User talk:JJMC89/Archives/2024/October

JJMC89 Bot removed Image Files on my User Page

Hello JJMC89 it is great to talk to you the first time. I'm a 13 year Wikipedia user. And I returned to the platform on this new account.

2 years ago... I saw I edited my user page on my 2nd Wikipedia account (This account) and it said on JJMC89 Bot 'Describe What you changed' text and said "Removed WP:NFCC violation(s). Non-free files are only permitted in articles." Was it because of copyrighted images? And I don't have the rights to use that image since the image can only be used in articles? Thank you and have a great blessed day! :) Legoweatherboy (talk) 03:18, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, per WP:NFCC#9, non-free images are only permitted in articles. — JJMC89 18:36, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. If I remembering this correctly. There is a notice on non-free image files? Legoweatherboy (talk) 21:07, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Each file has a license. Ones that are not free will have one of the non-free ones. — JJMC89 18:00, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Got it. Thank you for helping me out. Legoweatherboy (talk) 19:10, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

One moment, last thing. What are the block times if you continue to put non-free files on your user page. When the bot keeps reverting changes.

Warning, Temporary Block, then Permanent Block, etc. Legoweatherboy (talk) 15:53, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Titles ending in /

Are you sure about this? There's a bunch of existing matches, and all the ones I checked looked legitimate. —Cryptic 18:14, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for bring it up. I've reduced it to the user and user talk namespaces, where most of the problems are. — JJMC89 18:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Updating Template:Non-diffusing subcategory

Hi, when the bot renames a parent category on a category page, and that parent category is also specified as a parameter within {{Non-diffusing subcategory}}, please could the bot also update that parameter? E.g. [1].

Likewise, {{uncited category}} in an article page, e.g. [2]. – Fayenatic London 10:50, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

This is similar to User talk:JJMC89/Archives/2024/April#CFD bot requests except for linking instead of categorization. Please open a discussion at WT:CFD/W to get input from the other regulars before I implement. — JJMC89 17:55, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Renaming and locking account?

I noticed you renamed editor qwerty account to something weird and then globally locked it. He's always been a great user with me. Was there a compromised account that I also need to look out for happening to me? Just wondering. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:31, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

The account was vanished (at the user's request). I cannot disclose the reason for vanishing, but I can say that the account was not compromised. (We don't vanish accounts for that.) — JJMC89 17:52, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Just wanted to understand. So if I understand vanishing, you actually move the account to a wikipedia coded account number, then delete the old account. That way if a user ever wants to come back with a different handle it makes it easier to transition the info to that new handle? I never knew that. If you ever deal with him again please give him my best wishes. Cheers. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:04, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

The account is not deleted. Vanishing on a technical level is changing the username to 'Renamed user ' + random string and locking it. Global renamers (or Stewards) approve requests. The software determines the new username and locks the account (lock logged by m:User:AccountVanishRequests). Vanishing is for users leaving the project(s) permanently. — JJMC89 19:24, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cyonsw

There's a clerk request at the above SPI, but I'm not asking you to take care of it. I'm coming here because I'm hoping you can assist me with the SPI helper script so I can do what I'm asking a clerk to do. Active clerks are in short supply these days, so it'd be good for me not to have to request a clerk for anything I'm permitted to do myself. Also, the list of socks is not complete (I'll add the new ones soon).

So, I've stared at the SPI helper script to assist in single-tagging one group and double-tagging the other group - and I could swear I've done this before with the script - but I can't figure it out. And there's now way I can try something and then just revert it easily, so getting it right is kind of important. Assuming you know, can you explain to me how it's done? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:18, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

User:GeneralNotability/spihelper#Block/tag socks may help you. I would do the tagging for each group separately.

1. Confirmed to Bleedroots:
   • Bleedroots:
     • tag: CU confirmed master
     • alt master: suspected alt master
   • Others confirmed to Bleedroots:
     • tag: CU confirmed sock
     • alt master: suspected alt master

   You should be prompted for the alt master after clicking Done.: Cyonsw

2. Possilikely to Cyonsw:
   • tag: Suspected sock

— JJMC89 18:46, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Well, it didn't work. The first part (confirmed to Bleedroots) worked fine, but the second part did not. All of the accounts that are confirmed to Bleedroots and suspected to Cyonsw now have only the suspected tag. I guess in retrospect I didn't put the suspected in the right column, don't know really. Is there a way to retag that group using the script, or do I have to manually do it?--Bbb23 (talk) 21:32, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

You can just go back to the same block/tag screen to retag. In an effort to check if my instructions were incorrect, I fixed the tags on the confirmed Bleedroots socks. They should have tag (first dropdown) as CU confirmed sock and alt master (second dropdown) as suspected alt master. Then after clicking Done, specify the alt master as Cyonsw. — JJMC89 21:56, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

I think I understand what I did wrong on the second round of tagging, but we'll never know because AFAICT you fixed all of them, right (I spot-checked several)? Did you run the script or what (you didn't edit the SPI itself)?--Bbb23 (talk) 22:13, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I ran the script and fixed all of the confirmed Bleedroots socks. (Adding a comment on the SPI is optional.) Feel free to revert my tags if you would like to test yourself. — JJMC89 22:16, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Heh, I think not. I will close the SPI now. Thanks very, very much for your patience and help. Maybe some of it will sink in for next time, although it doesn't happen too often.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:47, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Susan Crown edit

what is non public data: If I find a bit of data on Google in the listings and I put that bit of data in an article here why does your bot "revert it": remove it and put back the old incorrect bit of data (I am asking to know your policy here so I do not again waste my time trying to edit when it is against wikipolicy, I have no intention of going back and trying to fix the edit again, however what I am talking about is in the records & you can certainly go back and fix it: re: Susan Crowder birth date), please provide info re current policy in american english John5Russell3Finley (talk) 12:05, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi John5Russell3Finley. I'm not JJMC9, but I'll try to answer your question. First, just for reference, new posts typically are added to the bottom of talk pages; in addition, you should also try to add a section heading for new posts because it helps to keep it separated from other previously made posts on the page. Most talk pages have "New section" tab near or at the top of the page and clicking on this will open a new editing when where you can add your post.

Next (and more importantly), the edit you made here wasn't undone by JJMC89 bot, but was undone by a different editor named Edwardx with this edit. You can also see this in the article's page history. Edwardx reverted the article back to the version that existed prior to your edit (which was the version edited by JJMC89 bot), and the reason they did this was because the changes you made were uncited. If you'd like to discuss this with Edwardx, you can do so at Talk:Susan Crown: just go to the article's talk page and click on "New section" at the top and add your post. You can then you add Template:Please see to User talk:Edwardx to let them know about the discussion, but it's better to actually discuss things on the article's talk page because it makes it easy for others to participate and it helps to keep all discussion about the article in one place.

Finally, all Wikipedia articles require sourcing for article content using citations to reliable sources so that it can be verified; this is particularly true for articles about living people per Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. When it comes to anything that might be seen as contentious like dates of birth or places where people are born, citations to reliable sources are required or the content can be removed. Google search results in and of themselves are not considered a reliable source by Wikipedia for its purposes, but you can often use Google to find more specific reliable secondary sources to support article content. So, if you've found a specific reliable secondary source that can be used to verify Crown was born in 1958 and also born in Chicago, you should add information about that source to your article talk page post. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:52, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

File:Sayyid ummar bafaqi.jpeg

Hi JJMC89. Can you check to see whether File:Sayyid ummar bafaqi.jpeg isn't just a re-upload of File:Sayed Ummer Bafakhy.jpg that you deleted earlier today? -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:54, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly. It is one of the three files that were uploaded at the other title. — JJMC89 00:29, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

File:Alfa Romeo logo.png

Hi JJMC89. JJMC89 bot has tagged File:Alfa Romeo logo.png with {{orfurrev}} delete, but the recently updated version might be too different to be an acceptable overwriting of the file. Do you think the file should be split and HISTMERGEd? -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:14, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly. It should have its history split. Unfortunately, overwrites like this happen quite often. — JJMC89 00:31, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look. Would you mind splitting the file and doing the history merge? It probably should be done before the older version is deleted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:51, 12 October 2024 (UTC)