeting will be on 27 July at 19:00 (UTC). See the agenda and how to join.
Future changes
- New Filters for Edit Review, at the moment available as a Beta feature, will be released by default for the Recent Changes in September.
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
15:58, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
Coin
Hi,if you have a second, could you take a second look at your image review on this FAC? I think you'll find all in order. Thanks much.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:48, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
- Oh, I see now you're on holiday. Shall I get someone else?--Wehwalt (talk) 21:52, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
- Holiday doesn't mean I shut down completely, I shorten my reviews however. I'll take a look tomorrow. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:21, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I'm the same way. Much obliged. Enjoy.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:26, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
- Ok, it's morning so going back to work... Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:52, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I'm the same way. Much obliged. Enjoy.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:26, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
- Holiday doesn't mean I shut down completely, I shorten my reviews however. I'll take a look tomorrow. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:21, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
Hi Jo-Jo Eumerus,
I am an employee of ayondo and looking to resubmit the wikipedia page for the company. I am trying to provide a neutral article for informational purposes only - no advertising of any kind. Since you removed the article the last time it was submitted, would you be willing to revise the current version I am working on to ensure the neutrality of the article to avoid deletion this time?
Vielen Dank
M.
M.ayondo (talk) 14:28, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
- Which company did you guys hire last time to create the article? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:35, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
- As far as I know, another employee created the article the last time, as he showed his connection to the company on his user page and sent me his old draft. M.ayondo (talk) 14:41, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
- Well, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ayondo indicates that there aren't enough reliable sources paying attention to your company. Without them, your company cannot have an article here. Sorry! Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:42, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
- As far as I know, another employee created the article the last time, as he showed his connection to the company on his user page and sent me his old draft. M.ayondo (talk) 14:41, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Palomo
On 27 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Palomo, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a geologist named a secondary vent of Palomo volcano (pictured) after his son, hoping that one day he would get to know the mountain range? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Palomo. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Palomo), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
DYK Kurile Lake
On 16 December 2016, Did you know was updated with facts from the articles Wikipedia and Kurile Lake, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Wikipedia,Kurile Lake), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
- — Maile (talk) 21:53, 16 December 2016
- Manually signing this so that it gets archived. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:35, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Hualca Hualca
I have just promoted your DYK for Hualca Hualca to prep. Could you confirm that the statement "they are all constructed on Neogene ignimbrites, one of which was dated to 2.2 +- 1.5 million years ago." is correct, or is there a misplaced decimal point here? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:26, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
- No, just a problem with a glyph. I've remedied it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:16, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
- OK, but there is an enormous difference between 3.7 and 0.7 million years ago. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:04, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
- Yeah, these dating methods can have huge uncertainties. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:33, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
- OK, but there is an enormous difference between 3.7 and 0.7 million years ago. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:04, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Deletion of Jill Chamberlain - Ways to Restore?
Hi Jo-Jo,
You recently deleted the page for Jill Chamberlain, author of The Nutshell Technique: Crack the Secret of Successful Screenwriting. The article was originally flagged, but those issues had been addressed and an editor was kind enough to help us meet Wikipedia's standards. The article was re-flagged, and before we had time to make the necessary rebuttal/edits, it was removed. The page referenced both Authority Control and Library of Congress numbers, legitimizing Jill Chamberlain as a noteworthy person. We also found the content similar to other authors and screenwriting academics such as Blake Snyder and Christopher Vogler and were somewhat confused about the issue, but we would be happy to make further edits necessary to have the page restored.
Any assistance would be much appreciated - thank you for your time!
Jakobmwarren (talk) 00:37, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
- Greetings, Jakobmwarren The thing about that article is that for a topic to have an article here on Wikipedia, multiple substantial reliable sources independent from the subject need to have written about it. Authority Control and Library of Congress don't seem like they'd be substantial enough to meet that standard, and people in the deletion discussion noted that some sources read as promotional. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:24, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:45, 28 July 2017 (UTC)