User talk:Diannaa/Archive 35

Archive 30

←

Archive 33

Archive 34

Archive 35

Archive 36

Archive 37

→

Archive 40

CCI update

That was a rather big one... I'm going to have to work out how you do it so efficiently :) --Mkativerata (talk) 04:57, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Diannaa (talk) 15:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Ineffective page protection

How has this been allowed to happen, despite the page protection made in light of the persistent sock puppetry by User:MariaJaydHicky on that page? The most recent, HH.Mandem, created their "account" less than a week ago, yet has been able to vandalize an article protected against socks. Dan56 (talk) 19:28, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

I am not watch-listing that page, as it's outside the scope of my usual activities. How it happens, is the sockmaster knows that 10 edits + 4 days = autoconfirmed. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:35, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

The disruption is continuing, so I will watch-list and try to jump in quicker next time. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:48, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	The Barnstar of Diligence is awarded in recognition of a combination of extraordinary scrutiny, precision and community service. This barnstar is awarded for consistently good judgement relating to administration. PhilKnight (talk) 14:44, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Phil! Very nice to get some positive feedback. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:54, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Request for administational advice

Hi Diannaa , and sorry to bother You (again). Since I believe You to be "hard but fair" (hope this little general expression is OK), and never give favours nor the contrary, am I now asking for Your advices. I have previously experienced some problem with user Peter. A year ago or so, he rejected the idea of Scanian dialect as a part of the Swedish language (in the latter article). Eventually I accepted his ideas. But now he also rejects all ideas of Scanian to be based on the Danish language, nor anything "inbetween". (!!) This is the background of our current troubles. As a lingvist in general, I have no doubts that his knowledges are above my level. However not in historical matters, in my humble opinion. Main trouble and reason for this request, is that he rejects every source that in some way can be traced to "Stiftelsen Skånsk Framtid" or "SSF". Here I believe a litteral translation is called for, the three words mean "The foundation, Scanian, Future" - www.scania.org For instance he wrights at my talk-page "inappropriate sources like 333-årsboken[1]..." (Swedish ISBN 91-7586-384-7) "The 333 Year Book" from 1991, 333 years after Treaty of Roskilde, though it is just an assembly of 17 different authors (including f.i. Wilhelm Moberg that has been written over many decades).

Peter Isosalo has previously stated SSF to be "political extremists", though it has no political agenda at all, the only thing they seem to argue, is a call for a less centralised Swedish nation and improved Scanian-Danish relationships (is that "extemstic" in the current Global perspective ?). And SSF is indeed not a political party, and most certainly not even remotely close to for instance IRA, PLO or ETA, to my knowledge SSF is sooner a Scanian Gentlemen's association. Of cource I realise that "333-årsboken" as a source only is usable as source within the various topics its different authors handeles (but this has not been the troble for Peter Isosalo, only "the SSF connection" so to speak). Its different authors deals with different issues, like Danish-Swedish, Scanian-Swedish and Swedish-Danish history, Scanian dialects, the re-nationalisation of Scaniaand Skåneland (a wider area), its consequenses, specific crimes committed by Swedish military and Kings etc. Many authors are experts in history, lingvistic, social studies and culture and have university examinas while some others are (in Scandinavia) famous authors. Some of them even died long before SSF was founded. But Peter rejcets all its parts and athors based only on the fact that SSF has assembled and published the book, and that in his opinion SSF are "political extremists". So - if possible, and if You have time and inclination, Your advices on "333-årsboken" would be very much appriciated, regardless of Your verdict. Otherways perhaps You possibly could ask some other (preferably un-bias, un-Scandinavian) administrator or other suitable user You know if "333-årsboken" really is inappropriate in a Global perspective. And again, I'm asking for NPOV advice not any kind of benefits. I'm sorry to have bothered You again, but In a matter like this, in my own opinion and experience, You are the best to ask, who I'm aware of. Kind regards Boeing720 (talk) 17:42, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Boeing720. Unfortunately I do not speak Swedish so it's impossible for me to assess the publication or the organization that produced it. You might try the reliable sources noticeboard but I have my doubts about anyone being able to assess this foreign-language source. Looking on the Swedish wiki, there only seems to be one article that uses the book as a source. There's two articles on this wiki that cite it (searched via ISBN). -- Diannaa (talk) 18:53, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

I understand, though www.scania.org is in English. I'll take it, as suggested to WP:RSN, thanks for this appriciated advice. Boeing720 (talk) 19:31, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Most of the articles on the website are in Swedish. Many do not provide an author, so I would not be inclined to consider it a reliable source for GA-level work. Perhaps for basic facts -- Diannaa (talk) 21:52, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Erhard Heiden

Diannaa-- when you have time, might you check the reason and validity of why the photo as to the subject of this article was deleted. The corpse of this early Reichsführer-SS was found in September 1933. The photo would be 80+ years old; what about fair use? Kierzek (talk) 20:00, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

The image was deleted as the user uploaded it to Commons without adequate proof that it is in the public domain. There's a copy here which pre-dates his upload, so I will bring it over for fair use. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:49, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Excellent; it always helps a bio article when a reader can see a photo of the subject. Kierzek (talk) 00:32, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Martin Bormann

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Martin Bormann 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 Legobot, on behalf of Jonas Vinther -- Jonas Vinther (talk) 14:00, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Martin Bormann

The article Martin Bormann you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Martin Bormann for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jonas Vinther -- Jonas Vinther (talk) 15:42, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Indef Semi-Protection Request

Hey Dianna, hope all is well with you. Could you indef semi-protect this page in my userspace for me, please? Thank you....Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:53, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi NH! the wee task is done. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:56, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

I must find you a greater task for next time. :) Thanks! - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:11, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Carl Frampton

Article semi-protected due to vandalism. What vandalism? Tigerboy1966  16:39, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

diff, diff, diff -- Diannaa (talk) 16:45, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Harassment

Can you look at this? I blocked this user on Commons for anti-Russian POV-pushing, and now he's come here and posted the same material on my talk here and at ru.wiki and uk.wiki. Thanks for your time. INeverCry 23:56, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

There's nothing blockable, yet, on this wiki. I will drop a warning on his talk. I already have your talk page on my watch-list -- Diannaa (talk) 00:07, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Content removed?

Even after removing the copyright infringing content. I removed the Gamespot copyrighted content. Yet my article was still deleted for copyright violation. Also if you wanted me to add references someone could have told me and I would have put them in. The article was Army Men: Video game. JoshaGibby (talk) 01:36, 9 September 2014 (UTC)JoshaGibby

The topic is already covered in our article Army Men. Also, the remaining content seemed to me to be likely copy vio as well, though I could not locate the source. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:46, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of File:Interchange of Highways 53 and 169.jpg

Hi Diannaa. Zath42 brought this deletion to my attention. I looked through the deleted revisions and it seems that the image was tagged as {{PD-self}}. It turns out that I personally know Zath42. He lives right by that interchange and took the photo himself. Could you review the history again and reconsider the deletion? Thanks. --EpochFail (talk • contribs) 15:12, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

This is an aerial photo of the interchange, not taken from the roadside. It also appears on the company website. The uploader states on the file talk page that Hoover Construction is the owner of the image. Therefore an OTRS ticket is required. Sorry, -- Diannaa (talk) 18:29, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

URGENT

I am sorry to have to tell you this, but an IP hopper on the page Talk:Yet Another Movie has made a death threat.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoops gza (talk • contribs)

Thanks Hoops, I have emailed as per the instructions at WP:emergency -- Diannaa (talk) 03:14, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

They have already responded, they are looking into it. Thanks for the report, -- Diannaa (talk) 03:18, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

File:SimilarWeb logo.png

You marked this with {{nominated for deletion on Commons}}, but the file has never been nominated for deletion on Commons. What did you mean? This is possibly {{PD-textlogo}}. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:52, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

I meant to nominate, but for some reason it didn't get done. It's nominated now. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:59, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I overlooked that it was a British logo. --Stefan2 (talk) 23:04, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Need your Assistance

First, my apologies for dragging you into this controversy and writing on your personal talk page. However, you seem to have an understanding of this controversy as well as Wikipedia policy better than a lot of editors/adminis out there. The page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premakeerthi_de_Alwis which has been re-written lately from a neutral point of view. I was initially okay with the new writeup, however I am concerned about including an accusation on the page violating the Wikipedia policy. I have requested the Wikipedia Biographies of the Living People noticeboard to remove accusatory content from the article. I would appreciate if you could include your opinion on this issue as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard Thank you.--108.28.168.3 (talk) 12:58, 14 September 2014 (UTC)--108.28.168.3 (talk) 13:04, 14 September 2014 (UTC)--Ramya20 (talk) 13:05, 14 September 2014 (UTC) Thank you!!--Ramya20 (talk) 00:25, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Mushroom9/BigJolly9

I'm not confident enough to block, but it does look like we have a sockpuppet. Hence: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mushroom9. MER-C 11:18, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:47, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

The Lives of a Bengal Lancer

Hi friend. Since I reviewed your Martin Bormann article would you be kind enough to review my The Lives of a Bengal Lancer article? You see it's my absolute favorite film since I can remember. I watch at least 2 times a day, so would be very keen on seeing it achieve GA status - which is why I have spent the last days significantly improving it. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 15:14, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Hmm? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 01:11, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jonas. I have thought about your request for a few days and have decided not to do it. Sorry, -- Diannaa (talk) 23:19, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

It is probably worth requesting a copyedit for GA at WP:GOCE. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:37, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

User:Demiurge1000, what does that mean? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 21:57, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

What I mean is that wording like "tells the story of group British cavalrymen and high-ranking officers" might possibly be an impediment to its achieving GA status. There are two more obvious (to me) grammatical errors in the lead, and it does not seem to get better subsequently. Therefore a copyedit may be a good idea? It's free but not necessarily fast... --Demiurge1000 (talk) 16:03, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I see Demiurge1000. But, if it's just two grammar errors in the lead, a GA-nomininator could mention those two points in the review and I'll fix it, per the reviewers request. I don't think two potential grammar errors should fail the nomination. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 19:55, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good! Carry on! --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:58, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Demiurge1000, I did not noticed "a" was missing between "of" and "group". Obviously I can see that's wrong in any case. :) Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 21:43, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Presumptive

You have been investigating my page Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Vin09, I saw this also Talk:Khammam#Possible_copyright_problem. Can you explain me about that? Are my edits fine?--Vin09 (talk) 03:20, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

The content looked professionally written, and same wording appears here. So I re-wrote it, per the cleanup instructions, which can be found at the top of the case page. -- Diannaa (talk) 09:46, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Premakeerthi de Alwis

I have reverted back the page to your version.It is being apparently being edited by an indef blocked user User:Academiava3 and have filed the report Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wipeouting. Just for information.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 05:57, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Pharaoh. -- Diannaa (talk) 06:00, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Copyvio on Northern Cyprus

Hi Dianna. Sorry for the trouble. Just a question: Does this copyvio need to be revdeled? Thanks and take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 08:59, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

I found another and removed it. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 10:44, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi again Dianna. It is much worse than I thought. I removed several sections but I think there could be more which remain in the article. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 12:01, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

The main author of this mess is Hasmens who left some PAs on my talkpage, instead of recognising the copyvio problem of his edits, despite my warning on his talkpage. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 12:23, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Very good work Dr K! I have manually checked the editor's 50 edits to the article. You missed a bit in the Sports section. I think it is clean now. Best wishes, -- Diannaa (talk) 15:22, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Excellent work Dianna and professionally done, including the notification on the talkpage. :) Thank you very much. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 15:28, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Dianna. FYI, I have reported Hasmens at ANI. All the best. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 09:22, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

LSSAH Barbarossa Deployment

This division was not deployed with the LIV Army Corps as part of Army Group South. The LIV Army Corps operated in the extreme south as part of the 11th Army around Odessa. LSSAH participated in the attack toward Kiev, as part of III Corps, when it was taken out of reserve.

Depending on the source on June 22nd, it was either deployed in 1st Panzer Group reserve, or as part of the XIV Panzer Corps, which was in reserve along with SS "Viking" and 9th Panzer Division. Axis history, which is pretty reliable has it as part of the 1st Panzer Group reserve, here, but Russian sources, such as this map, put it in the XIV Panzer Corps.

We can say here that it was in "reserve" with Army Group South and that should be sufficient.

It is simple enough to say that it was in reserve with Army Group South, as its precise attachment is irrelevant, since it was not fighting.

Referencing this revision Livedawg (talk) 06:14, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Livedawg. I see you have also posted on the article talk page; that's good. The Axis History Forum is not considered a reliable source, as it consists of user-submitted content. I will have a look at this later. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:03, 20 September 2014 (UTC) I have formatted your post so that if fits on my narrow display; I hope you don't mind. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:17, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the formatting. There isn't any reference for LSSAH in LIV at the time. There are plenty of references for its presence in Lublin, the only real point of contention is what formation it was subordinated too when in reserve. I think the Soviet mapping is actually correct, having seen other references to the fact that it was attached to XIV Panzer Corps, but I don't have time to dig them up. Even if it was attached to XIV PzK, it wasn't for very long.

More important is the fact that placing it in LIV places it about 400km away from where it was, and out of position to join III Korps advance -- that is the meat of the issue.Livedawg (talk) 21:27, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Edited to add: And its Axis History that places LSSAH in the 1st PzG reserve, unlike the maps. It is the Russian maps that place it in XIV Panzer Corps.

It makes a lot more sense to place your comments on the article talk page, where all interested editors can see them. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:32, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes. Thanks for your attention. Livedawg (talk) 21:36, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

hitler

Hello, Diannaa. I know you are quite busy, but since you watch the page could you please keep on eye on the categories changes that are made to Hitler's article? Back in December I had to remove Category:German founders of automobile manufacturers. I also keep finding the status of his religion changed. He belongs in Category:Former Roman Catholics. Thanks. - Hoops gza (talk) 15:04, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

they also keep adding and removing categories regarding antisemitism. I don't know much about categorzation, so I usually stay out of it. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:12, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

mengele

I see that his pseudonyms have been removed. Do you know why this is? Several of them were referenced. - Hoops gza (talk) 15:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

There used to be a list of pseudonyms at the bottom of the article,

• Wolfgang Gerhard
• José Mengele
• Helmut Gregor[i]
• Rudolph Weiss
• Dr. Fausto Rindón
• S. Josi Alvers Aspiazu [sic]

Three of these (Helmut Gregor, Wolfgang Gerhard, José Mengele) were worked into the prose in the appropriate spots. The other three aliases were not mentioned in the sources I used when doing the re-write so I don't know when or where he used them, and I don't personally see any value in including them in list form, without any context. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:00, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

I see now. When I had originally asked you about this, I had merely done a search of "Fausto" with no luck and had not tried any of the others. Thanks for explaining. However, is it not worth mentioning within the article that "he used other pseudonyms, including..."? - Hoops gza (talk) 01:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC) Regarding the source for those other names, it only listed them without any depth. - Hoops gza (talk) 01:08, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Ya, that would be okay, but I'd rather see it in the prose somewhere, rather than as a list. How about at the bottom of "Later life and death", where the mention of the alias Wolfgang Gerhard makes a good segue? The source for Dr. Fausto Rindón and S. Josi Alvers Aspiazu was Christian Zentner, Friedemann Bedürftig. The Encyclopedia of the Third Reich, p. 586. Macmillan, New York, 1991. ISBN 0-02-897502-2. "Rudolph Weiss" was unsourced so it will have to be left out unless a source is found. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:22, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

I added in the two names where you said. Thanks. - Hoops gza (talk) 01:52, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of this. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:29, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I did not take the time to see that there is a citation format being used for that article. Thanks for cleaning that up. - Hoops gza (talk) 23:40, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Guatemalan vandal strikes again

190.106.222.87 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) And here I thought s/he had finally given up. Erick (talk) 19:43, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Range 190.106.222.0/25 blocked for 3 months. As usual, please let me know if you see them on IPs outside this range, and I will widen the block. Thanks, -- Diannaa (talk) 19:50, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Vandalizer

This IP address: 81.108.170.242 is a vandalizer. He has previously being blocked but is back again. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 14:55, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

It's a Virgin Media dynamic IP, which means it is frequently reassigned. The first step is to place a warning on the user talk page. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:34, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	For you thorough work in weeding out copyrighted text on a global scale. Truly appreciate it. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 17:34, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! -- Diannaa (talk) 18:29, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm curious, do you use any specialised tools for finding copyvios? what are they? otherwise personally I find it tough it manually. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 12:56, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

There's a really good tool, https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios, which helps find copy vios where the sources are online. It's easier if the editor provided sources for the edits. Some cases, I have taken books out of the library to find the material. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:01, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Very impressive. Yes, I've come across that tool before among various copyvio detectors...I'll try it out. Good day, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 16:28, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

More copyvions on Tourism in Northern Cyprus

Hi Dianna. I just found more copvios in Tourism in Northern Cyprus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Not sure if I found all of them. Thank you for your time. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 19:59, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Dr K, I have checked using the Copyvio Detector and it looks like you got it all. Thanks for helping with copyright clean-up. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:41, 26 September 2014 (UTC)q

Don't mention it Dianna. Thank you also for your advice and continuing assistance. All the best. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 01:08, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Awesome Wikipedian

Any chance I can get you to jump ship and become an Awesome Commoner? I'd love to be able to run an RFA for you on Commons some day. Can't blame a guy for dreaming... I hope you don't mind the cat, btw, it was certainly meant as a sincere compliment. Take care. INeverCry 23:05, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Hey thanks! I don't have time right now to take on any more wiki-tasks, but will keep this idea in mind for the future. Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 01:19, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

GA Cup 2014-15

Since the judges encourage me to, I am pleased to invite to participate in the GA Cup 2014-15. You can read everything about it on the project page. The whole goal of the cup is to have a friendly competition and loads of fun. Hope you participate. :) Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 01:17, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of File:Professor Alice Roberts Wiki Portrait.jpg

Dear Diannaa,

I wonder if you may have been a little hasty in deleting File:Professor Alice Roberts Wiki Portrait.jpg under CSD#F9 as I do not believe it is an unambigious copyright infringement from a Telegraph Q&A article. The same image also appears on alice-roberts.co.uk, and the user who uploaded the file, Scubadoo2 (talk · contribs), has previously claimed on their talk page to be the webmaster for that website. The image was uploaded in a higher resolution than those on either of those webpages, and included detailed metadata that those do not. The Telegraph webpage with the image does not include any attribution and the Q&A does not read like it was conducted in person, so it seems entirely possible that the Telegraph requested an image from the subject or their agent rather than sending either an interviewer or a photographer in person. I am not an expert in copyright matters or Wikipedia image policies and do not know if the uploader might need to provide further evidence of authorship, or in what form. Regards, Qwfp (talk) 09:48, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Since the image appeared on another location on the Internet before it was uploaded her, an OTRS ticket is required. The uploader may be the owner of the photograph, or they may just have copied the photo without permission. We don't know unless they provide proof to OTRS. I will post some instructions on their talk page. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:45, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Copyvio issue

Could you explain your words here: [2]. I think this is the associated edit [3] but I see no copyvio in the deleted content. Plain facts and figures (in this case dates and placenames) cannot be copyrighted, and the plot synopsis text is not identical to, or even very similar to, any text on the weightofchains.com site that I can see. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 20:14, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

There were two diffs where I removed copyright content.

(Redacted)

• Removed plot material: Copyvio detector shows the plot synopsis was almost identical to the source. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:48, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for answering so quickly. However, I don't think either blocks of text could be considered copyvio. Regardless of how identical it is, the first is just a list of city names. Facts cannot be copyrighted. And if there is a deliberate order to them, such as shooting schedule, that too cannot be copyrighted. It is all bare facts, no creative content. However, I would have cut most of that content anyway as is seems very peacocky, as if it was advertising how many cities they went to with the implication that this proves how great the film is. The second is a plot synopsis - one would expect there to be similarities between one brief synopsis and another synopsis of equal length if they are about the same film. - there would be something seriously wrong if they were not similar, and it would be OR for an editor to write his own synopsis. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 01:03, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

They are not similar, they are practically identical; it's been copied from the website almost in its entirety. This is a copyright violation, there's no doubt about it at all, so sorry. The removed plot summary from the article:

(Redacted) -- Diannaa (talk) 01:34, 30 September 2014 (UTC) {{copyvio plot}}

We must agree to disagree then. The alternative, for editors to write their own plot synopsis, would surely be OR. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 16:17, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Hmmm ... seems like I was wrong, OR is welcome in plot summaries, or rather it isn't counted as OR unless it goes into interpretation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Writing_about_fiction#Plot_summaries - this probably explains the many overly-detailed plot summaries in Wikipedia articles. Reminds me of the critic who condemned Wikipedia for having an article on the Star Wars film that was longer than the article for the Second World War. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 16:35, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Friedrich Dollmann article

Hi Diannnaa - Recently, I translated and moved over a significant amount of the German article on Friedrich Dollmann. Much of what was also added comes from historical works in my possession as well. Given your vigilance with textual clarity and the like, I would appreciate it if you could edit the content for grammatical, punctuation, word choice, and structural errors whenever you have time. Also - it probably now meets the GA standard - but I will leave that to your discretion. Thanks --Obenritter (talk) 17:29, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

I will look it over later and do some copy edits. Good Article status requires a formal review. Please see Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions for how to nominate an article. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:22, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Obenritter, when the GA-expansion/improvement of the article is done, let me know and I will happily review it. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 21:54, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jonas - Thanks but I have no dog in this fight whatsoever. I simply thought administrators could quickly upgrade articles based on content and citations. My efforts on Wikipedia are towards academic quality and substantiation. Honestly, I am uninterested in the administrative minutiae of qualifying an article, particularly given what seems to be an extensive process. Thanks for any editing that you do @ Diannaa.--Obenritter (talk) 23:34, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Once I have done the copy edits I will post it for assessment at WP:MILHIST (this is painless and hassle-free). It should qualify for B-class or C-class. Cheers, -- Diannaa (talk) 23:52, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi again Diannaa - thanks for your excellent editing. Your ability to reduce excess verbiage and write in active voice and succinctly is second to none. Great clean-up on the Dollmann article. I knew it needed some hacks as I translated it over the course of one evening and added some additional meat from my sources. You made that sucker bleed "real good" and it is much improved. You rock! :-) --Obenritter (talk) 00:59, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words. Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 01:00, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer

I'm requesting reviewer rights. I already have rollback rights and have plenty of experience on Wikipedia, see retired account: User:Jerm729. -- Thnx & Cheers -- JudeccaXIII (talk) 19:31, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi JudeccaXIII. Please file your request at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions -- Diannaa (talk) 21:54, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Prolific plagiarism

Hi Dianna. Sorry for the trouble, but Alexyflemming continues adding synthesis, original research, advertising and plagiarised material in the article of Northern Cyprus despite continuing warnings. For the latest, please see this diff where he plagiarised the sentence Northern Cyprus has firmly established itself as an independent actor in the international community from the Brian Zachary Mund source, while using WP:SYNTH to add: With the higher-education sector of Northern Cyprus constitute 40 percent of the economy of the country<ref>[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/sep/30/higher-education-turkish-republic-northern-cyprus/?page=1 Washington Times]</ref>and with more than one million tourist visits per year, which does not exist in the Brian Zachary Mund source. In addition the Washington Times source is an advertising insert, which Alexy Flemming also plagiarised. Please see this, where he plagiarised the sentence: Degrees from Northern Cypriot universities are recognized and accepted all over the world. from page 2 of the insert. I would appreciate any assistance or advice in this matter. Thank you again. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 15:26, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Update: Now he is resorting to personal attacks. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 19:06, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Dr K. The level of personal attacks does not warrant a block at this time in my opinion. I will help you watch for more copy vio additions. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:09, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much again Dianna. I appreciate your help and advice. I leave it entirely up to you to decide if anything is (or will be) actionable in this case. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 21:44, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Oorah (organization)

Hi Diannaa, any idea what to do with this?

(Coincidentally, the organization has a connection with an acquaintance of ours from New York, I believe... that might be how I got there, but I'm not certain.) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:12, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

I have removed most of the section on Programs; Wikipedia is not a directory. On the other hand, it's not much worse than many of our other articles on schools. The article looks like it's been edited by a series of SPAs such as "Correctioneditor7" and "Bloggergurl39". I will add it to my watch-list. Also, this. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:12, 2 October 2014 (UTC) I started some copy edits, and the controversy section is mostly about Kars4Kids and is already covered in that article. So I took it out. -- Diannaa (talk)

Thanks! Less = moar. Or moar = less, can't remember. Definitely an improvement anyway! --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:48, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Amon Goeth

I'm guessing that you're more likely to know than anyone, it would appear that the exact date of Goeth's marriage to Anny Geiger was added, and then someone removed the date, or else it was not put in in the first place. It simply reads "on October 1938". Could you please look into this? - Hoops gza (talk) 03:44, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Got it; it's in Crowe, on p.223. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:52, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Help with ruthless genre warrior

Hey, Diannaa could you help me with a user who had been block over 9 times for edit warring by the name of Dan56. He keeps insisting The Clash is a punk rock band, which isn't true considering they played other forms of rock music. As seen on London Calling (ska, reggae, jazz, hard rock,etc). It would be like calling the Bee Gees a Disco band just because of the Saturday Night Fever Soundtrack. On top of the its a violation of wikipedias generalizing of bands. As this user said on a talk page: "The guidelines are clear that we are to aim for generality when assigning genres to an artist. Sub-genres are to be avoided."--Fruitloop11 (talk) 06:23, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

There's already an RFC/U underway, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Dan56. You might like to comment there. I am not interested in getting involved in this issue, so sorry. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:53, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

(stalking) The RFC/U appears to have stalled, but I am familiar with Dan56, and also with some of the edit warring that goes in with genres. My take is that you should keep it simple and ask yourself - what would a non fan expect? The Clash did indeed introduce reggae and ska to their musical style, but first and foremost I think basic sources class them as punk. The first general-purpose source I could find is this one, and the opening paragraph defines them quite clearly as this. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:17, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Zyklon B

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Zyklon B 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 Legobot, on behalf of Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 16:00, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Zyklon B

The article Zyklon B you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Zyklon B for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 16:40, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Diannaa. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Your GA nomination of Zyklon B

The article Zyklon B you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Zyklon B for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 12:42, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

GOCE September 2014 bling

		The Minor Barnstar
		Thanks for copyediting a total of 1,383 words during the Guild of Copy Editors September drive, and for your help in maintaining the drive page. All the best, Miniapolis 17:35, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks M! -- Diannaa (talk) 18:31, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

John Michael D'Cunha

Hi

Note your edit and removal of certain sections. Was running tight on time and did a sloppy job of cut and paste of these sections. Agree to your removal.

Will now move these to the "talk page" so that I can refer this and rework on it once I again find time.

Let me know your thoughts. Prodigyhk (talk) 09:13, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

have now reworked most of the removed parts and included in article. Please check. If any issue, respond on the page talk. thanks Prodigyhk (talk) 10:03, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Possible reverse copyvio

Hi Dianna. Sorry to bother you again, but can you check the discussion indicated by this diff whenever you have the chance? Thank you and take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 21:36, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Replied there, -- Diannaa (talk) 21:52, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Dianna. Can this be restored, or we don't have enough certainty yet? Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 00:32, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

I think it's okay to re-add it. The IP who added the material was likely also the author of the paper. You might consider adding a {{Backwardscopy}} template to the article talk page. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:52, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much Dianna. Will do. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 00:56, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Potential article

I have devised a list of nicknames of Nazis, but now that I think about it, it would probably be vandalized frequently. If I were to submit it, would you be willing to keep an eye on it? - Hoops gza (talk) 23:17, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

I could watch-list it, for sure. Let me know if / when you have it go live. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:59, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

OK, I have created it, at List of nicknames of Nazis. Another one you may wish to watchlist is List of suicides in Nazi Germany. - Hoops gza (talk) 04:37, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I have watch-listed them both. -- Diannaa (talk) 12:50, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

FUR for File:Thomas_Eric_Duncan_2.jpg

You deleted https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Thomas_Eric_Duncan_2.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1 File:Thomas_Eric_Duncan_2.jpg. I had just today indicated I was writing a FUR, because it had just become necessary. Why? Would you please restore it so I can add the FUR? If not, why not?--{{U|Elvey}} ^(t•c) 23:27, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

There's no rationale for the inclusion of this non-free image in the article in question, which was 2014 Ebola virus cases in the United States. The inclusion of the image does not tell us anything about the subject of the article that cannot be described using words alone. Leaving it out is not detrimental to our understanding of the topic. It therefore fails WP:NFCC #1 and #8. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:45, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

OK.--{{U|Elvey}} ^(t•c) 00:50, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Solar Roadways

You have added temporary semiprotection to the Solar Roadways article. The rationale you gave was unsourced and poorly sourced additions. Where in WP:SEMI might I find "unsourced" much less "poorly sourced additions" as a rationale to protect a non-BLP article? Geogene (talk) 01:51, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, the edit summary was not very informative. Various non-confirmed accounts were edit warring unsourced material into the article. This had been going on since June. Another admin protected for a month at the beginning of July, and the disruptive activity resumed as soon as the protection expired. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:00, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

@OlEnglish: who also used semiprotected on the page. Those red-linked SPA's look pretty shady. But none of them were ever blocked. In fact, only two of them were even warned about edit warring. And all of them were, incidentally, attempting to add critical material to the article when the semiprotection was applied. Geogene (talk) 02:10, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I noticed that, but none of the additions were sourced. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:12, 10 October 2014 (UTC) WP:BLPGROUP says to be very cautious when adding negative information to articles, whether they are BLPs or not. A series of single-purpose accounts arrived at the article to insert unsourced negative information, or information sourced to YouTube videos. Protection seemed appropriate to me, more appropriate than blocking. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:19, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I agree that the socking is obvious. But, Economist is not a source? Diff:[4] Geogene (talk) 02:24, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

There was no sourced content added between July 2 (the day the previous protection expired) and August 9 (the day I protected the page). I am logging off now, see you tomorrow. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:34, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

And BLP protects commercial products from criticism on technical and economic grounds when the company's owner's names are posted in the article....? Really? Well, okay. That'll be news to a lot of large corporations. Geogene (talk) 02:38, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

This edit seems to contain the material being edit-warred over at the time Diannaa semi-protected the page. The edit contains two sentences. One of the two sentences contains an unsourced claim about public commentary on the company. The second, and more strongly worded sentence, contains an unsourced claim about public commentary on "the Brusaws' claims". That's not commentary about the company, that's commentary about two living persons. (The edit also fails WP:NPOV and lots of other things, but that's besides the point.) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:00, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. Looks like there's a community consensus that the action was a good one. Geogene (talk) 19:03, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

tagging for deletion of File:Tobacco cultivation (Virginia, ca. 1670).jpg.

I scanned that myself in 2005 from a textbook copy of a painting published in the USA before 1923. Rjensen (talk) 19:39, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Better source info is needed. Do you remember which book? -- Diannaa (talk) 20:01, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Need your help!

Hi friend. I'm current being accused of sockpuppetry. The users GamerPro64 and Dom497 are accusing me of being 84.127.80.114 who has repediatly being blocked for vandalizing and starting edit wars. Can you help me? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 14:31, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Question. Where in my statement for Dom does it say I accused you of being the IP? GamerPro64 14:38, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Question. How am I accusing you? I simply asked if you had any relation. You said you didn't, so it's all cool. Diannaa, please keep in mind that this user was participating in the GA Cup and when things didn't go his way, he got mad at the judges for no reason and wanted me to withdraw him from the competition a couple times. At the time, I thought he was reviewing articles properly so I convinced him to come back to the competition. Yesterday, I decided to take an in-depth look at his reviews and discovered that his GA reviews were not complete, so I gave him a warning (per the GA rules). He then asked me to withdraw him, but this time I took him seriously and carried out the request....then he retired from Wiki as a result. So I think it is fair to say he is out to get me.--Dom497 (talk) 14:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Dom497, lets take this from the beginning shall we? You asked me on my talk page if I had any connection to the IP user which I denied. But then, on your talk page, you say you received an email from another judge who suggested that I and the IP user might be the same person. What I would like to point out is that you with this edit said "This doesn't surprise me at all....another judge of the GA Cup just emailed me suggesting the IP and Jonas are the same person....it makes sense. But either way, just remember to never feed the troll". Exactly how is this not a personal attack and accusation? Instead of teaching me about the policies of the GA Cup, you might want to re-read Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 14:58, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

(ec x 5) Jonas is certainly not 84.127.80.114. He lives in Denmark, not Spain, and edits on Nazi Germany topics almost exclusively (not video games, bikes, or computer software). Obviously he is 83.93.219.86 (talk · contribs); you can see an edit to his own user page and to 1940 Field Marshal Ceremony, an article he created. Since we have overlapping interests, I have known him pretty much since he started editing, and can vouch for what he says. A couple of points: sockpuppetry is a very serious charge, not to be made lightly, and certainly should not be discussed on user talk pages, nor anywhere outside WP:SPI. While they will not link an individual IP to a user name, in this instance Jonas can easily be ruled out as being that IP in Spain, purely on behavioural grounds. Jonas has retired/threatened to retire several times already when he gets frustrated. Such behavior is not rare. The remark about trolling is certainly a personal attack, and random unsubstantiated accusations of sock puppetry have on occasion been considered personal attacks as well. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:05, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

"Instead of teaching me about the policies of the GA Cup" - If you did not understand how the GA Cup worked, you should have never joined.....we made that clear to every single participant.--Dom497 (talk) 15:07, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm done here, this is going no where and all it will result in is more arguing.--Dom497 (talk) 15:08, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Better you should apologise for this rude personal attack first: Diff of User talk:Dom497 -- Diannaa (talk) 15:12, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Maybe later....I'm not in the mood for any apologizes right now. The only reason this is all happening is because Jonas was rubber-stamping GA nominations (one thing turned into another).--Dom497 (talk) 15:14, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Overenthusiastic behaviour and a burning desire to win the contest do not make a man a troll, so sorry. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:18, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Desire to win a contest through cheating is what is made me mad....even after we emphasized to everyone that they would be disqualified if caught. He knew what he was getting into and is getting mad for being caught. I'll apologize, I give you my word on that, but I need time to cool off so I can make it meaningful.--Dom497 (talk) 15:23, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Dom497, I don't want to be a child and start an argument out of another argument, but saying I cheated to win is not true and you know that. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 15:29, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

No not really, if I were to check all of your reviews, would I find several more to be incomplete? Just because we put check marks beside them doesn't necessarily mean that the reviews are complete.--Dom497 (talk) 15:32, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Diannaa, I'm also a judge in the GA Cup, so I'll apologize on behalf of the judges for accusing Jonas of sockpuppetry. I won't apologize, though, for protecting the integrity of the competition. Jonas might not have been guilty of sockpuppetry, but he's definitely guilty of trying to cheat. You can't blame us for considering that the IP is Jonas' sockpuppet, based on this. It's also clear that Jonas was using the GA Cup to win a video game, which is inappropriate. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 15:40, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

As most people know by now, I was really determined to win the competition, so naturally I reviewed as many articles I possibly could. I can assure that I have not a single time made a drive-by review in the belief I could get away with it. I think the first ten-fifteen reviews I made I left a bunch of suggestions (not necessary suggestions for improvements), but as I felt my leading place in the cup was threatened, I neglected the suggestion part more and more, but this does not mean I didn't read them through or reviewed them properly. Because I was reviewing articles both day and night I'd say it's predicable I overlooked a few grammar errors in an article or two, but declaring my overall contribution to the cup as cheating would be unfair. Can't we both at least agree on that? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 15:43, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

@Figureskatingfan: I agree it's mandatory to protect the integrity of the competition and the GA process and by extension the encyclopedia as a whole. All reviews done during the contest must be of the highest quality and all reviews by all participants should be checked to ensure that this is happening. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:19, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

@Figureskatingfan:, I agree on that too and I made all my reviews in good faith and in the belief they were high quality reviews, which by far most of them are. One of the articles categorized as "not properly reviewed" was only being categorized as that because I overlooked two grammar errors in my initial review. Don't you think that's overreacting? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 16:52, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

@Jonas Vinther:, I'm sure that there were more than two grammar errors. The articles that I checked I'd stop at a certain point and judge if the article was reviewed completely. It's not our responsibility as judges to review your review; just to check if it was done according to the rules. But I'm done, so I won't try and explain anything more to you. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:21, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Article history

Can you translate this to an attribution on the talk, as you did for Locus iste? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:44, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, done. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:24, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:43, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Ywreuv

One of the main activities of this editor has been stalking Roscelese.[5] This editor was almost blocked for this before.[6]. I'm considering an indefinite block now, rather than let this go on any further. Comments? Pinging User:Drmies, User:Mastcell and User:Viriditas. Dougweller (talk) 12:03, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

I would have no objection to an indefinite block. The edits I reviewed don't show any promise. --Diannaa (talk) 14:09, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Ditto. Drmies (talk) 14:21, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 15:56, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. It was late and I wasn't sure what to do, so I just blocked for the edit warring aspect. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:23, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Harassment from the SPA

Hi Dianna. The SPA has increased the attacks recently: Yesterday he attacked me at Talk:Northern_Cyprus-note: You can deceive ordinary users, but I am a flemish Northern Cyprus expert! Today he came to my talkpage to tell me: Armenians said billions of times "genocide" since 1915 just as Greek Cypriots say billions of times "invasion" since 1974 and I said One can bury his head in the sand like an ostrich till the hunter (truth) faces him.. Please, transmit my this message to GC fanatics (perhaps you may know some of them) along with USA Federal Court decision so that they can take their heads out of sands. I think he thinks he is a hunter for the truth and he comes to my talk to track me down. This is pure harassment from the SPA. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 19:19, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

I have placed a warning on the user's talk page. You might like to post at ANI or ask for discretionary sanctions as I feel out of my depth here. It never seems quite blatant enough for a block in my opinion, though other admins might feel a block is warranted. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:39, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

No problem. Thank you Dianna. I will see what I can do. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 19:41, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Dianna. FYI. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 23:41, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

84.127.80.114

Now that we're on the subject, could you throw him/her yet another warning or block him for some time? He's continuing to use my name and annoy me, even after I personally told him not to on his talk page. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 14:42, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

It's a lucky thing being annoying is not blockable, or we would all be in trouble I'm afraid. i've posted on his talk page. I suggest you go to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#GA project goal challenge and tell him directly that you are not interested in his offer. Hopefully that will be the end of it. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:09, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Copyright issues with editor you've dealt with

See[7] - the last few edits have been sourced to [8], a forum with a number of articles from newspapers added to it by an arun.vr - these are clearly copyright (and of course we don't use forums as a source). I also cannot tell if the text added is copyvio as I can't read the sources. His talk page is full of copyvio notices, mainly images. Any suggestions? Dougweller (talk) 16:12, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

I see that the content has now been removed from all four articles where he added it. I've posted on his talk page asking him not to link to copy vio material. Hope this helps. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:37, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 13:40, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Utah Beach

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Utah Beach 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 Legobot, on behalf of Jonas Vinther -- Jonas Vinther (talk) 21:20, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Deleted File:Mushtaq Pahalgami.jpeg

This is regarding the jpeg image file Mushtaq Pahalgami deleted due to lack of proper licensing. Have made the required edits, provided necessary credits and signed the free use license. Plese let know how to upload it again. Best.Samar Samar khurshid (talk) 21:28, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

I notice that the image was taken by Himalaya Discover Studio, Tulyan, Pahalgam. They are the copyright holders of the image, and will have to give permission for us to display the image here. Please have them contact the OTRS team using the instructions at WP:Consent. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:32, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Nuremberg Laws

Hello, I saw you did an "undo" on my edit. I am new and would like to improve the article. Please, can you keep an eye on what I do? Any suggestions are welcome. I did an undo on your undo, if that makes sense. I put an explanation, too. It was just to delete some duplicate information. Thanks. --YeOldeGentleman (talk) 21:38, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi there and welcome to Wikipedia. Using the edit summary, especially when deleting content, is a good way to inform others as to the reason for your edit. Sorry but I don't have time to monitor your contribs. the Teahouse is a great resource for new editors. Good luck, -- Diannaa (talk) 22:29, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Utah Beach

The article Utah Beach you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Utah Beach for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jonas Vinther -- Jonas Vinther (talk) 22:00, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Utah Beach

The article Utah Beach you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Utah Beach for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jonas Vinther -- Jonas Vinther (talk) 00:02, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Excellent! Diannaa, you could improve Utah Saints to GA standard next perhaps! :) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:55, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Oh thanks for the spelling correction over there! Luckilyy I didn't say "parapoopers" -- Diannaa (talk) 20:23, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Parapoopers were a TOP Secret unit who wore a dark earth brown uniform, I recall. But really, congrats on yet another GA. Cheers, Kierzek (talk) 20:30, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Abstention from Editorial Madness

Thanks for all your assistance in the past. Please excuse my abstention from Wikipedia for a time at least, as I am not used to such trivial madness. Editors who elect to attack and make sweeping assumptions, failure to properly coach new translators on editorials nuances related to copyright etc.,, and PAs acting like Gauleiters is not why I joined Wikipedia. My time is much more valuable than this and I refuse to be subjected to petty scrutiny. Disagreeing with others is not something English speakers do well so it seems. This makes me miss Germany, where argument = learning. So much for my numerous academic contributions or my financial donations to the Wikipedia organization. My participation on both fronts is soon to wane. You've been awesome - unlike many others. I have been threatened by the powers that be so they can have it. I'll probably just get blocked altogether if I don't bow out now for a time. Best Regards. --Obenritter (talk) 00:46, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words, Obenritter. Have a good wikibreak, I hope to see you editing here again someday soon. Best wishes, -- Diannaa (talk) 01:08, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Yet another rule that I was unaware of about editing here. The question becomes, why would we waste server space on a resolved issue? But OK, no problem. --Obenritter (talk) 17:29, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

The place is mad with rules, but rules are necessary so that people behave in predictable ways. It helps us keep order on this large and intricate website. When people arrive at a talk page, they expect all past posts to either be visible on the page or visible in an archive. (There are a few exceptions.) What may not be obvious is that removing posts does not save server space. Even material deleted by administrators is still present on the servers, and can be viewed by admins. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:19, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

After a break, come on back Obenritter; the door is always open. Kierzek (talk) 20:31, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

I absolutely agree. Your contributions are much appreciated -- Diannaa (talk) 20:33, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Deletionist move without giving a rationale?

I appreciate that you are an admin but IMHO you are still required to provide a rationale when gutting a well-cited NPOV contribution to a section which is left threadbare. I think that discussion belongs on the article talk page thanks. Wikidgood (talk) 23:50, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Please read the edit summary, where I said that I have moved the content to the sub-article, Hitler in popular culture. I am working right now on cleaning up the addition and formatting the citations. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:52, 19 October 2014 (UTC) It's good, well-sourced content, but the main article is already too big (11,685 words; the upper limit is supposed to be 10,000) so I moved it to the sub-article and used it as part of the lead, as it gives a nice overview. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:01, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you

Hello! I am new so still trying to find out how various things work. I happened to see in passing on some article's Talk that links to commercial websites are not permissible on Wikipedia. Is this right? My reason for checking is that someone else just told me that useful links are OK, but the useful link is to Amazon. Here: [9].

So my question is, are links to commercial websites OK so long as they are 'useful', if that makes sense? Sorry to trouble you with such a noob question. --YeOldeGentleman (talk) 16:35, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

No question too big or too small! What we're trying to avoid is (for example) offering links to Amazon at the bottom of an article on an author, as a place to buy that author's books. The particular diff shows a user restoring links offered as part of a citation. Personally I don't think Google or Amazon book links are a very useful part of a citation, as the content can be verified by getting the book from the library (I work at a library, so this is pretty easy for me to do). Google book links I find to be quite useless as a person is only able to look at a book about 10 times and no more; that book will no longer be searchable from my IP (buy the book, sayeth Google). And what a person is able to view will vary from country to country and region to region. But some people think they are useful, so it's best not to strip them from citations without posting on the article talk page first. There's more information on external links at Wikipedia:External links. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:42, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thank you! --YeOldeGentleman (talk) 07:57, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

It would have been nice....

Could have pinged me before closing the thread. Not so I could prevent it but could haved developed content..oh well. Wikidgood (talk) 07:15, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Research into Wikipedia's holocaust-related articles

Hi Diannaa, just mentioning this in case it's of interest; here

I haven't read it properly, but I am guessing the articles studied may be relatively limited in number or scope, since there seems to be an assertion that none of them (on any Wikipedia) were at "Good" status. So perhaps they excluded topic-central biographies like Amon Goeth or Oskar Schindler, and focused instead on more general articles. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:40, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks; I will read it when I have time. I have tweekd your link, which is too wide for my monitor -- Diannaa (talk) 18:53, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm going through the thesis now; interesting read. Just finished p. 94, i.e. end of chap 3; will read rest of it tomorrow. Just to clarify one thing about the author's statement that "none of the Holocaust articles is rated 'good quality'" (p. 70): he means only that none of the English-, German-, and Dutch-language Holocaust main articles, which he is comparing, are 'good'; he does not mean that there are no 'good' Holocaust-related articles at all.
--YeOldeGentleman (talk) 21:39, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Knowledgekid87

Hi,

Wouldnt fancy blocking the duckDr. Foster went to... hitting up this talk page as well would you. Amortias (T)(C) 23:31, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

The user was blocked by TParis. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:32, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Never mind someone did it while I was posting this. Amortias (T)(C) 23:33, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

File:SGBCommander.png

I change my mind about this image. The subject of this image is very, very, very rare to find. I don't think most people are aware of using their own photos of the product for Wikimedia Commons. It was used in Super Game Boy as non-free image. Undelete then? --George Ho (talk) 07:08, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

A problem with an edit-warring IP user. What to do?

Hi Diannaa! Lately I've been having a problem with some annonymous user who is hiding under this IP address: User:66.191.10.150.

Here are his contributions including the deletion of my SOURCED data: [10]

Im talking about these two articles:

Sokollu Mehmed Pasha

Sokollu

You can check the history of edits of both of these articles as well.

To give you a better view on the problem, let me tell you the basic information: The whole Sokollu family was Ottoman or Bosnian by nationality, but their ancestors were ethnically Serbian. I am a historian, so I'm sure about it. Their original religion was Christianity and their ancestors belonged to the Serbian Orthodox church. Noone can deny it. BUT in the English version of Wikipedia, those information are carefully omitted by some general terms.

Now this IP user claims, that Sokollu (Sokolović) had no Serbian origin as he reverts my contributions. Moreover, he denies the fact, that Sokolović is a pure Serbian last name, and it's even more Croatian, than Bosnian (he deleted the language adnotation, leaving only "Bosnian"). I have reasonable prospects that this IP user is anti-Serbian as I could easily conclude it from his other contributions.

I wanted to talk to him about this problem, so we could maybe explain some things to each other and solve this case, you can read this: User_talk:66.191.10.150#Mehmed_Pasha_Sokollu_was_a_Bosnian_Serb_.28a_Serbian_citizen_of_Bosnia.29 Talk:Sokollu_Mehmed_Pasha#He_was_Serb._Enough_is_enough

He didn't respond, but instead he reverted my contribution again. I don't know what to do. Please help. Yatzhek (talk) 21:14, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

The Balkans as a topic area has been placed under discretionary sanctions by the Arbitration Committee. This is the wrong place to post as I have no experience in this area. Sorry, -- Diannaa (talk) 23:03, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

I understand. And do you know someone who could help here? I'm really trying to keep the truth on Wikipedia, while many editors' aim is to make lies pass as truth, and they usually succeed in this, while I'm labelled as "the bad guy". Yatzhek (talk) 21:28, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Editing in that topic area is always contentious and I can understand your frustration. However I don't see how the sources provided in this edit back up your assertion as two of them are dead links and the third says "son of a Bosnian priest", which contradicts your addition of "ethnic Serbian". General advice: straight edit warring should be reported to the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Questions about the validity of sources can be presented at the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:48, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Diannaa! I will keep your suggestions in mind. Yatzhek (talk) 19:44, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Photos at an RAF museum possible?

Hi Diannaa. I know you are busy but maybe you can give me a steer here. I recently visited RAF Museum Hendon and was entranced by a beautiful restoration of the fuselage of a Supermarine Southampton, which had been used as a houseboat until it foundered in the early 30s. It was recovered and restored in the 80s. It is the only surviving example in existence. It shows interiors, and photos with accompanying text would make a great addition to the article, as a new "survivors" section. What to do? Should I approach them by email? Is there any previous wiki contact with the museum? Any advice greatly appreciated. Irondome (talk) 00:02, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

The way to do it is to approach them via email and ask for release under a Wikipedia-compatible license. If they agree to do this, they will need to sent a permission email directly to the OTRS team specifying which images and which license. There's a sample permission email and other instructions at Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries. Then you would upload the images and mark them {{OTRS pending}} and an OTRS team member matches them up with the permission email and adds the OTRS tag to each image. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:11, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Much appreciated! Irondome (talk) 00:13, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Longerich and Goebbels

Though you may be well aware, I thought I would let you know that Peter Longerich's new biography (in English) on Joseph Goebbels is due to hit stores 19 May 2015, quite simply titled: Goebbels: A Biography. If it is half as good as his bio on Himmler, it should be worth a purchase and help out nicely in the event that you may want to work on bringing Goebbels's article up to good status. I thought I should let @Kierzek: know about this, too, as you both seem to tag-team on bringing articles up to good status. - Hoops gza (talk) 01:12, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Yah, we have a copy on order at the library where I work. I see that unfortunately the publication date has been pushed back! I thought it was coming this month :/ I bought a copy of Manvell & Fraenkel and will bring in some other stuff on inter-library loan as well, but not until the Longerich book is in hand. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:24, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, Diannaa and I had discussed using the new book to bring Goebbels back up to GA status. I guess we will have to wait a bit longer to work on the article. Hoops, thanks for the thought. Kierzek (talk) 02:04, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Important question, would appreciate fast reply friend

What's the difference between "given name" and "personal name"? Could you be so kind to use both terms in a sentence for me? Cheers in advance. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 20:29, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

I've never heard the expression "personal name" so I'm afraid I can't help with this. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:01, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Neither did I, but Wikipedia has an article named personal name and I was wondering if you, while writing an article about a name, should write "Jonas is a given name" or "Jonas is a personal name"? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 21:21, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

I would go with "given name" or "first name" as both of these are commonly used, and both appear in the Oxford Dictionary. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:24, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

One last question: should foreign names be in italics? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 21:38, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

No -- Diannaa (talk) 21:41, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

NBA 2K15

Extend PC time? --George Ho (talk) 03:41, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

@George Ho: Everything seems okay so far. Please request another round of protection at RFPP if the situation changes. -- Diannaa (talk) 03:22, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Anastasia

Hi friend. I've just completed re-writing the Anastasia article with the hopes it can become a GA-class article. As I re-wrote the article I quickly discovered it would not be a very long article because it's a name and how much you can say about a name is very limited. Even so, I'm fairly proud about the length I managed to expand the article to, and also, the GA-criteria does not, as we talked about here, mention a certain length an article must have to be a GA-class article - it's all about comprehensiveness. Because I can't think of anything else to add or edit on the article, I would very much appreciate if you'd glance over the article and give me some feedback (if you have any). Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 17:00, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

I don't know if there's enough material there for GA, but it's a nice little article. I've done some copy edits etc. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:03, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for you ce's. If you click here you can see a gallery section of famous people with name which I included in one version. Do you think it should be re-added? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 22:00, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

My opinion is No, per the advice at WP:Gallery. Also, you would be restricted to only those persons for whom we have an image. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:05, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

OK, I will refrain from re-adding it. With these article improvements I'm going to nominate the article for GA-status. Let's hope it will pass. :) Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 22:13, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello Diannaa:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – The Herald 12:07, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

File:Anastasiya Tolmachevy 2014.jpg

Could you please delete that image? I intent to re-upload it under the proper section. Cheers in advance. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 15:57, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Deleted. Don't re-upload it; non-free images of living people do not qualify for fair use. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:37, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

I uploaded it under the wrong source and copyright information. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 20:01, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

I have decided to replace it with File:Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna Crisco edit letters removed.jpg, but I can't think of the proper caption. If you have a suggest for a caption, please add it. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 20:15, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Walther von Brauchitsch

As you may or may not know, I have nominated Brauchitsch for FA-status as getting it to GA-status. An editor has asked me to crop the watermarks of File:Bundesarchiv Bild 183-E00780, Walther von Brauchitsch.jpg and File:Bundesarchiv_Bild_102-01817A,_v._Rundstedt,_v._Fritsch,_v._Blomberg.jpg. As I don't know how to it, could you be so kind? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 13:58, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Done. For more sophisticated image work you can post a request at the Wikipedia:Graphics Lab. Straightening crooked photos, adjustments to exposure and color, etc. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:17, 28 October 2014 (UTC) Good luck with your FA nomination ~! -- Diannaa (talk) 14:19, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

RE: Orphaned non-free image File:Forest School, Horsham Logo.jpg

Hi, I mentioned that the image in question is obsolete (check the template on the image's page), and has been replaced by a png of the same name. Feel free to delete it! :) ∫ A Y^™ — Preceding undated comment added 13:53, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Ember First Appearance.png

I uploaded a new version of the file with reduced resolution. However, the old version with higher resolution is still on the file page as the original image. Does the original image have to be removed and if so how do I do that without deleting the low resolution file too? PointsofNoReturn (talk) 22:35, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

An administrator will have to delete the old revision. I have tagged it to get it into the queue. The new image is still too big. As a rule of thumb, multiply the height by the width and the result has to be less than 100,000. I have shrunk it some more for you. There's also a bot that goes around re-sizing images. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:45, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Ok. Thank you for your help. I didn't know the 100,000 pixel rule before but now I do. Thanks again. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 22:49, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Diannaa. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard.
Message added 15:08, 31 October 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:08, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Happy Halloween!!!

Wilhelmina Will has given you some caramel and a candy apple! Caramel and candy-coated apples are fun Halloween treats, and promote WikiLove on Halloween. Hopefully these have made your Halloween (and the proceeding days) much sweeter. Happy Halloween! '"On Psych, A USA Network TV series Episode 8, The Tao of Gus, Season 6, Shawn refers to pumpkins as "Halloween Apples" because he thinks all round fruits are a type of apple. If Trick-or-treaters come your way, add {{subst:Halloween apples}} to their talkpage with a spoooooky message!

Cheers! "We could read for-EVER; reading round the wiki!" (talk) 17:45, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello Diannaa:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    –  ΤheQ Editor  ^Talk? 18:14, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Walther von Brauchitsch

Would appreciate your vote here here. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 16:14, 31 October 2014 (UTC)