User talk:JJMC89/Archives/2021/August

Category:Disney+ series ID not in Wikidata has been nominated for merging

Category:Disney+ series ID not in Wikidata has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Terasail^[✉️] 16:13, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Desist botting and read messages, please

Bot operator: you keep taking action without reading or replying to my counter-actions on Marzani & Munsell: please visit edit history, read my responses, and then talk to me so we can agree on next (if any) action). Respectfully - Aboudaqn (talk) 15:39, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

2nd request: Bot-maker-operator: please dis-automate your bot and read replies before taking action yet again - your bot is removing some images but not others, which makes no sense: please talk to me first and then let's agree to appropriate action; Undid revision 1037128018 by JJMC89 bot (talk) - Aboudaqn (talk) 18:55, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

No. You are required to comply with the policy. Further reverts may lead to you being blocked. — JJMC89 18:56, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Aboudaqn, I side with JJMC89, Every Wikipedia User including Me and you are required comply with the policy, and by the way that photo on the article is Copyrighted and the Author or copyright owner is unknown that still makes it an WP:NFCC Violation. Chip3004 (talk) 19:22, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)@Aboudaqn: I've removed the files from "Marzani & Munson" again since their use in the article still doesn't comply with relevant Wikipedia policy. I also left you a bit more detailed explanation as to why the bot kept removing the files on your user talk page. Edit warring (regardless of no matter how right you think you are) is generally not a wise thing to do; so, before you try and re-add those files to the article again, I strongly suggest you slow down a bit and try to understand why they keep being removed.

The bot left an edit summary explaining why it removed the files each time it removed them, and these edit summaries contain links to relevant pages where you can find more information or find assistance. If you didn't understand the edit summary the first time or didn't notice the links, then that's OK. Image use (particularly non-free content use) on Wikipedia can be tricky sometimes because there can be lots of restrictions placed on it, and mistakes are really easy to make. The first time and maybe the second time you re-added the files aren't really a problem because others are going to assume good faith; however, the third and fourth times you re-added the files are where you went wrong per WP:3RR, WP:EW and WP:IDHT and that's were you're going to find yourself having problems. The bot isn't going to stop doing what it has been set up to do just because you don't like it or agree with it; moreover, in this case, the bot is completely correctly and is doing what it's supposed to be doing in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policy related to non-free content use. So, if you continue to mistakenly assume the bot is the problem and continue to try and force those files into that article without complying with relevant policy, JJMC89 or some other administrator is going to likely end up blocking your account. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:12, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

JJMC89 bot

Hello, JJMC89,

I've wondered, can your bot empty categories outside of a CFD decision? Where I've seen this come up is when categories created by a sockpuppet are tagged for speedy deletion and they still contain pages. I don't help out at CFD so I didn't know if a tagged category like this could be listed to be emptied and deleted or whether it needed to be nominated for deletion and not be speedied (unless an editor manually removed all of the category contents). Thanks for your help. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:50, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

A reply would be nice, JJMC89, you're the expert on your bot. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:08, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Liz: I haven't been around much. While CFDW can be used for the bot to handle such cases, I strongly perfer that it isn't since it will not have accurate log entries or edit summaries. I recommend admins use WP:CATALOT to empty if there are more pages in the category than they want to manually remove. If using a bot is warranted due to the volume of pages, then I can trigger mine manually with custom edit summaries and log entries. — JJMC89 02:05, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, I appreciate the reply. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:43, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

UTRS enquiry

Hi JJMC, hope you're well. If you get a chance, can you have a squiz at OTRS ticket# 2021081010003503 ? Relates to UTRS and a potential tech issue? Cheers, Daniel (talk) 23:36, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

@Daniel: I left a note on the ticket. — JJMC89 01:20, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Edit notice for List of flags by color combination

HI JJMC89. Do you think a non-free edit notice would help out at List of flags by color combination? It seems to be one of the "List of flag" articles which attracts a fair amount of inappropriate non-free content use. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:24, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

I've added it. — JJMC89 01:18, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:46, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Request

Hi, I am Ram Dhaneesh, The article that I have created Salem Local Planning Authority is proposed for deletion by User:Onel5969 for the reason, the Article has not provided with reliable sources other than the concerned government website, but now the article is cited with more reliable sources from Times of India, and more, now the Article is in good status, more than this Wikipedia is most trusted site in world, it may help many of visitors to Know about Salem Local Planning Authority, so please disclose the deletion request, Thank you! Dhaneesh 🙃 Ram 08:24, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Notable Person

Please check this page Draft:Shweta Bhattacharya she is notable Person on Wikipedia she acting on notable television show. this article are approved 2 time but a user move it draft for review. you can also check my talk page this page are approved 2 time. plase you do something for this page🙏🙏 Tanvirnahid565 (talk) 16:43, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

KARR image

• File:Karrimage.jpg
• bot removal

Hi JJMC89.

So this is a simple merge of info. Can you help? - jc37 22:05, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

New page creation

Hi, I am going to create page of Iltija which was previously deleted by you due to violation of ban or block. Please, review it. Phaans (talk) 10:15, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

2020 Summer Olympics pictograms

Hi JJMC89. You might want to take a look at 2020 Summer Olympics pictograms because JJMC89 bot has had to remove non-free files from the article on multiple times over the last day or so. Moreover, someone seems to have tried to add “deny bot” syntax to the article as well to stop the bot. This seems just to be a big misunderstanding about NFCC#10c and non-free use rationales, and why the bot keeps removing the files. FWIW, I came across this at WT:NFCC#New editor in need of help. — Marchjuly (talk) 15:06, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Just want to update that this seems now resolved; so, not sure if anything else needs to be done here. It does seem strange though that someone would try and "deny" the bot from removing clear NFCC#10c violations from articles. I'm not aware of technical points raised by Hammersoft below, but being able to neuter the bot in such a way could have quite an impact on its effectiveness (and I think it's really been effective). -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:23, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/JJMC89 bot 12

Greetings. While working on explaining the bot's actions on 2020 Summer Olympics pictograms, I noted a user attempting to deny the bot doing this work [1]. The bot is not exclusion compliant for this task, so the bot continued despite the attempt to stop it [2]. At User:JJMC89_bot#Tasks, it notes the bot is not exclusion compliant for this task. I don't think it should be exclusion compliant, and I'm glad it isn't. But, I note that at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/JJMC89 bot 12, when it was approved it was approved as exclusion compliant. I'm not attempting to do any bureaucratic nit picking here. I just want to understand. Was there a discussion to make it not exclusion compliant? I don't want to point to the bot and say it's not exclusion compliant and then have an editor come back at me or the bot saying it was supposed to be exclusion compliant and isn't. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:25, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Just going to add that JJMC89 bot and its work was specifically cited here and seems to be the main impetus behind this; so, if there any question as to whether the bot should be exclusion compliant, then perhaps that needs to resolved somehow asap. FWIW, as I mentioned above, allowing the bot to be stopped from doing its intended task by simply adding a template to the affected article seems like a big mistake. I don't think the bot is making any mistakes since I often look at User:JJMC89 bot/report/NFCC violations when it appears on my watchlist. I don't check each and every file the bot finds, but the one's I have checked seem to have been appropriately removed (particularly the NFCC#9 ones).

One suggestion might be to somehow tweak the edit summary left by the bot so that things are a little more spelled out for those unfamiliar with the NFCC. I don't think the current edit summary is bad per se, but the bot often needs to go back to the same articles and remove the same files because they've been re-added without addressing the NFCC#10c issue. Of course, this could be a case of someone simply not caring about the NFCC, but it also could be well-meaning editors just not knowing any better. Perhaps there's a way for a brief notification (similar to Template:Missing rationale2) to be also added to the article talk page or user talk pages.

One more thing that I've noticed is that when the bot removes a non-free file for NFCC#10c reasons, there are sometimes other NFCCP issues involved as well. I don't expect the bot to necessarily be able to detect these, but in some cases the reason why a file had been previously removed was due to a consensus at FFD or NFCR. Is there a way for the bot to know whether a file it's removing had been previously been removed per some consensus? If there is and a link to that discussion could also be added to the edit summary, then that might help avoid some re-adding of files. The edit summary left by the bot makes it seem in these cases that all that is needed is for a rationale to be provided; however, if prior consensus has determined that a valid rationale can't be provided, then this could be confusing when the file is subsequently removed again by a human editor. Perhaps there's no way around this kind of thing, but it's something that I've occasionally noticed when checking files removed by the bot. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:19, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

More copyvio image uploads by User:Sharkman720

JJMC89, on 23 September 2020, you deleted several copyrighted images uploaded by Sharkman720 to various Dancing with the Stars articles. It appears these same copyrighted images were uploaded again yesterday, with false claims of being by the uploader and with both Gnu 1.2 and CC 4.0 licenses. These should be deleted right away, and I'd like to suggest that a block is in order. (I would have nominated them for F9 myself, but couldn't figure out where the images came from, since no source is given beyond a "wiki".) Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:57, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Ok I remove them. Eric Sharkey 05:12, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

I've figured out how to do the F9 speedy deletion request, so all four files are now up for deletion; Sharkman720 has indeed removed the images from the four articles. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:18, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

How long is bot active?

Hi, just wondering how long the bot keeps running in relation to CfDs? There is one I am administering that successfully changed one name to another, but I am now attempting to add a new category with the original name where relevant - but the bot is still running and has reverted it back to the amended name (see here). Not a big deal, just looking for a time frame to create this additional cat successfully. Thanks. Crowsus (talk) 13:26, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Why Delete my edits ?

Why are you deleting my edits. I'm been the one who's included so many photos and created the Result table. I am not editing anything wrong . Then what is your problem. If you repeat this, I will delete all my own edits, including the result box that I have prepared for so long. Mins pk (talk) 11:05, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Adding Template:Draft categories?

Hi there! I see that you talked about having your bot add {{Draft categories}} in this discussion. However, I sometimes find drafts where your bot has kindly added {{drafts moved from mainspace}} but not {{Draft categories}}, such as Draft:Kawsar Khan. Is there a way to tweak your bot to programmatically add {{Draft categories}} so it doesn't have to be done manually? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 20:42, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

File:Land of the Lost (1974 TV series).jpg usage

JJMC89,

I used the File:Land_of_the_Lost_(1974_TV_series).jpg on the Wesley Eure article, because he was the primary star of that show almost 50 years ago. Your bot removed it, claiming I had not given a fair use rationale for it. So I did a rationale and restored the image on the page. Now you've removed it again and removed the fair use rationale. You claim the file lacks "contextual significance" in that article? You must be unaware that the article's subject achieved notability from starring on that show; and continues to be known primarily for that work even after almost 50 years later. See here and here. So the "contextual significance" is pretty self-evident. Additionally, the article currently lacks any other imagery beyond the infobox, so the image is used there as noted, to illustrate the subject's primary notability. It also cannot be substituted with some other image to accomplish that objective. It is the fair use of a low res, limited use of an image that is, not only already on this project, but is almost 50 years old. So WP:NFCC#8 doesn't apply, but WP:FUR does. So the image needs to be restored. If you still disagree, we can discuss it. If not, either you can restore the image and the fair use rationale, or I can. X4n6 (talk) 10:34, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Transistors for you!

FormalDude has given you transistors! Transistors promote WikiLove (📖💞) and hopefully this one has made your day more efficient. It is the food best preferred by bots. 🤖 Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else transistors, whether it be someone you have had robot wars with in the past or a good friend.

For being a good bot and reminding me to reduce the image size at File:Pan Sophic Fraternity Crest.png.

Spread the goodness of transistors by adding {{subst:Transistors for you}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

––FormalDude talk 01:34, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

The return of a sock

If you have a minute, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Haiyenslna appears to have returned. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:41, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick block and tag. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:24, 31 August 2021 (UTC)