User talk:Justlettersandnumbers/old5

---

Note: This talk-page archive covers all of 2019. Older archives are:

• all of 2018
• most of 2016 and 2017
• about July 2014 until mid-January 2016
• from when I first started editing until about July 2014.

But I often delete stuff from my talk, so none of these pages is complete.

---

please check the rewrite temp page of Ou Ning

On what basis you have reverted the page of DEONI district and deoni cattle. What do you know personally about that village? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ou_Ning/Temp — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lanyuan (talk • contribs) 02:16, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Ospedale degli Incurabili, Venice

On 3 January 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ospedale degli Incurabili, Venice, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Ospedale degli Incurabili in Venice, where Johann Adolph Hasse was maestro di cappella, was founded as a hospice for sufferers from syphilis and other incurable diseases of the time? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ospedale degli Incurabili, Venice. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ospedale degli Incurabili, Venice), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:01, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Despacito lyrics vandal

For what it's worth, 99.112.22.186 did it again at Paper bag - [1]. Home Lander (talk) 23:44, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

A beer for you!

This has to be the fifth or sixth copyvio-revdel you've taken care of for me in recent months. Cheers! cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 21:09, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Cymru.lass, that's perfect timing, just drained the last few drops of my Franziskaner. Anyway, happy to help, keep them coming! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:19, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Subodh Kerkar

Hi, I've created a fresh version of the article at this temp page. This version is free of copyvios. Also this particular revision is a clean revision of the page, free of copyvios. Do look into it at the earliest as he is an important personality here. Thanks. SerTanmay (talk) 12:25, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Martin Speake

Why was his article deleted? He a quite famous Jazz musician. Govvy (talk) 16:13, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Govvy! If you follow the red link above, you'll see that I deleted it as "G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of https://www.gsmd.ac.uk/music/staff/teaching_staff/department/12-department-of-jazz-studies/574-martin-speake/, https://www.martinspeake.com, http://www.woodwinds.daddario.com/woodwindsArtistDetails.Page?ActiveID=2022&ArtistId=46324". It was a few hours old and had no significant contribution from any editor other than the creator, nor did it have any independent sources. It consisted entirely of his own promotional materials and could also have been deleted as G11. Do you want me to restore the skeleton of the page so that you can write a proper article about him? Do you have the sources to do that? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:28, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Not sure if I should work on the page, probably a conflict of interest... Don't know, I had it on my watchlist because I know the guy. Was just a bit upset it got deleted. Govvy (talk) 18:33, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Fair enough (and yes, probably a good call). So how's this: if you can come up with five or six solid independent RS that clearly show notability and actually say something about him, I'll run up a quick stub (and I do mean quick!) if that's of any interest. Let me know? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:42, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Seriously, have you not done WP:BEFORE? He has played at Pizzaexpress live one of the top jazz venues in London, EFG Jazz festival and even had an review in the Guardian. Govvy (talk) 18:58, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Well, seriously, no, since this has nothing to do with AfD, which is what WP:BEFORE links and relates to. Anyway, I'll take your reply as a "no" – unless, that is, you'd like to point to several more independent sources with enough in-depth coverage to base a brief stub on? As it happens, I've played a few gigs myself, some of them in very notable venues, several of them – to my great and wholly undeserved good fortune – with very well-known musicians; that doesn't make me notable or anything like it. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:15, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

I know, can be hard in music, I've got a fair few CDs created by friends, now they are either accountants, lawyers, in computing, but excellent at music. I just thought Martin deserved a bit of an article, I had a bit of a go and a tidy on that draft. Govvy (talk) 20:41, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Sydney College of Advanced Education

I don't really understand why you rejected this speedy deletion - the entire article is a cut and paste copyright violation from a user who didn't understand copyright that hadn't been substantively edited at all in those ten years. I really want to rewrite it and I've got the sources to do it sitting in my browser but I don't want to do it until the copyright issue is dealt with. I could have rewritten it today but now I guess I'm having to wait for another couple of weeks? Very helpful. The Drover's Wife (talk) 18:59, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, The Drover's Wife, I should have explained that more clearly. WP:G12 says specifically: "For equivocal cases that do not meet speedy deletion criteria (such as where there is a dubious assertion of permission, where free-content edits overlie the infringement, or where there is only partial infringement or close paraphrasing), the article or the appropriate section should be blanked with {{subst:Copyvio|url=insert URL here}}, and the page should be listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems". I see no indication that the claim of public domain is valid, but there is one.

You can either rewrite the article on this temporary page, or – slightly out of process – simply create the new version above the copyvio template, leaving it in place for now. Either way, I'll tidy things up as soon as you're ready. For another time: you are completely free to remove copyright-violating content yourself; you can then ask for the infringing revisions to be hidden by adding a {{copyvio-revdel}} request. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:20, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. I just had a go at using the temporary page, but ProveIt, the tool I use to reference, doesn't seem to work in that namespace, so it's just getting a bit hard. Might have to wait until after it's all sorted after all. The Drover's Wife (talk) 20:01, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

So I admit to having been frustrated by this in the past, albeit for different reasons than The Drover's Wife. JLAN, it feels like your actions while patrolling G12 are qualitatively different than general community norms; it's certainly not unreasonable but it is different. It's different even, from what I can tell, of how you acted prior to your RfA (where you indicated you would deal requests in ways that support the use of the COPYVIO template in equivocal cases, such as "where free-content edits overlie the infringement"). I would ask you to consider getting some sort of community support, if only through a discussion at a place like WP:CSD, for this alternative method of dealing with G12 tags on notable topics where the removal of copyrighted material would leave the page without content worth saving. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:24, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Page cleaned, The Drover's Wife, all yours. Barkeep49, could you be a bit clearer? What do you think is the "normal" response to a G12 nomination where there is a foundational copyvio, a ten-year page history and a dubious claim of permission? I'm open to advice if I'm doing something wrong, but I'd first need to understand what that something is. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:26, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Legend. Thanks very much! The Drover's Wife (talk) 21:34, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Prajakta Kale

Hello, Thanks for the soft approach and notification about Prajakta Kale's page, Like you advised I have created a Temp page and this rewritten version is void of copyright problem, I hope you look into this for me and restore the page. Thanks once again for helping out.Epaomo (talk) 11:07, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Your misunderstanding of the the public domain

I see you are new and no doubt young. Please investigate what is and is not in the public domain before removing my work on the articles I created. If content is produced by a government agency in the US, it is automatically in the public domain. There is no copyright on government work. I will ask you to revert the hyperactive vandalism you did to the articles I created by removing them even though there is no copyright inifringement. I wonder how many other articles you have vandalised through your lack of knowledge of the law on copyright?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ives_-_Henry_murders

I believe you also proudly but erroneously "clean up" nonexistent copyright issues on the article about Colorado Center for the Blind ...and what else? Please correct your mistakes. In the future consider your age and level of experience compared to others before wrecklessly hurting the free sharing of knowledge in your efforts to show off your imagined expertise. I see by other comments you have taken it upon yourself to "police" copyright infringements even though you are untrained and unknowledgeable about the issue. May I kindly suggest you find a way to contribute based on your knowledge and not your psychological need to exert power by miscorrecting the work of experts?

Leidseplein (talk) 17:00, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Ah yes, young no doubt! And yes, I do always try to edit "wrecklessly" – I so hate filling in those insurance claims! On a more serious note, would you like to answer the question I asked you: are there other articles where you have copied material from copyrighted sources into Wikipedia? If you think I've removed public-domain content from something you've written, please say what and from where. If you think the Encyclopedia of Arkansas History & Culture is PD, please read this page, which will disabuse you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:16, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

If the educated and experienced did not have to constantly correct the young and inexperienced, Wikipedia would reach a billion more people everyday. It does not matter what a website CLAIMS it matters what the actual copyright law IS. I can write on my website that my work is copyrighted, but this does not make it true. Please gain some humility appropriate for your age and study the law of copyrights which will disabuse you of any notion that you somehow have knowledge enough to vandalise the work of those with much more experience and more education than you. Try writing an article and contributing instead of using Wikipedia to address your psychiatric issues. Will you kindly revert your vandalism? On a more serious note, would you like to answer the question I asked you: are there other articles where you have vandalised the work of others based on your lack of knowledge and teenage level of education?Leidseplein (talk) 17:23, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Leidseplein, our copyright policy is here, my contributions are here. If you find evidence of vandalism, the place to report it is here. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:43, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Are we being trolled or just patronised?

Hi there,

I see that you, I, and others have been clearing up various copyright infractions on Leidseplein's articles and drafts.

To which his responses have been both insulting and boringly standardised - that we are inexperienced, young (woohoo!) and vandals.

I do find this quite humorous, but he doesn't seem to be reducing his copyvio frequency - his public domain defence also doesn't apply in quite the way he thinks it does, attribution aside.

I've responded to his queries to me, but I was hoping for some thoughts on what can be done pre-ANI? Nosebagbear (talk) 17:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

You two are the poster boys of new arrivals. Do you actually think that arriving a few months ago and then threatening to "take someone to ANI" is scary or helpful in anything but your psychiatric needs? Within 20 minutes of a conflict you are already so frightened that you're asking for helps for the grownups. ANI is a last resort - try understanding and practicing the letter and spirit of Wikipedia instead of pedantically quoting what you imagine policy is and what you imagine is here to protect your wounded ego. You can link tp WP endlessly and threaten all you want if it helps build your confidence, but this is not the mission or style of Wikipedia editors. To wit: works produced by the State of Arkansas and published online are automatically in the public domain. Now, kindly recover from you errors and remove your vandalism. Leidseplein (talk) 17:42, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Nosebagbear, I think the best thing to do is to sit back and relax. Your answers to date have been both correct and sufficient. The user has a week in which to rewrite the draft, and whoever reviews that will surely look at his/her other contribs – of which, fortunately, there are very few. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:30, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Copyvios?

I see you moved Draft:Thermoelectric acclimatization, an article from which I had already removed some copyvios, to draftspace. Looking at the creator's talk page, there is some suggestion that the creator Aeronauticengineer67 is Michele Trancossi, author of various papers. While new page patrolling, I have now come across Hybrid electrical aircraft, which appears to be largely a copyvio of this site, but one of the authors of the paper concerned is also Michele Trancossi. We aim to encourage experts to write about their areas of expertise, but it is difficult to know how best to proceed if they copy their original papers verbatim without affirming their right to do so. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:37, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

[Swanee Songs]

So, when will Swanee Songs be put back whole? I did take my blog post down. That was what rang the copyright bell. The fact that I wrote them both, which is why they were the same, is now neither here nor there. On a separate thing. I created a page for the author and film showman Jack Stevenson. On that page I have had a picture of the dust jacket for his most recent book deleted twice. First, Jack sent me the art, then I put it on Wikimedia commons, and put it on the page. After it was deleted I advised Jack that he should put it on wikimedia commons and then I could put on his page. That was done and it was deleted a second time. The dust jacket art was created for exploitation and has no copyright. Further, it is the property of Jack. I appreciate any help you can provide. Thanks, Dennis— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dennis william nyback (talk • contribs) 17:22, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Dear Justlettersandnumbers, Looking again at what is left of my page Swanee Songs I found this:

curprev 16:46, 8 June 2019‎ Justlettersandnumbers talk contribs‎ 301 bytes -16,289‎ Reverted to revision 879527148 by Justlettersandnumbers: This content has already once been removed as a copyright violaation of a page previously published at http://www.dennisnybackfilms.com/2018/10/the-comprehensive-swanee/; it can't be hosted here without the written permission of the copyright holder (which shuld be emailed to OTRS) (TW) thank Tags: Undo Replaced

I am the copyright holder of the article. Could you help me with just to who and where I should send the written permission? It is not clear to me from the post. Oh, Swanee Songs is no longer at Dennisnybackfilms.com, which is my website, as I pulled it down from there so as not to be in conflict with the wikipedia page. Thanks Dennis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dennis william nyback (talk • contribs) 04:48, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Dennis william nyback, a work is considered to acquire copyright when it is published; that you have later removed the content from your website doesn't change that. As I said in my edit summary there, that material can't be hosted here without the documented written permission of the copyright holder. That should be emailed to OTRS – please see here for details. You should be aware that even if you provide permission, there is no guarantee that all or indeed any of the text will be found suitable for inclusion in the encyclopaedia. Seasonal greetings, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:05, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

My questions weren't rhetorical

Hi Justlettersandnumbers,

• You haven't elaborated on what you meant by "and other cited sources" after your link to Hertfordshire Constabulary's press release on your blank out message on the page Berkhamsted child rape network. Please provide the full list of every source with which an issue will need to be resolved. The reason you should do this is obvious.
• Most of the highlighted phrases in your Copyvio report are the names of criminal offences which are listed on the UK government website and reusable under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Does the Open Government Licence v3.0 allow me to include these names of criminal offences in my article if I attribute their webpages in my article's Talk page? If I reword everything else and retain and attribute the names of criminal offences do I still face having my article deleted and being permanently removed from Wikipedia? Tots & little ones matter! (talk) 20:58, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

By "cited sources" I meant, of course, "the sources cited in the article". You can see clearly which are the most problematic by using this useful tool (click the "compare" link against each source to see what text has triggered the alarm). The exact legal jargon used to describe each offence is presumably derived from national law in the UK, and so not subject to copyright as far as Wikipedia is concerned; the value of endlessly repeating that jargon is questionable, and it might be preferable to omit and/or rephrase some or all of it. The other material copied from the sources should not be included in your rewrite, though it may be rewritten in your own words. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:40, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Justlettersandnumbers, thank you for linking to this tool. This is actually very useful and seems to have most of this information I need. I have one final question. How much rewriting in my own words or deleting must I do for my article to be accepted? Is it enough reword the page to make all the percentages green once criminal offence names are ignored? Tots & little ones matter! (talk) 22:10, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

You can work on a rewrite on this temporary page. Please don't copy any copied/copyright content from the old page into your rewrite, as that would make it useless. Essentially everything you write must be in your own words; those technical legal terms may be an exception, and quotations – provided they are attributed, are brief, are relevant and are the subject of discussion in the article text – may be included in moderation. Phrases like "a year-long investigation that identified hundreds of other ..." may not be copied – you have to express the meaning in your own words without using those of the source. You shouldn't pay too much attention to the actual percentages that the tool shows – what matters is the content highlighted in red, and whether there's a reason for that to be acceptable (which it often is, and also, unfortunately, often is not). Good luck! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:05, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Justlettersandnumbers, I have rewritten much of the article. I have not yet found all the names of the criminal offences on the UK Government's website, so I am temporarily using placeholder phrases such as "multiple child sex offences". I believe the copyright issue is resolved. Tots & little ones matter! (talk) 00:18, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

I've had look at the rewrite, and I'm afraid it still contains many phrases copied (for no good reason) from the sources – please see here. These might perhaps not be enough to trigger an alarm in a new article, but in this case they are simply the remnants of the earlier copying of non-free content, and so need to be removed. Will you deal with that or do you want me to? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:00, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Which phrases? Tots & little ones matter! (talk) 01:50, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Discovery Institute

I think I finally figured out the copyvio situation there, and made an attempt to fix it. Can you take a look and let me know if the issue has indeed been resolved? Appreciate it, thanks. Marquardtika (talk) 02:32, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Andy Picci

I'd love you help us contribute to the Andy Picci page, as I am quite new to wikipedia. But I'd also appreciate you not destroying the research work I am doing on this subject. If tone is inappropriate, this might come by the fact english isn't my mother tongue. There's no need to be patronising here. Even if you're not sensitive to Picci's work, it doesn't mean it isn't worth credit.

Please help us instead of slow us down. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fineartsfrance (talk • contribs) 11:27, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Fineartsfrance, I've left you a note about conflict-of-interest editing on your talk-page. You might also like to read about what we think of promotion in Wikipedia. What's your connection to User:Dandyanartiste, by the way? And who exactly do you mean by "us"? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:10, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers, User:Dandyanartiste and I obviously know each other. We both are working on a research Master of Fine Arts. Our research is about artists using internet and social media as an art medium, which led us into the work of Andy Picci, but not only (Arvida Bystrom, Signe Pierce, Andy Kassier and many other are on the "to do list"). Our idea was using our research to complete/create some wikipedia pages, as we felt there was a lack of informations about it. We are new here, and try to learn each day a little bit more about how wikipedia works. Our tone might not seems impartial sometime as we are passionate about our studies, but we try our best to get stuck to facts. We have no affiliations with Andy Picci, although we are currently trying to get a meeting with him to discuss our research further.

I am sorry if we started on a wrong foot, but we feel that by changing "staged an artistic performance in which he dressed up as Pete Doherty; fooled some photojournalists, and had his picture published on Le Parisien's front-page as Doherty's" into "dressed up as Pete Doherty; the impersonation fooled some photojournalists, and his picture was published in Le Parisien as Doherty's" is very diminishing about his work and process. Maybe it is our level of english misleading us, but we believe we can meet middle way. Once again, we started contributing because we felt artists we are interested in were not yet present on wikipedia, and that I we are interested, some other people might be. But if this is a wrong motivation, we sincerely apologize.

EDIT: I am done. My aim was to contribute to this beautiful encyclopedia, adding informations I felt were missing. But I don't have time to lose fighting whith your egocentric patronising closed mind. Have fun, hope you'll be proud to discourage in such an impolite way people from contributing to world knowledge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fineartsfrance (talk • contribs) 13:54, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Mary Weatherford

Hi, Why did you make major edits to the page on Mary Weatherford? All was cited properly. Mary's galleries do have websites, but her wiki reflects her history not theirs. Please advise so we can work together on this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaiseyCox (talk • contribs) 21:05, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

MaiseyCox, please see your talk-page, where I have asked you to make an appropriate paid-editor disclosure before making any other edit. It would be really, really good if the David Kordansky Gallery would stop, once and for all, trying to use Wikipedia for publicity purposes, but I don't suppose there's much hope of that? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:17, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

I've expanded the article a bit—a very interesting artist. Seemed a pity to let her languish as a stub :). Best, Voceditenore (talk) 18:00, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

I saw that you were working on it, VdT, will glance at the end result in a minute. Just looking at Jennifer Guidi now (a copyvio blurb by Almine Rech overwritten with another blurb from David Kordansky), but not convinced I've the interest to do much about it. You? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:30, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Me neither at this point, although it has a lot of the flaws that Mary Weatherford had. While not flamingly so, it does have the flavour of a PR write-up. Voceditenore (talk) 13:36, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

User:Richagoel108

I saw that you had blocked that guy for copyvio. His most recent creation, Rohit Suri is also a cut and paste job. He doesn't seem to be getting it. << FR ^(mobileUndo) 10:58, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Indeed, FR30799386, unfortunately it seems he's not. Thanks for letting me know, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:21, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

User: Boscosodi499

Hi Justlettersandnumbers,

I am trying to edit the Bosco Sodi page and the changes I had made based on the requested Wikipedia standards except the text is gone. Is there anyway to modify it so that I can remove the copyrighted material / alter it to fit wikipedia standards?

I spent a whole afternoon writing this page and this the second time that my changes have been discarded.

If you can please let me know what I can do to salvage my revision without rewriting it I would really appreciate it.

Thank you Boscosodi499 (talk) 19:53, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Not really, I'm afraid, Boscosodi499 – you have a very evident conflict of interest, and so are strongly discouraged from editing that article. Please read the last of the three rather long messages I've left on your talk-page (User talk:Boscosodi499#Managing a conflict of interest), which offers some advice for people in your situation. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:04, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Keith Griffiths (architect)

I created a new version of this, can you let me know if I may take out the COI box? I clarify that I am not editing the page on behalf of anyone. All sources linked. Whywhy99 (talk) 01:29, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

I strongly believe that Whywhy99 has undeclared COI. Citobun (talk) 10:42, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

@Citobun:I once again clarify that this is not the case. I suggested ways to edit the page and have requested for help awhile ago from you on your talk page. We are here to help editing articles, instead of raising issues without fixing. Suggestions made on article's talk page as well. Grateful if anyone can help. Whywhy99 (talk) 02:49, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Whywhy99, you don't need my permission or anyone else's to remove the COI tag from Keith Griffiths (architect), provided that you are sure that there is no COI problem (and, of course, provided that you have no COI yourself); I myself am pretty sure that there is a continuing COI problem at that article. Could you please answer two questions: who do you mean by "we" when you say "we are here to help"? and why does virtually every edit you've made since 27 November 2012 relate in some way to Aedas – which, as you will understand, gives a very strong impression that you have some connection to that company? Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:54, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

He's at it again

See Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Alec Smithson {{{{SIGH}}}}. Voceditenore (talk) 16:43, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, well spotted, what a bore he is! I commented there, asked for a lock here, and left a note for AttoRenato about the IP, who has a number of live edits there. On the bright side, he hasn't bothered us so much here recently. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:11, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

No, he hasn't bothered us much, apart from his ministrations to his LTA page. He still periodically nips into Simple English WP, but hasn't created any new "articles" there for several months—probably knows I'm watching all his targets there. Interestingly, the multiple throwaway accounts at Commons never seem to edit anywhere else. The problem is, virtually every file they upload is a copyvio. Once the checkuser investigation there concludes, I'm going to bring this to the admins' attention at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. Then they can decide what to do. I personally don't have the time or energy to start deletion discussions for dozens and dozens of copyvio files. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:58, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

I agree, certainly not worth nominating files individually. I think we could start a bulk deletion discussion with a title such as "Files uploaded by Alec Smithson and sockpuppets", though. I'd be happy to collaborate on something like that if you don't get any joy at User problems. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:22, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Even bulk deletion requests can be messy unless they have a single factor making them copyvios. His have a variety of issues. Sometimes claimed as own work when they're all over the internet. Other times the publication date has been falsified. Anyhow, perhaps we'll get some advice from the User problems board. Meanwhile, it's a pity that AttoRenato doesn't edit Italian WP much any more. You could also try User:Civa61 and User:Carlomartini86. Both of them have gone after Smithson sock edits in the past, plus Carlomartini86 is also an administrator there. You could also try posting at Progetto:Patrolling/Controlli/Alec Smithson although it doesn't have many watchers. Voceditenore (talk) 15:54, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

You might want to add Italianpassion89 to your global lock request. He popped up yesterday and uploaded over 30 copyvio images. I've also added this one to the Commons checkuser request, which so far has not attracted any response. Voceditenore (talk) 15:27, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Sanjay Pradhan

The latest version of Draft:Sanjay Pradhan wasn't unambiguously a copyright violation, as most of the duplicated material were things like proper names and titles. Prior to tagging the submission button on the draft, I had reviewed the deleted versions as well as the most recent version compared against the web pages and I was satisfied that the creator had done good work to avoid copyright infringement.

I'm working with the creator on OTRS, who is justifiably confused as to why the draft was deleted again, and why she is blocked again. Would you object to me undoing those actions so that we can proceed? I'm watching the draft and the OTRS communications. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:15, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

I see you undeleted the draft, thanks. I am explaining to the editor that she's blocked for undisclosed paid editing, and not just copyvio. I will instruct her how to proceed with an unblock appeal. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:32, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Anachronist, I've restored it, but I'm in no doubt that it was a wholly unacceptable copyright violation. Even an innocuous little phrase like "Pradhan grew up in Bihar" is copied (from here). I can't be responsible for leaving something like that in circulation, so I'll blank it it and list it at WP:CP – I hope that's acceptable to you? It gives the editor a week to produce a copyvio-free rewrite.

As for unblocking, please do as you think fit. However, if the editor doesn't understand the reason for the second block, that seems to suggest that he/she doesn't understand our copyright policy either. There's also the matter of what appears to be undisclosed paid editing ... Over to you! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:42, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Anachronist, that sounds good. I liked the questions I saw added here earlier today ... Oh, and I forgot to mention that the image in the draft seems to be a copyvio too – I've nominated it for speedy deletion on Commons. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 01:02, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Jennifer Guidi Date of Birth

I am trying to add Jennifer Guidi's date of birth to her Wikipedia page, as per the artist. However, the edit has been undone twice. How would you suggest I source this information other than it is being requested by the artist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.48.165.46 (talk) 18:49, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for asking, 45.48.165.46. We have fairly strict rules against adding unsourced personal details of living people, which I have already linked to twice when reverting your edits. Of course, this is for the protection of the privacy of the individuals concerned. If her full date of birth is widely reported in independent reliable sources, please mention one or two of them on the talk-page, Talk:Jennifer Guidi; but if it is not, Wikipedia will not publish it and attempts to re-add it are in vain. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:11, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

I work for Jennifer and she is asking that this be added because her age is currently incorrect on Wikipedia. How do other artists source this? Thank you for any guidance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.48.165.46 (talk) 21:05, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

I don't understand you – the year of birth now shown in the article is exactly the same that you have twice added, 1972; it is sourced to VIAF, which gets it from the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek, not an institution famous for its mistakes (it gives the year only; the day and month you have tried to add are unsourced to my knowledge). Is it wrong? – if so I will remove it. But if so, why did you not try to correct it, and why is it also given here, a page which is presumably under her control? Are you sure that she is looking directly at Wikipedia (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Guidi), and not at some other site which transcludes our content? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:56, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

The year is correct, but her age is wrong because she was born in June of 1972. It is saying she is 47, which she is not for another 5 months. I don't understand why the month and date cannot be added so her age is accurately reflected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.48.165.46 (talk) 22:06, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Because there is no independent reliable source for it, as explained above. Her age is not mentioned in our article; where do you see it? Please copy the url from the address bar of the page where you see it and paste it here – oh, unless it is something like https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=%22jennifer+guidi%22, in which case don't bother, I already know what the problem is: Google. We can't control what Google publishes in our name; neither Guidi's age nor place of birth are in our article, so if Google is showing them then it's getting them from somewhere else even it says Wikipedia, and Google is who she'd need to contact to get them to stop. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:50, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Eyes needed on Nicky Spence

Nothing to do with the "Milanese Pest", but repeated attempts to add PR promo, much of it copyvio, and a lengthy list of every bit part he's ever sung in opera, starting in college. Needless to say the editor doing this is named... er... NickySpence. He's been reverted by three different editors (including me), but he's very persistent [2], [3], [4], [5]. Talk: Nicky Spence has more background as does User talk:NickySpence. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:11, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

ipfs.io

Thanks for the hint on that - I confess I hadn't looked properly at the page. I googled a couple of phrases, that site came up, then I used Earwig's tool to compare them; if I'd actually read the page properly and scrolled to the bottom, I'd have seen that it was a mirror site. One to remember for next time. GirthSummit _(blether) 13:31, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Hazrat Data Mehboob Shah Wali

Dear, Sir

I will request you to review Draft:Hazrat Data Mehboob Shah Wali and accept for article creation.I hope you will do it. Rural3857 (talk) 15:57, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Misuse of tools to delete a page

[6] bad call. School closed over 100 years ago so WP:NCORP does not apply as there is not a chance of any promotional benefit. You just deleted a good title using your admin tools after no one asked you to do that instead of doing a merge (if that was even needed). That is an abuse of tools that should not be allowed. Don't like it use AfD. Legacypac (talk) 22:29, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Which admin tool was that, Legacypac? I used the ordinary page mover right to suppress a redirect from a blatant and implausible spelling mistake (Prepatory? – what exactly were you thinking?). I used ordinary editor discretion to redirect it to its parent. What makes you think WP:NCORP does not apply to companies and organisations from 100 years ago? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:34, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Legacypac, ping fail. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:35, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

kindly guide me about page

Hi,

it seems that you have declined my content here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domenico_Vacca

kindly guide what should i do to improve and how to make it live

Waiting for your kind response

Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamskinner608 (talk • contribs) 13:22, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Adamskinner608, both the page and draft have been deleted as unambiguous advertising. Given the history, my advice would be to leave things that way, and write about someone or something else instead. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:55, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Aggie83#Wikipedia_and_copyright

You indicated that I posted information that is not public domain information. In fact, I posted information that I personally wrote. I referenced this to www.kikogoats.com as that is the official webpage of the American Kiko Goat Association, of which I am the current Treasurer. Do I need to submit incorporation documents to wikipedia to prove that our organization was founded in 1994? I want to correct the erroneous information on wikipedia, but I am stumped. Thank you for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aggie83 (talk • contribs) 22:54, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Aggie83, we've no way of knowing who you are or what you wrote. We just don't allow editors to place previously-published copyright material in Wikipedia. There are instructions here for donating copyright text for use here, but in practice such text is hardly ever used. The website can be used as a source for facts, but not for the form of words used to convey the information – that must be new text, purpose-written for Wikipedia. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:03, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Navy Department (Ministry of Defence)

Hi. Taking you at your word, so I don't bother Diannaa so much. Looking at this copyvio report, it shows a large tract of text directly cut and paste from this government website. But that site is under an "open government license", so it's not a copyvio, but does it constitute Wikipedia:Plagiarism? The passages are cited, but is that enough to cover attribution? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:53, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Onel5969, nice question! I have to admit I'm pretty hazy about the OGL in general. Anyway, I think that here the existing attribution (in reference #7) is quite sufficient, and we don't need to worry about plagiarism. That said, it's a bit hidden away, and I don't think anyone could reasonably object to an extra {{OGL-attribution}} at the end of the reference section (any more than they could reasonably object if someone were to edit that text to read little more like an encyclopaedia and a little less like a government handout). Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:49, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Well, thanks for looking into it. Normally I simply know it's a copyvio or not. Plagiarism, on the other hand, I've never really come across before. Take it easy.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:23, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Michele Catti

Hi Justlettersandnumbers, I was notified that you undid the revision of the page on Michele Catti. Your comment makes sense. Unfortunately, it is difficult to substantiate the statements by linking to paid online art pricing databases that provide more elaborate support. In your opinion, could a revised version of my text be included, if latter part on prices is left out? I am a descendant of Michele Catti through his firstborn son Ugo -my grandfather- and the booming business in forgeries at online auctions such as Catawiki is detrimental to my great-grandfather's legacy. It would be good if more prospective buyers are aware of these issues, which is why I wished to add these comments in the first place. Thank you.

Best, Marina-Vera Catti — Preceding unsigned comment added by AMO SICILIA (talk • contribs) 13:46, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Marina-Vera! There's no reason why there shouldn't be a mention of forgeries in the Michele Catti article, provided that the material is fully supported by independent reliable sources that have discussed them. These might be major Italian or foreign newspapers, or reputable magazines, learned journals and the like. If the problem has not been reported by such sources, it won't be included in Wikipedia. I understand that this may be frustrating for you, but this is not the place to warn people of fraud in the art market. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:27, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Guidance kindly requested

Hi Justlettersandnumbers,

Could you please have a preliminary look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:W._Patrick_Murphy? It has been rejected a few times without clear explanation, we feel that the suggestions do not match the bio nature of the page, therefore we are uncertain about the exact expectations.

Thank you very much in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stenobook26 (talk • contribs) 15:16, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

OK, Stenobook26, I had a look. It's definitely better than it was – it had no citations, and now it has some. As I see it, the next steps are:

• disclose your conflict of interest, which as far as I can see neither you nor Redmercw has yet done. Disclosure is expected in any case, and is obligatory if you have any kind of paid connection to Murphy
• explain what you mean by "we" in your post above; Wikipedia user accounts are strictly for individual use, so if there's more than one of you then you'll need more than one account
• remove from the draft whatever content isn't supported by independent reliable sources (which as far as I can see is most of it)
• try to identify more and better sources that discuss him (rather than just tangentially mentioning him while discussing something else); the official dressing-down he got in Thailand may have attracted press interest, for example.

Ping Praxidicae, since you posted the same request on his/her talk-page too. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:09, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Italian wine

Hello Justlettersandnumbers, yesterday, february 20, I've modified the "Italian wine" page adding a link to a website that lists all the Italian wine denominations, with informations extracted directly from the Italian Ministry of Agriculture website, which is already provided, but translated in English for non-Italian speakers. I've read the conditions for such links, and can't understand why it has been deleted and tagged as spam. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheWineNerd (talk • contribs) 10:36, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Well, TheWineNerd, perhaps I was wrong. It seems to me that this is just somebody's website (registered to Contact Privacy Inc.), and not a very good one at that. I tried clicking on Sangiovese, and the first name that came up was Amarone della Valpolicella; that's not an expected result (which would have been a list of Sangiovese wines). Anyway, your best way forward is (1) to disclose any connection you may have to that website and (2) start a talk-page discussion – I suggest at Talk:Italian wine – to see if other editors think this is a valuable resource which we should link to. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:46, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Bigelow

Your recent block of User:CharlesBigelow reminded me of a similarly-named editor (InternetBigelow) who posted at the Teahouse recently, and who had also edited font-related articles, and whose account was created just an hour before the one you blocked. I replied to them here. I will keep a watch on their edits - they may be unrelated, of course.

BTW: do you happen to know how to search Special:ListUsers for any usernames containing a string of characters, not just starting with them? It must be possible, but I really can't see how to do it. It would be so helpful in finding and investigating potentially related accounts. The nearest I can get is this search of User pages and User Talk pages, but both are dependant upon one or other of those pages having actually been created, and that doesn't always happen with disruptive accounts. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:06, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Indeed, Nick Moyes, that could be a different editor – surely worth keeping an eye on. I'm about the world's worst searcher, though I'd have got to the same point as you with that one; perhaps some page watcher can answer? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:28, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Lakshmi Bai Kelkar ‎

Since you have deleted the article for copyvio, I would like to know if my new changes to this version violates copyrights anymore. See this. Dheerajmpai23 (talk) 18:10, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes, it does – the phrases highlighted in red are those that the tool picks up, but the whole thing is WP:Close following of the source. Why have you posted it on Wikiquote? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:25, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Cause by posting on wikipedia I was risking block. I will work on red phrases. Thanks for reviewing. Dheerajmpai23 (talk) 18:41, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

It absolutely does not belong at Wikiquote. It was user-blanked and then deleted. Misusing Wikiquote this way is definitely risking a block. ~ Ningauble (talk) 20:29, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Ningauble! If I may, I'm going to make a note of your name for next time I feel I should contact a Wikiquote admin. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:41, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Ruskin School of Drawing and Fine Art

Hi, as you refined the article name of Ruskin School of Drawing and Fine Art some time ago, I'm wondering if you might be interested in contributing to this discussion on a further change: [7]. Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 14:10, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Sharmeena Begum

Hi there. Further to the AfD and the copyvio, I wanted to let you know that I have started a draft that can potentially replace the problematic article, should AfD swing to keep based on notability. See Draft:Sharmeena Begum. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 11:11, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Cool, Jake Brockman. I've moved it to Talk:Sharmeena Begum/Temp, the standard copyvio rewrite page – it might otherwise have been overlooked. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:13, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Draft Riccardo Crespi Gallery

Dear Justlettersandnumbers. Thank you for your comment. I am surprised to read that my Draft is on “Speedy Deletion”. I don’t intend to steal anybody’s copyright and I am not doing it. The gallery has its objective relevance to be on Wikipedia and the gallery is happy to share any content with me for the Wikipedia Community. If you personally need a letter of agreement of the gallery regarding these sentences, I’m happy to provide. Let me know how I can keep the draft and maybe one day be allowed to publish it as an article. I’m a new and most of all enthusiastic member of Wikipedia, looking forward to keeping that spirit! AnniRes

AnniRes (talk) 22:03, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

AnniRes, as you can see here, the draft has been deleted because it was copied more or less word-for-word from this page, archived in November 2015. It is possible to release material for use in Wikipedia (see WP:DCM for how the owners of that website could do that), but promotional content of that sort is never going to be included in an encyclopaedia, so it would probably be a wasted effort. It seems that your only activity here to date has been to try to promote the Galleria Riccardo Crespi. If your connection to the gallery involves financial reward of any kind you are obliged to make an appropriate paid-editor disclosure on your user page, User:AnniRes; you should do that before you make any other edit. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:26, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

QuisLex - Conflict of Interest/Noticeboard

Please see my reply to your comments on WP:COIN under QuisLex. Thank you very much. Dylanexpert (talk) 14:08, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Two additional copyvios

Hi Justlettersandnumbers. Thank you for removing the copyvios at Alexandria Cortez. I have since found two similar copyvios that were added just before the copyvios you revdeled at that article. They are from the same Fox news source as the revdeled ones. This is the first and this is the second. Perhaps, these should to be deleted as well. Thank you again. Dr. K. 02:02, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Done those, Dr.K., thanks for noticing them. Have you looked at the other additions to that article by the same editor? If not, I will. Let's hope this was just a temporary aberration. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:52, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

You are very welcome Justlettersandnumbers and thank you for removing these as well. I checked a few pages of the history of the Cortez article before these copyvios and didn't find any more, but I will check more systematically and I will let you know. Best regards. Dr. K. 21:48, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

We have more. It seems many of the large-scale edits to articles by this user are copyvios. Copyvio from Kansascity.com (link), copyvio from Washington examiner.com (link), copyvio from politifact.com (link), the usual copyvio about Greenpeace but pasted to a different article. Dr. K. 22:43, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for looking further, Dr.K., and for documenting so nicely what you have found. I've revdeleted the last of those. Unless I'm missing something, the other three show similarity in using some identical short phrases, but not extended passages of copied content; I think they fall short of the level of infringement that we need (or can afford) to be concerned about. However, I'll try to dig around a little myself too ... Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:58, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Sounds good. Thank you for your help in this, Justlettersandnumbers. For the short copyvios I did not search extensively, and I did not use Earwig's detector due to time limitations. In any case, at least now we have a frame of reference. It was nice meeting you. All the best. Dr. K. 19:58, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Ilaria Cucchi

Thia article was kept at AfD, closed by Ritchie333, and I believe it did not qualify for G5 which specifies "... and that have no substantial edits by others". I'm pretty sure I remember editing it substantially myself, including linking to her brother's death on Italian wiki. Please reinstate this article. Thanks. PamD 08:33, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

I've restored it. A CSD cannot override community consensus, and this is an invalid G5 because the most edits were made by BritishFinance and a significant amount of content was contributed to the article by MarnetteD. Deletion will require a new AfD. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:18, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Indeed, PamD, Ritchie333, my mistake – thanks for fixing. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:56, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Duan Yingmei

Thank you for your constructive criticism. You seemed to have deleted most of the information on Duan Yingmei page and then sent it into drafts. Would you be able to send me what was deleted from the page so I can further work on it and see what areas were not acceptable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LadyBarbarella (talk • contribs) 00:46, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

LadyBarbarella, as you can see from my edit summary, what I removed was a machine translation of this page – a few words were different from what Google suggested, but no more. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:26, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Farewell Angelina (Band)

Hi, I had an infringement issue when I tried to submit an article about the band Farewell Angelina. I had cited the source I got my information from but it was not correct, could you explain to me how I can solve this problem? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZachFarnum (talk • contribs) 21:01, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, ZachFarnum! That page was deleted because it was copied wholesale from non-free sources on the internet – what we call copyright violation. I've now also deleted two other versions of the same material, this and this, for the same reason (I should have done this earlier, my mistake). You appear to have a financial connection to this topic, but have not made any appropriate disclosure. That should be your first step, before you make any further edit elsewhere; after that, you may contribute in draft space, ensuring that everything you write is entirely in your own words. Please understand clearly that Wikipedia does not tolerate promotion of any kind. Thank you, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:23, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Dexithea (mythology)

Hi. Can you take a look at this page, technically it's not a copyvio, but almost the entire article consists of quotes. Any issues with it? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:22, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Onel5969! The only potential copyright issue I see is that the English translations of the quotes are unsourced, and might still be in copyright, though the language seems very old-fashioned. The other problem, of course, is notability – if there aren't any modern sources, why do we have the article? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:33, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for that, it's what I figured. Regarding notability, we don't have a specific criteria regarding mythological figures, many of them are obscure, and many don't have a lot of new research done on them. My thought is that I apply the rule that if they are mentioned in 2-3 sources, it passes WP:GNG, as notability isn't temporary. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:40, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

New independent sources in the page Draft:WebRatio

Hello, following your ccomment, I added new independent sources: - reference 4: A research done from people external from the company - reference 6: A research done from people external from the company - reference 7: A research done from people external from the company - reference 11: A news on one of the most important italian newspaper - done from people external from the company

Are they ok as independent resources?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paolorivius (talk • contribs) 10:55, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

User blocked for being a spam-only account. MER-C 19:48, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Hey sorry

I am sorry that I copied and pasted text from the Minecraft Wiki and put it on the draft one on Wikipedia. However I am still learning the rules so ya. MoMoCool2005 | Talk•••Contributions 19:06, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Oh wait sorry wrong page :P MoMoCool2005 | Talk•••Contributions 19:10, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Smithson's at it again

FYI Special:Contributions/151.36.115.15. I just reverted him at Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Alec Smithson. He tried the same trick at it:Progetto:Patrolling/Controlli/Alec Smithson. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:56, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Already blocked. I thought about protecting the page, but I think it's more useful not to – am I wrong? Many, many thanks for all the time you've spent on this. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:09, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

No, you're right to leave it unprotected. 'nuf said :). Voceditenore (talk) 11:51, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Voceditenore, I think I read that you are now away for a while. I forgot to mention to you this conversation and the conclusion it led to. I've not yet done anything about it, but wondered if we might perhaps work together on drafting a proposal when you're back or have some time? Meanwhile, have fun! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:08, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi JLAN! I imagine you read my vacation plans here (before he blanked the page after I told him I was finished trying to help him avoid the problems he's causing himself and everyone else and was having nothing more to do with his "translation projects". Grrrr. Anyhow, I think drafting something when I get back would be a good idea. I think we'd have a decent chance given the copyvio and hoaxing. I'll have a certain amount of internet access while I'm in California, so will check in on WP once in a while when I'm not tramping on beaches and through forests with the grandchildren. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 05:42, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Yes, that was where it was, what a maddening situation that is too, the very opposite of collaborative editing! As for the other thing, to some extent I feel that if Commons doesn't have a G5 criterion it's not our problem; on the other hand, taking the extra step might perhaps help smaller and more vulnerable wikipedias as well, who knows? I don't think a few weeks are going to change anything much, so enjoy the holiday! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:08, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Re the "maddening situation", he attributes my "failings" and those of everyone who has tried to steer him in the right direction and/or anyone who draftifies his creations to a "generational thing", i.e. we're young and don't know any better. Little does he know that I am several years older than he is. He tried that line (and worse) at the French WP. Result... er... bannissement . I suspect the same thing is going to happen here eventually. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:46, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	I thank you for your kindness and diligent guidance. Usedtobecool (talk) 00:25, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Ruth Hesse

Some admirer wrote a list of roles and recordings with details, which I'm to tired to source bit by bit. Please say what needs a ref, and why you think copyedit is needed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:36, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, the text of the article needs to be supplied with citations which support the content; stuff like "thanks to her large voice with dark timbre and the capability to dramatic expression" needs to be put into English, stuff about "the imperial couple" does not appear to relate to Le Nozze di Figaro etc. I'm not sure why you would want to remove the maintenance tags without first addressing the problems they highlight? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:51, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

I thought the concerns meant the uncited sections, but will look after what you mention. "Imperial couple" doesn't refer to Figaro, "Nurse" is in "Die Frau ohne Schatten", and the roles are in German Kaiser and Kaiserin, Färber and Färberin. What is "etc". It would be helpful if you put "citation needed" behind a fact, not on top where I musinderstood it. Her voice was described in the source as "dunkel timbrierte, groß dimensionierte, zu großer Dramatik des Ausdrucks befähigte Stimme", - I am sorry that I couldn't put it to better English than you quote above. A translator says "dark timbral, large dimensioned voice, capable of great drama of expression". What do you suggest? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:05, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

ps: Sorry, I just don't like maintenance tags (can't help thinking: what will our readers think?), and prefer discussions on the talk. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:10, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

past midnight, can't keep my eyes open any longer, - will check tomorrow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:31, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Colloquial Welsh nouns

Hi. Could you take a look at this one? It gets an incredibly high rating on earwig, 89%, but when you look at the report, I think there's overlap, but I don't think it rises to a true copyright violation.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:38, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Onel5969! So, I took a look at this, and I think that it should go to WP:CP; the overlap is high but sporadic – mostly fairly short phrases – but it seems to be associated with a good deal of WP:close following. The page seems to me fundamentally unencyclopaedic in any case, but let's ignore that for now. Will you deal with the listing, or would you prefer me to? (it'd be later, I'm already halfway out of the door). And BTW the []Colloquial Welsh prepositions|prepositions]] are no better than the nouns. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:44, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I'll take care of it. And I'll look at the Pronouns as well...Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:51, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Lady Rose Gilman

Why did you delete this article, edit history and all without discussion? That's very nice... one cannot even have access to the content. I'd like to know. Anotherwikipedianuser (talk) 22:27, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Anotherwikipedianuser! I deleted it because it was nominated for deletion as G4, Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion; that discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lady Rose Gilman. I believe you must already have access to the content, as you were able to reproduce it very closely when you re-created the article two years later. For example, where the deleted version had

Lady Rose was born at St Mary's Hospital, Paddington, London, and at birth was 12th in line of succession to the British Throne. She was baptised on 13 July 1980 at Barnwell Church, Northamptonshire.

the re-created version had

Lady Rose was born at St Mary's Hospital, Paddington, London, and at birth was 12th in line of succession to the British Throne. She was baptised on 13 July 1980 at Barnwell Church, Northamptonshire.

You are of course welcome to ask for review at Wikipedia:Deletion review (which, following an edit-conflict, I see you have already done). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:49, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

No, I don't have access to the content as you have deleted everything. When I recreated the page, it was a redirect, so I could use the previous content. I'm not an admin, so now I would have to start from scratch. Anotherwikipedianuser (talk) 22:53, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

On second thoughts, maybe the article was deleted, but I was able to retrieve the contents somewhere else on those Wikipedia mirror pages or something... which I can't do now. Anotherwikipedianuser (talk) 22:56, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Deletion review for Lady Rose Gilman

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Lady Rose Gilman. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.

Page deletion

WOW! That was a superfast deletion - just a couple of hours - no chance for me to go back and correct the offending issue! I still do not even know what the actual issue was with the Catriona Fraser article - nor can I learn by visiting the original article and comparing it to the sources???? Question: Is there is a difference between a "sentence" being copied from a site - which I did not do and which is clearly a copyright issue, and a "list" --- the only thing in that entire and now deleted article that was a direct copy was a list of awards... a list of awards! not a sentence! So please help me: if that's a copyright violation - then the only way to prevent it is by re-arranging the awards? When I re-do the article from scratch - since it was deleted and I can't fix it - should I then just re-arrange the list of awards? I do regret that it violated copyright - please understand that it is my first article and that I never suspected that a list of anything is a copyright violation. In any event - thank you for your forthcoming advice.--BoriquaZurdo (talk) 16:14, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, BoriquaZurdo! So, I've checked, and not quite every word was copied from here, though I think that both the G12 nomination and my acting on it were justified (but then I would, wouldn't I?). I've restored the page, removed the most obvious copyvio/close paraphrasing, and blanked it for listing at WP:CP. You are welcome to work on a rewrite, or wait for someone to process it – your choice! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:04, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Sir or Madam! - Will learn from this and promise you a much cleaner approach from now on! --BoriquaZurdo (talk) 16:26, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

UTRS appeal #24614

A user you have blocked has opened UTRS appeal #24614 on the Unblock Ticket Request System. The reviewing administrator, Just Chilling (talk · contribs), has requested your input:

Hawk Studios Gaming (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Time: Apr 05, 2019 20:59:25

Message: Hi, I should welcome your reaction to the coment I have placed on this appeal, please. Thanks.

Notes:

• If you do not have an account on UTRS, you may create one at the administrator registration interface.
• Alternatively, you can respond here and indicate whether you are supportive or opposed to an unblock for this user and your rationale, if applicable.

--UTRSBot (talk) 20:59, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Just Chilling, thanks for responding there. I'm unfamiliar with that interface, so please forgive any mistakes I may have made in trying to use it. To summarise: I'm not in favour of unblocking unless the reservations I've expressed there are addressed. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:01, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your very clear response at UTRS. Just Chilling (talk) 22:37, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Time to Debate

Hello Sir

On my film I've few references & i think thats enough to say this is notable now if its not why this article is live? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buz-e-Chini

Search the reference in google news & GBooks & you won't find nothing but the article is live, on my article it has references but the guy who put deletion page is from "india" as this film is anti indian & showing how Pakistan Military gave response to india therefore he put deletion tag, it's a violation of wikipedia because once it was approved & after two months someone put deletion tag.

I request you to kindly investigate & give your decision.

Thanks MemonBhai (talk) 09:13, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, MemonBhai! I imagine you are talking about Operation 786? The person who nominated it for deletion may or may not be from India – neither you nor I have any way of knowing that; what is certain is that he/she is one of our most level-headed long-term administrators, with almost 50000 edits to the project. The deletion nomination is undoubtedly made in good faith, and because that editor actually believes that it "appears to be someone's home-made pet project, not a notable film" and should not have a page in our encyclopaedia. Now that you have acknowledged your connection to the film, you should place a proper paid-editor disclosure on your user page, User:MemonBhai, and also leave a note at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Operation 786 disclosing your connection. If you want the page to be kept, you should present solid and reasonable arguments for keeping it, rather than flinging accusations around. You might find this page helpful. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:46, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello

Let me clear I'm not paid for editing or creating as I'm writing for many celebrities & films such as operation 786 , noor zafar khan, Sumbal khan etc. Second thing the surname is indian who edited my article & put deletion page. Third on article buz e chini why u didn't put deletion tag? You just put the tag articles need verification if person didn't fulfill your demand what would be the result ? Will u guys delete buz e chini? I can point you 6 articles from same category & same country the articles have no references but it went live. I hope wikipedia administrator will give decision to all articles.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by MemonBhai (talk • contribs) 10:53, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

MemonBhai, you are quite new here. However, I'd advise you to avoid making baseless statements which might sometimes appear to be accusatory in tone. Operation 786 was nominated for deletion by Huon. "Huon" is a username, not a surname; if you look at User:Huon, you will learn that the name is taken from that of a character in this tetralogy by Michael Moorcock. As for Buz-e-Chini, I did what I thought appropriate, others may think differently; you might also read Wikipedia:OTHERSHITEXISTS. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:22, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Fine but I'm not talking about Huon, I'm talking about someone else who requested admin to put deletion tag & that guy is indian :)

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by MemonBhai (talk • contribs) 12:21, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

A few comments. Firstly, I'm not Indian, and if "Huon" is an Indian surname name, then we don't seem to have articles on anybody with that name: Huon lists three people, inluding two fictional ones, and all are European.

Secondly, nobody "requested" me to put a deletion tag on the article, and while on the internet I can't tell the nationality of people, I strongly suspect that the person who brought this article to my attention is Pakistani. They were trying to write an article on some non-notable person from Karachi and argued, "If Wikipedia has an article on Operation 786, then why not on my person?" Whenever I'm given such an argument I take a look at the article that's pointed out, either to explain why that article belongs on Wikipedia or to nominate it for deletion, whichever is appropriate. Since you now argued "Why Buz-e-Chini and not this one?", I took a look at the Buz-e-Chini article, too, and I would almost agree that that film indeed also shouldn't have a Wikipedia article - but Deutsche Welle reported on that film. That's a reliable third-party source, international media coverage. If the film has that level of coverage, likely additional sources in Urdu, Pashto, Dari or Hazaragi exist, too - I would be ill-equipped to find them, though. Thirdly, even if I and/or that other person were Indian, that wouldn't invalidate the reasons I gave in the deletion discussion. Huon (talk) 22:32, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Helena Artillery

Please review my rewrite of Talk:Helena Artillery/Temp and see if it is now free of copy write issues. Thanks! Aleutian06 14:10, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Is there someone else I should submit this to? Aleutian06 21:55, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Bohumil Herlischka

Can you please check if draft:Bohumil Herlischka now meets your requirements? I'll work on it more but in draft, I can't even use DYK check ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, they're not my requirements, they're the requirements of the community. You've brought the page to a point where it doesn't just meet, but abundantly exceeds, those requirements. I'm pleased to see that it is already in mainspace. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:16, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, and please excuse my sloppy wording, - I should have put "your" at least in quotation marks. - For some reason, I sometimes feel as part of the community, and when I see that an article is a translation, I am "surer" about notabiiy and references somewhere - even if not inline - than without. I found all references I added via Google, and every patroller could see that they are there. - I am not familiar with draft space: is it right that it may be deleted - but with a warning - after some time? ... and when then work is done, that time begins again? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:31, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

A draft is subject to speedy deletion as G13 after six months of inactivity, Gerda Arendt; however, it's a soft sort of deletion and the page can be restored on request. DYK check may not work, but the pagesize script does. I noticed that you didn't link happy ending in that page; our article is fairly direly awful, but lieto fine is a broad and interesting topic for an opera expert – the contrast between the Baroque Orfeo of Monteverdi and the Enlightened Orfeo of Gluck being an obvious example. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:37, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Please feel free to add such a useful link next time. - I do hope that there won't be a next time for draft. Could you please just add an article that needs attention here? Spares readers who come from the :de: or :fr: an irritating "was deleted" message (go to de:Joseph Kupelwieser and see what happens when you click left on English, and the same happens for all links to him, and no sign of German and Esperanto). I hate articles loaded with tags on top, but hate that "deleted" even more ;) - Lieto fine? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:26, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Christian Elsner

Draft:Christian Elsner, can you please check. Yes, some bits are unsourced, the lead is too short, and recording are missing, but a believe that it's better to have that article now than not. Need to leave for real life. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:17, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

I found someone. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:32, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Cautious Clay

Hi there, I am looking to lend a hand in getting this page published (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cautious_Clay), but I am unsure about a few of the reasons why it got denied (likely because this is my first time doing this). My main confusion is with the section that mentions that some of the citations seem like they were "edited in return for undisclosed payments." Coul dyou point out which those were so that I can find replacements and get this approved?

I appreciate your help! Cpcalabrese120 (talk) 21:56, 10 April 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cpcalabrese120 (talk • contribs) 21:55, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

First time doing what, Cpcalabrese120? The only thing you've done so far in Wikipedia is to post here. Did you have a different username before? Why are you interested in "getting it approved"? If you'd like some advice on suitable activities for brand-new editors, I'd be happy to try to give some (it wouldn't include trying to "get approval" for any drafts). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:20, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Tourniquet blanking

Two months ago, you blanked tourniquet in this diff. There's been no attempt at resolving this problem that I can see. I'm particularly concerned as the article seems to have tens of thousands of pageviews per month, and it's been listed at CP for two months with no progress. Can I simply rewrite the passages marked as duplicated by Earwig's Copyvio Detector to solve this problem? Even just removing them outright and reinstating the article would be a big improvement for the many readers who want to see this page. — Bilorv (he/him) _(talk) 08:26, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

That would be excellent, Bilorv. A rewrite is what is needed, as there is no clean version to revert to. The copyvio, and any content deriving from it, needs to be completely removed to avoid the risk of creating a derivative work. I'll try to comment further on the talk-page there once I've looked a little more closely at the history (at least two other pages, Surgical tourniquet and Emergency tourniquet, may also be involved or affected). It'd be great if you'd take this on, thank you! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:51, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Okay, I've rewritten bits and blanked others. Earwig's tool is still showing a lot of matches with tourniquet.org but I'm wondering if these are backwards copies. — Bilorv (he/him) _(talk) 09:54, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Great! I'll try to look soon, Bilorv. We don't really need to consider the possibility of backwards copying here, as this archived page predates all but a few early stub revisions of the page, and both tourniquets.org and delfimedical.com are cited in the second revision of the page. As I'm sure you have by now understood, this was a promotional exercise in deceptive advertising by associates (at least two) of James McEwen, so we can be quite ruthless with their text. Thank you for taking this on! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:51, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Right, Bilorv, I looked. It was much worse than I had previously thought; with hindsight, the best approach would have been to remove everything and then add back only material that was demonstrably not copied from the publicity materials of Delfi Medical. I had completely missed the more recent massive copyvio edit by another COI editor, which only showed up after the earlier problems hd been removed. The article is pretty much a wreck, I don't know if you have any inclination to do something about that? If not I'll probably leave a note at the medicine Wikiproject. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:26, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Ah, oh dear. I don't think I'm going to be able to do anything about it in that case. I hope you can find a solution. — Bilorv (he/him) _(talk) 21:46, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Elena Matei

The page wasnt edited at all by me. From the notes the page has been in Pending for over 6 months which shouldnt happen. The page should have either been published or deleted. They had qustions about notability in October. From what I can tell the page was cut down to about 3 sentences since then, the links were ammended (sort of, not a great job), and there was at least some discussion on the talk page. If someone feels the person hasnt achieve WP:Notability they should nominate it for speedy deletetion or allow the article to be published as a starter article. According to the references provided she has been on at least 3 major magazine covers in the 2 months which, with research I am not willing, to do means she probably has done enough to meet basic WP:Notability for a starter entry. I am not really invested so. Trutth563 (talk) 18:46, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Also on the talk page it says she probably meets the WP:Notability because she is one of the only celebrities out of Moldova. Trutth563 (talk) 18:48, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

No, that has no bearing on anything. Draft:Elena Matei appears to have undergone a good deal of UPE and/or sockpuppet editing. If you think it should be in mainspace you can submit it for review by a trusted AfC reviewer (press the blue bar that says "Submit ..."), who will then evaluate it and make a decision. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:49, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

I think the draft could possibly be deleted completely and rewritten. Might be the cleanest option, thought I am not going to step in some else's pond or vendetta. That being said, I think the subject while possibly not notable enough when the article was submitted has likely achieved enough notability to at least be included due to her being one of the only famous people from Moldova. To me it looks like the promotional content was removed and the article was being developed as a starter article of stubb. The entire article is only 3 sentences long. What do you think? Looks like you have created 100's of pages, would the combination of her nationality, her recognized work in fashion and the VS stuff to qualify for an article? Is there a reason you haven't rewritten the page and published it? Seems like 3 sentences wouldnt be that hard. Trutth563 (talk) 02:42, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Two reasons, Trutth563: I have absolutely no interest in the topic; and I don't – as a matter of principle – help sockpuppets and undisclosed paid editors get their material into Wikipedia. I repeat: If you think it should be in mainspace you can submit it for review by a trusted AfC reviewer (press the blue bar that says "Submit ..."), who will then evaluate it and make a decision. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:55, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Newbie wiped comments

I’m sure this is okay per WP:OWNTALK but merits vigilance going forward nevertheless. I think that removal was more aimed at my comment, and yours is probably just collateral damage.Thanks for your efforts there. Mathglot (talk) 00:38, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

I saw. And no, in a way I'm part of the problem, Mathglot – but then you've already seen the discussion at Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English#Art Nouveau in Italy. I objected quite strongly to this mass of Google-translated garbage, probably too strongly; I don't think that made the user very receptive to subsequent advice. I've created redirects for Stile Liberty and Jugendstil in Germany, will try to clean up the Chini article, and write this down to experience. My opinion: we should either deprecate the expand-language templates completely, or rewrite them so that it's completely, blindingly clear that it's only worth translating if (a) the content is properly sourced and (b) the translator is fully capable. Translation is a difficult skill – that must be why it's so very badly paid! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 01:00, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Have a look

Hello! I noticed your notability tag on Nate Lewis and followed the breadcrumbs. Please have a look at my "Bad sources" note and list on User talk:Artdoofus. I might drop you an email with some other info, no need to reply to it.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:43, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

ThatMontrealIP, I still have that contribution page open, but have been distracted by other stuff. Email is fine, but please – in the interest of openness – post here unless it's something you can't or shouldn't or don't want to make public. Nate looks to me like an AfD candidate, but I think I've used up my quota for today. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:51, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Roger that, I think Nate would pass AFD as there are some minor Washington Post reviews.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:53, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

I just realized now that you are an admin, wow. You're so mellow on wiki :) ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:55, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Userspace copyvio

I know you've cleaned up after this person before, but they apparently left behind some copyvio in their userspace at User:MasiyaPeter/sandbox. I'm probably too cautious about editing other people's userspace pages, but if you could take a look I'd be grateful. If not, no worries. Thanks. Bakazaka (talk) 23:12, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Bakazaka, done that. My take on userspace: you're right to be cautious, but violations of the Terms of Use (copyvio, BLP violations, undisclosed paid editing and so on) should take precedence over that caution. You're certainly always welcome (if there's demonstrable reason) to blank any page and list it at WP:CP. Thanks for noticing this one, best regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:19, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Will do. Many thanks for taking care of this one. Bakazaka (talk) 20:22, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Joseph H. Vicari

Is it ok to revdel from here until your edits? -- Amanda (aka DQ) 05:26, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Aarggh! I thought I'd done that (and now have). Many thanks for the reminder, Amanda/DeltaQuad. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:43, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

List of Murder, She Wrote episodes

We have copyright violations there again. I just removed[8] three episode summaries copied word for word from Imdb....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:11, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

It is more than 3 episodes. I found multiple word for word copies from Amazon where seasons 1-5 are now available for streaming. Should we go back to no edit summaries at all again?...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:23, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

WilliamJE, thanks for your vigilance! If I had my way we'd have no episode summaries at all in Wikipedia, they're just so much more trouble than they are worth. Do you see any remaining overlap with external sites now that I've removed the recent IP copyvio? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:35, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

You're welcome. I entered a Season 1 summary into a google search when those edits first appeared and it came back it clean though I had to correct one episode for a factual mistake. So I suspect those are fine.

Surprisingly I didn't watch MSW (I watched Ellery Queen with Jim Hutton and David Wayne when it came out in 1975 when I was 14) when it was on the air but for a few episodes. Around 6 months ago I bought the whole series on DVD. Right now I am working on the latter part of season 5. Season 5 is kind of weak. The episode '"The Last Flight of the Dixie Damsel" should have won an award for sci-fi writing. A plane crashes 40 years before intact and after sitting around all those years without any upkeep is flown several thousand miles. Sure and I thought the sci-fi/magic transgender fiction that I make a living from was realistic....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:46, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Another copyright violation in this edit[9] where at least two of the episode summaries are copied verbatim from IMDB. I reverted and I'm letting you know in case you want to do more....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 17:16, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Quick copyvio-related favour

Hi. Could you pop over to Pensions in Germany and confirm my suspicions that this is in fact a reverse copyvio, not a G12? The first revision of the article in 2011 lights up Earwig's bot, which suggests Wikipedia had the text first and others copied, but I can't easily prove it. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:27, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Ritchie333! Is the "lighting up" done by this blog post dated 14 June 2011? Because that was surely copied from our page after the edit of 3 May 2011 in which "Pension provision in Germany is based ..." was changed to "Pensions in Germany are based ..." (which is also consistent with the publication date). But if it's one of the sources cited in the first version of the page we may have a problem; I checked the first (only) of those, and found no cause for concern. I've revdeleted the recent copyvio. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:12, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Possessives for church buildings

Hi JLAN, thanks for you work in cleaning up Wikipedia. However, it's common practice to refer to churches, abbeys, etc, as "St. Foo's Church" or "St. Fee's Abbey". Famous examples are St. Peter's Basilica in Rome or St. Paul's Cathedral in London. So would you mind reverting your move of St. Märgen's Abbey to Abbey of St. Märgen. Thanks. Bermicourt (talk) 20:06, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Bermicourt! You are surely right about the second of those two examples, and possibly about the first too. It's my impression that we do not do that when the name of saint/person is in a foreign language (Basilica of San Vitale, not San Vitale's Basilica, Abbey of the Santissima Trinità (Venosa) not Santissima Trinità's Abbey (Venosa) etc) or simply unfamiliar (Mausoleum of Theodoric not Theodoric's Mausoleum), but I'm open to correction. It's also common practice to use the "Abbey of Foo" form (Abbey of Santa María la Real de Las Huelgas, Abbey of Saint-Remi etc). What I did here was (a) check that there were no book sources at all using the possessive 's form and (b) follow the example you had set in the first sentence when you created the page. I don't really care too much – I'm happy to self-revert and start an RM if you'd like. Time would probably be better spent on something like actually identifying Sankt Märgen, which neither we nor de.wp yet seems to have been able to do. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:45, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, you're right, it's not a hard-and-fast rule, so when I'm translating these articles I usually do a google books and general google check to see what English literature uses or, failing that, English websites. In this case it was a 3 to 1 in favour of St. Märgen's Abbey. However, I do agree that it'd be worth finding out who St. Märgen was. Bermicourt (talk) 06:23, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Administrators must secure their accounts The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised. Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, exposed, or weak Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

View additional information

Why have I received this message? All administrators are receiving it. What prompted you to send this message? Recently, several Wikipedia admin accounts were compromised. The admin accounts were desysopped on an emergency basis. In the past, the Committee often resysopped admin accounts as a matter of course once the admin was back in control of their account. The committee has updated its guidelines. Admins may now be required to undergo a fresh Request for Adminship (RfA) after losing control of their account. What do I need to do? Only to follow the instructions in this message. Check that your password is unique (not reused across sites). Check that your password is strong (not simple or guessable). Enable Two-factor authentication (2FA), if you can, to create a second hurdle for attackers. How can I find out more about two-factor authentication (2FA)? You can find out more about 2FA at m:2FA.

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 03:02, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Copyvio help (Microloan Foundation)

Hi Justlettersandnumbers,

I don't run across copyvio especially often and when I do it's usually not too complex, but today I ran across Microloan Foundation which, to me, appears to be a complete mess of copying and complete NPOV junk. Earwig shows two major issues; the first is the entire lede, so I'm guessing this is someone copying from us (although I couldn't actually find the text on their website, so I can't be entirely sure, and half the website being in French doesn't help); the second is almost certainly copyvio throughout the article, added by Iwami45 and/or 81.136.164.220, neither of which have edited outside that article. I can't tell how extensive that is, but it looks to be fairly significant. I'd appreciate if you took a look at it. LittlePuppers (talk) 00:38, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

LittlePuppers, I'm sorry to have been so slow to answer here. I've spent a good deal of time looking at this, and found it surprisingly tricky. I think I've now dealt with it (ignoring the gca-foundation site which seems to have copied from us), but if you see any remaining problem do please let me know. Thank you for keeping your eye open for copyvio! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:23, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, it looks much better now. I really appreciate you taking the time to sort all of that out. LittlePuppers (talk) 00:22, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Jawanda

Hi, I notice that you deleted Jawanda earlier as a recreation of an article previously deleted via AfD. I had tagged it as such but now notice that the creator, Yuvi Jawanda (talk · contribs), has repeatedly created the thing, albeit it with a large gap. Further, at some point in the past they had copied info from the open wiki that is jatland.com and the latest recreation was similarly copied - see here.

Caste articles are something of a specialism of mine and I've never been able to reliably source this one. Is it reaching the point where the title should be salted or is the long gap between the most recent recreation and the prior one too great to justify it? - Sitush (talk) 01:00, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Sitush! Thank you so much for keeping an eye on this stuff, which to me is completely obscure. That wiki seems to have copied content from our article in 2009, which perhaps explains why the recent creation was so similar to the version (first) deleted in 2015. It's also licenced GNU-only, so not compatible here; anything copied here from there is also copyvio (unless previously copied from us, I suppose). On salting, I'm in two minds: it's been repeatedly re-created; but isn't it kind of handy to know what title it'll be at if it pops up again? I'm inclined to suggest "wait and watch" for now – is that OK with you? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:37, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Yep, fine by me. Thanks for the considered response. - Sitush (talk) 12:02, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Sriharsha7969 and AP24x7

Hi Justlettersandnumbers! I hope you're having a great weekend and that life is treating you well. :-) I'm messaging you because I saw that you blocked Sriharsha7969 for sock puppetry, but the parent account you tagged on User:Sriharsha7969 (AP24x7) was only soft-blocked because of their username. Unless there's something I'm missing or not seeing, Sriharsha7969 shouldn't be blocked as a sock puppet because the block placed on the AP24x7 account came with a note that gave them instructions telling them to go create a new account. I also note that the parent account was blocked back in February 2018, but this account was created just two weeks ago (more than a year apart). This is unusual to me - are you sure that you linked the correct accounts together as 'sock' and 'master'? Can you take another look at this or let me know exactly what I missed or didn't see? Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:40, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Oshwah! I was doubtful; and indeed, if it had just been those two accounts, the new one surely should not have been blocked. What persuaded me otherwise was reading this, in particular the username Sriharsha6556. That, coupled with the apparent WP:UPE/WP:COI, seemed to show long-term determination to misuse multiple accounts. If you think I misjudged, please do whatever you think best in the situation. I think I wish we didn't actually invite soft-blocked editors to start socking ... Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:19, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Justlettersandnumbers! AHA! There were more accounts involved than just these two! That's what I was missing! ;-) Nope, I'm pretty sure that the evidence is clear and you did the right thing - this was exactly what I was looking for. The only thing I'd do is just update the soft block on the AP24x7 so that it reflects the blocks set on the others. Other than that, I see no crime and hear no crime (on your part). ;-)

Well... we allow the user to simply create a new account when they're soft blocked for their username is for a number of reasons. We try to provide options that'll accomplish the same thing but where one may be easier for the user than the other. Otherwise, instead of giving them the option to just make a new account - we force them to request an unblock, wait for an admin to review the request, wait for a global renamer to change the username for the account, and then wait again for an admin to unblock it... The primary reason I applied and became a global renamer was because of how many times I saw users sitting and waiting for their unblock requests and suggested new usernames to be processed, and how many of them probably gave up and left because of the red tape and the process involved... when they could've just created a new account. Yes, many times they result in more abusive usernames and the like, but in my experience... I think there's enough legitimate use that justifies its existence and any attempts for users to create more accounts in this situation so they can cause more damage is handled pretty quickly. :-)

Thanks again for the response and the explanation. I appreciate it a lot, and I wish you a great weekend and happy editing. :-D Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:31, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Really?

Hi Justlettersandnumbers, with regards to DJ Flevah all the references were already cited in the body per WP:LEAD. If you access the references almost half of them state "born Tendai Tembo". Please access references properly. Thank you Ceethekreator (talk) 17:09, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

All you need to do is put a WP:RS citation against any personal information that is not cited anywhere else in the page – such this person's real name. You can't expect other people to plough through all the refs to see if any of them support that info, the WP:BURDEN is on you to cite it properly. I checked one source, The Herald, and there's nothing there but a bare mention of his stage-name, Fleva. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:48, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Alright understood, I have cited the source that mentions his real name on the info box to avoid "other people to plough through all the refs...". Thanks :) Ceethekreator (talk) 18:06, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

New message from KCVelaga

Hello, Justlettersandnumbers. You have new messages at Talk:Thukral & Tagra.
Message added 05:45, 18 May 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

KCVelaga (talk) 05:45, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

List of sovereign states by financial assets

Hi,

You recently deleted that article as G6, however, could you have a look at List of sovereign states by external assets if possible? The article still has a redirect link and I'm unsure whether or not to restore an earlier revision which would have been [10] before the said redirect got put in place. Note: I was going to place a G8 but not sure whether or not to place it on the article. Any help would be appreciated. ImpWarfare (talk) 15:44, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, ImpWarfare, I didn't think to look at that page – I'd assumed that Christian75 would go ahead and move it to the new title once the redirect was out of the way, but maybe that wasn't the intention? Anyway, I've restored the content and it can now be moved if there's agreement that it should be. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:58, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

@ImpWarfare: It was moved today. I first saw it was deleted when I got the ping. I have moved the article to List of sovereign states by financial assets. The red links are gone :-) - Christian75 (talk) 18:59, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

CSD G12 question

Howdy, question about how you handle CSDs. A couple times, I've seen you add G12 with justification when deleting a page I marked G11. Does it make a difference in how you handle the deletion if it's a G12? I've been assuming that a CSD is a CSD and not going out of my way to look for evidence of copyvio, but if it does change things, I'm happy to start checking for copyvio to make things easier for you and the other people doing the deletion. creffett (talk) 15:02, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Creffett! My take is this: G11 always involves a subjective assessment, and, while sometimes that's a complete no-brainer, it can at times be borderline or doubtful; I pass on a good proportion of the G11s I look at (including some of yours), not because the nomination is necessarily wrong, but because I'm not convinced that it's an "unambiguous" case. G12 is much more black-and-white – if there's copyvio it has to be removed; if it affects most or all of the page there's just no question, it's a delete. Personally, I find that easier to assess; I've no idea what other more experienced admins might think. I used to find that a combined G11/G12 nomination – if appropriate – was really quite unlikely to be declined. Oh, and thanks for your good work, by the way! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:24, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, that clarifies things nicely, I'll start keeping an eye out for copyvio just to make things easier. Happy to help, and thank you for all of your cleanup work as well! creffett (talk) 15:28, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Creffett, (talk page stalker) I fully agree with that observation although I will add my own personal thoughts, as I often run across an article already tagged as a G 11 and add a G 12. My concern is the situation which would arise if I didn't add the G 12, and the admin assessing it for G 11 comes down on the side that it doesn't qualify. Then the article would be accepted, despite the fact that there are copyright issues. I also agree is often easier to process so my hope is that an admin seeing both would decide to check the G 12 first because that might be straightforward and there's no need to agonize over the G 11 issues. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:40, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Page Edits - The Optical Society

Hi, I see you made some edits to The Optical Society (OSA) back in April. Thanks for taking the time out its appreciated! I just wanted to point out a problem with one of your changes.

You flagged the OSA as a professional association and removed the scientific society tag, which is incorrect. OSA is actually a scientific society (learned society), not a professional association, these are two different types of organizations with a very key difference. OSA is a society focused around the promotion of a specific field of science, optics and photonics, we do not however maintain control or oversight of the practices and legitimacy of skills and competencies of people in those fields or provide any sort of certification or accreditation in the field. It is possible for an organization to be both, but that is not always the case.

For example the American Society of Civil Engineers is both a learned society and a professional association. They work to promote their field and to provide certifications of skills in their programs such as their Civil Engineer Certification (CEC). Contrasted with the American Association for the Advancement of Science which is a learned society promoting science in general which does not provide any sort of certification or accreditation.

I know that for a period of time it was incorrect on our website. A past employee had made the change in error, with the same misunderstanding that there is a difference, but it was corrected once discovered. Could we possibly get that change reverted? Also please let me know if you need any additional data backing this. - Tinynull (talk) 16:48, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Tinynull, I'm sorry that I forgot to answer this at once, please excuse me. I think there's some gap in our respective understandings of what a learned society is and does. As I understand it, a learned society elects by one means or another individuals who have demonstrated excellence in a particular field. I read in our article on The Optical Society that it has 300 corporate members; I don't believe that corporate membership (which is of course typical of a trade or professional association) is a characteristic of a learned society. Does the Royal Society have corporate members? the Académie des Beaux-Arts or the Académie française? the Accademia delle Arti del Disegno? I think not. Anyway, the place to discuss this is the talk-page of the article. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:56, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Draft page

I understand why you moved my page. Kindly bring it back for one more week. It is for my assignment. Im still a student, so that I can correct my mistakes. LadoyaJay (talk) 05:53, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm sorry, LadoyaJay, but under our policy on content about living people, you may not write contentious material in this encyclopaedia about people who are still alive unless it is fully supported by independent reliable sources. The content I've removed from Draft:Collen Khoza was definitely contentious, and definitely unsourced; I'm afraid I can't even consider restoring it. For now, you may be able to access your content through the page history tab, but that may change. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:23, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Planète Rap page

Hi I created a draft : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Plan%C3%A8te_Rap From the French draft : https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan%C3%A8te_Rap Plz sumbit the draft All sources all mentionned Thanks

I'm sorry, 196.113.161.66, but there's been no substantive change to that draft since I declined it before, so my comments then still apply – it's not adequately sourced and it's badly translated. Notability is not demonstrated by the few sources there are. There's really no point in re-submitting it without fixing those problems. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:08, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Association of American Medical Colleges Page Edits

Hi, I understand community vigilance about us potentially editing our page in bad way, but was anything here controversial, biased, or disputable? I see activity with similar groups by their own staff that have not been disputed (for example: =

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=American_Association_of_Colleges_of_Osteopathic_Medicine&action=history). 

For my future reference, what made the proposed change different from this? Respectfully,

Arlington9 (talk) 21:03, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Arlington9, may I thank you for taking the trouble to disclose your conflict of interest in your edit summary? – thousands don't! Community consensus is that those in your position are strongly discouraged from direct editing of affected articles. Would you mind using the talk-page of the article to propose any changes you think should be made? You can add {{request edit}} before your post to attract the attention of volunteer editors (this used to be met with stony silence, but the backlog has been cleared and such requests now often receive very prompt attention). Thank you, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:25, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

I respect the concern - it looks like someone uploaded press release boilerplate a few weeks ago (not helpful). Did we objectively violate a policy by making factual updates (including adding independent citations that the article needs anyways)? Thanks!

Arlington9 (talk) 18:13, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Need a second opinion on copyright issue

Hey Jlan, I'm clearing out This CCI and I came across Midhat Pasha Souq, which Earwig says is a copyvio from here. Problem is is that I can't for the life of my figure out if they copied from us or vice versa, as there seems to be no publication date; Am I missing something that might answer who copied from who? And, an additional question: In cases where it's too hard to tell who copied from who, what should be done? Thanks a ton, and sorry for bugging you, 💵Money💵emoji💵^💸 11:40, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I trust you already checked the Internet archive which doesn't have a capture prior to 2018 so that usually useful tool doesn't help us in this case.

However consider the following:

The wording of the Wikipedia article and the alternative site are identical. On the surface, this means we cannot rule out the possibility that whomever created the Beitalwali Hotel site copied that description from Wikipedia.

However let's compare the text of that site discussing the Azem Palace with the initial version of the Wikipedia article with that name: AZM Palace. That article was created about the same time (interestingly, on the same day). However, in this case, the text is not a match. Note some similarity which suggests that one was used to help write the other, but among other things the Wikipedia article claims a date of 1750, while the other site claims the date of 1752. I think it is highly unlikely that the person working on the hotel site would simply copy one Wikipedia article about one location, but when it comes to another building, they would write a very different description.

It seems much more likely that Wikipedia editors may have used this site as source material, with one editor using it loosely and paraphrasing it considerably (hopefully, acceptably although I haven't analyzed that) and the other editor taking the lazier root of simply copying and pasting.

I'm not quite sure whether this is enough to draw a definitive conclusion. I haven't looked at the other contributions to the CCI but I think it is reasonable to give an editor the benefit of the doubt in a one-off situation, but the benefit without a go in the opposite direction if they have committed copyright policy violations in other cases.

You could repeat the same exercise with Khan As'ad Pasha--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:35, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Sphilbrick, Man Sphil, you just break it down and analyse everything again. Kudos to your analytical abilities. That said, I'm not going to give the benefit of the doubt in this case, as the contributor's copyvios are most prevalent in articles about buildings, so this is unfortunately likely a copyvio. Thanks again for the advice you've consistently given me. 💵Money💵emoji💵^💸 14:53, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Money emoji, I glanced at this but won't be able to look in detail for a day or two (busy!). It looks to me as if Sphilbrick has anyway nailed it. One thing we don't quite agree on, though: there's no room for benefit of the doubt in a CCI – we've already established that there's such a pattern of violation that all text written by the editor can (and should) be presumptively removed unless it can be definitively shown to be clean. We don't need to establish that there's been copying in each individual page, we just go ahead and get rid of it all. I don't think we can revdelete unless actual copyvio is demonstrated, though, so proving it is still useful for that. More later, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:50, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers, Sorry to hear you are busy. When you do get a chance to take a look (and this is definitely not a rush), I think you'll find we're pretty much on the same page. If I'm examining a potential copyright issue in a vacuum (meaning I don't know anything about the editor's history) and I cannot conclude for certain that a copyright violation has occurred, I will conclude that I did definitive violation has not occurred. Obviously, that assessment will change if we get additional evidence, for example a statement from the copyright holder. However, when an editor has been found to have committed multiple copyright violations, the presumption is in the opposite direction, and I conclude that the close wording does suggest a copyright violation. You do make a good point that I had fully considered before, that we might read different conclusions about actions, e.g. reverting an edit versus revision deletion of an edit, with stronger evidence needed for revision deletion. S Philbrick(Talk) 23:42, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Au5:Draft

I provided a reason for why Au5:Draft did not deserve to be deleted but it was subsequently ignored. I want to know what I should do such that the article has a chance to be on the main wiki now that the DRAFT ARTICLE is banned from being created. I thought the purpose of a draft article was such that fellow editors could contribute to improving the article? As I have the previous source code, I thought the first appropriate step was to put the previously deleted article on the draft such that it can be improved. Unfortunately, these attempts are quickly removed as the article was "too similar" to the previous one. As the source code was from the previously deleted article on Au5, how am I supposed to make it look significantly different to avoid deletion? Is there any way the Au5 article has a chance to make it onto the main wikispace? User:LivinAWestLife 24:02, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

George Beauchamp

Hi! Please I am not a native English speaker, could you simply explain me what to do to improve the article? Thanks.--LLcentury (talk) 23:12, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I've done my best, :) --LLcentury (talk) 00:34, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I've done all I could, should I resubmit or it's not necessary? Apologies for the inconvenience. Best wishes. --LLcentury (talk) 16:31, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi friend, I've added several more sources, could you please check it if the tag is removable now? Thanks. Best wishes. --LLcentury (talk) 23:00, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello Justlettersandnumbers, the George Beauchamp DYK nomination is still on the DYK "approved" page. I am not as intimately familiar with the process, but I wanted to make sure the bot wouldn't mistakenly move it from there to the queue/prep stage. Should I remove the template from there, or is there some process that should be allowed to run its course?--MattMauler (talk) 02:59, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

MattMauler, I think it's OK, though I'm surprised that the bot moved it to approved. A DYK reviewer will presumably close it as unsuccessful in due course. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:42, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	Thanks for your extreme patience towards me. LLcentury (talk) 17:13, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Disclosure Follow-up

Hello Justlettersandnumbers, thanks for contacting me about the NetBase article. I've updated my disclosure on my profile page per your suggestion. Would you mind advising me on what parts of this article that lend to the "speedy deletion"? Thanks, --Ksurico2 (talk) 20:14, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for making appropriate disclosure, Ksurico2. As it says on your talk-page, Draft:NetBase was deleted as "unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic". Please understand that Wikipedia does not tolerate WP:Promotion of any kind. Thank you, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:21, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

List of Murder, She Wrote episodes again

I just reverted two edits as clear copyright violations. One of them was from here[11] and the other a close paraphrase from this[12]. They were done by a registered User so you may want to have a word with them too....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 01:12, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Please Restore the Page Yes Theory

Hello There, Before deleting the page Yes Theory you should have at least had a discussion. They are a huge group and highly notable. Please restore the page. IsraeliIdan (talk) 18:08, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Zvikorn, I don't agree – the page was without any independent reliable source whatsoever, and was wholly promotional in tone ("Yes Theory is a group of digital creators who are on a mission to inspire, motivate and empower others to reach their full potential by actively seeking experiences outside their comfort zones"? – really, in an encyclopaedia?). However, if you want me to restore it and nominate it for deletion I can do so – it just seems a rather pointless waste of everybody's time. Let's do this: if you list here six solid reliable sources that would support an encyclopaedic article on the topic, I'll restore it. How does that sound? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:54, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Hey, I agree with G11. It is very poorly written but still. Very notable. More than the things we have on here.

Two sources about them: 1. Forbes https://www.forbes.com/sites/petekrasspiersonkrass/2018/10/02/to-improve-his-mental-health-yes-theory-co-founder-seeks-discomfort-and-gets-a-boost-from-will-smith/#6c7477a51aa0 2. Variety https://variety.com/2019/tv/awards/will-smith-youtube-emmy-nomination-submission-1203222890/

Couldn't find anything that says they need a Wikipedia. As not many sites say that anything needs a wiki really... However, they are known for a multitude of large things. EG will smith, seek discomfort, Justin Beiber and more They have a big following on so many things. e I promise that within a week this article is on tip top shape. IsraeliIdan (talk) 19:11, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Hey please restore the page. Read my last message. This page will be top notch quality. IsraeliIdan (talk) 17:24, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Hey, Zvikorn, what about those six independent reliable sources? There's no point in me restoring the page if you don't have the sources to support notability and the content of the page itself. Wikipedia is already overloaded with unwanted promotional content, and just doesn't need any more. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:31, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Hey here are six sources about them:

1. Forbes https://www.forbes.com/sites/petekrasspiersonkrass/2018/10/02/to-improve-his-mental-health-yes-theory-co-founder-seeks-discomfort-and-gets-a-boost-from-will-smith/#6c7477a51aa0 2. Variety https://variety.com/2019/tv/awards/will-smith-youtube-emmy-nomination-submission-1203222890/ 3. PR Newswire (music news site) https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/soundboks-releases-the-ultimate-limited-edition-portable-bluetooth-speaker-in-collaboration-with-yes-theory-300860809.html 4. Buzzfeed https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/krystieyandoli/justin-bieber-eating-burrito-sideways 5. The Verge https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/25/17886896/will-smith-vlog-youtube-channel-yes-theory-bungee-jump-helicoptor-helibungee 6. Rebel https://www.rebelessex.com/2018/11/the-challenge-of-seeking-discomfort/

Not to mention the sources but Yes Theory has 40k plus on fb, one mill on insta and 3.5 mill on youtube.

bump @Justlettersandnumbers IsraeliIdan (talk) 09:17, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

hey... IsraeliIdan (talk) 20:27, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

HELLLLLO still waiting IsraeliIdan (talk) 20:22, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Naya Patrika

Regarding this edit, please share the results of your research so we can all see that you have done it. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:08, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Phil Bridger, I'm sorry, but I'm certainly not going to discuss the possible real-life identity or employment of a Wikipedia editor anywhere in Wikipedia. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:15, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. I understand. Phil Bridger (talk) 07:46, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Virginia Crosbie

This article has just been reviewed and approved by a Wiki editor. Paid contributions were declared in accordance with Wikipedia's TOS. Please detail your reasons for reverting to the current revision. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahkey512 (talk • contribs) 21:54, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

FWIW, I think Ahkey512 is right here. Tavix accepted this draft as sufficiently encyclopedic, so reverting back to the redirect essentially disregards this decision without prior consultation. Regards SoWhy 07:36, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 May 29#Virginia Crosbie. TryKid accepted the draft, but had trouble moving it to mainspace. Per WP:BLAR, the article should be restored and sent to AfD. -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:26, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Yep. The draft looked good to me but I was not experienced enough to handle the redirect deletion so I asked for help on the page linked above. Thanks for help, Tavix. Regards. TryKid (talk) 15:09, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Well, SoWhy, I was aware that Tavix had accepted the draft; but when I looked at the drivel the new page consisted of, and the rubbishy sources provided to support that drivel (Twitter, the Sun(!!), various connected sources etc) I reckoned – with all respect for Tavix and TryKid – that you had made the right decision on 8 June 2018 when you redirected it, and restored that version. I wonder, was there any prior consultation with you concerning the deletion of the previous page to make way for the paid draft? In any case, I'll now do as Tavix suggests above. Ahkey512, if you ever again copy content from an existing Wikipedia article into any other page you must provide attribution – see WP:CWW; the paid editor disclosure you've made is not sufficient, I'll leave you a note of explanation in a moment. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:41, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Virginia Crosbie. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:17, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Barb Jungr

Full disclosure was made at the point edits to this article became paid in line with Wikipedia TOS, so please explain your reasons for reverting this article to the current revision.

Ahkey512, between 31 October 2016 and 11 September 2018 you made twenty-four undisclosed paid edits to Barb Jungr, thus violating the Terms of Use under which all contributions to Wikimedia projects are made. I've reverted them. Like any other paid editor, you can if you wish request changes to the article by posting on the talk-page – I'll put some details of how to go about that on that page. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:22, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Bisri dam

Thanks for the feedback on the Bisri dam page. We changed it again and hope that all is good now. Feel free to have a look at it. We appreciate any feedback. Thank you! Stormy666 (talk) 09:02, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

What do you mean by "we", Stormy666? Is there more than one of you? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:11, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Page

Hi again Justlettersandnumbers, hope you're enjoying summer! I've just spent a while now revising and completely rewriting the original Vivienne Goonewardene page which, as you may remember, had some copyright issues with. I've now completed the page, but don't want to publish it to avoid getting a copyright strike without the text having being compared to the previously cited material. Is there anywhere I should publish it to allow you to have a look and give it the green-light?

Thanks, JamesSmith1988 (talk) 17:51, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

JamesSmith1988, I'm not sure what you mean – you last edited Vivienne Goonewardene on 8 April. Anyway, given your long history of problematic edits to that article, my initial advice is simply to stay well clear of it. If you absolutely must edit it, I strongly suggest that you do so in the normal Wikipedian way, working on a sentence or at most a few sentences at a time, making small changes, writing entirely in your own words, citing your sources and saving your changes at every step. As long as you do that it's hard to see how you could go wrong. As you have already discovered, the massive-text-dump approach is fraught with hazards. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:03, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers, thank you for your advice! - Just to clarify my previous comment, I've written a revised page but haven't published it. So you would recommend editing piece by piece instead of as a whole?

Again, thank you very much for your help, it's been super insightful. Thanks, JamesSmith1988 (talk) 15:53, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Draft Page Ahmed Adel (actor)

Hello, The page is supported by more than 9 References, There are also pages in other wikipedia.

Best --Crixuos —Preceding undated comment added 11:03, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Oh well, Crixuos, as you wish. I moved it to draft space so that you could improve it and then submit it for review by an experienced editor, but it seems to you didn't want to do that. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahmed Adel (actor). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:50, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers Beautiful reception in EN Wikipedia. --Crixuos

Check for copyvios?

Could you check Lori G. Beaman for copyvios? As noted on the talkpage, it has a lot of numbers in parentheses, which looks like the text was copy-pasted verbatim from a footnoted text. Softlavender (talk) 05:40, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

It certainly did, Softlavender. I wasn't able to trace any source that it might have been copied from – perhaps it was from a student assignment or something similar – but I've removed it anyway as it was unsourced and was serving no encyclopaedic purpose. I found some fairly minor copyvio nd removed that too. That article still needs a lot of cleaning up, don't know if I can tempt you ...? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:25, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks very much for that! Much appreciated. I don't know that I will have any time to do anything to the article -- I had simply noticed the person asking a question at the Teahouse about their edits getting deleted, and I checked their contribs. Thanks again! (By the way, can you once again replace the TOC on this talkpage? It's still very hard to use without one, and affects accessibility, which is important for admins.) Softlavender (talk) 01:17, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Barb Jung

A musician's web site can be used as a source provided it isn't used to justify grandiose claims. I'm not sure about this particular instance.
Vmavanti (talk) 13:10, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Removing galleries' lists of represented artists

Hi. What's your opinion of this edit on Charles Cowles (art dealer) please? Having removed them because they are a long bare list which lack much in the way of sources that would indicate whether the relationship is notable, includes red links, WP:NOTDIRECTORY, WP:INHERITORG, etc etc which you know all too well, someone saying the opposite makes me wonder if I should question my rationale. Thanks. -Lopifalko (talk) 10:15, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Samuel Kunz

Not sure what to do here. There is so much copyvio intertwined with non copy-vio material, if I remove the copyvio, what's left doesn't make sense. Suggestions?

I see what you mean, Onel5969, it's not an easy choice. So, when there's no clean version to revert to, the remaining options are G12 and listing at WP:CP. I think G12 would have a good chance of being accepted here, for exactly the reason you give – once the copyvio is removed, there's not much left. But given the sourcing, I believe this is probably a page that we should have, so listing at WP:CP would produce a better result for the encyclopaedia. Will you do that, or would you like me to? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:58, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the direction. I don't run into this much, but I should have remembered the CP option. My quandary was exactly what you state above, not much without the Copyvio material, but most likely should be an article. I'll take care of it at CP, but feel free to edit my entry there if I screw it up. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:01, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Request

Hello dear I have a question of you about Farshid asadian's wikipedia page. Please tell me why do you delete his page? He won several medal of asian and word championships and he is famuos on martial art. My english language is weak. Excusme about it.Payamkermanshahi (talk) 14:57, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Payamkermanshahi, Farshid Asadian was deleted by community consensus, established in this discussion. Unless there has been some major change in the last four months, I wouldn't recommend trying to re-create it. Anyway, why are you asking me, when neither you nor I ever edited that page or participated in the deletion discussion? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:00, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Your speak is correct, I am looking for the subject of this article because of my interest in sports, and I felt that it should not be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Payamkermanshahi (talk • contribs) 14:02, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Samuel Kunz

Dear Justlettersandsnumbers

I am happy you try to elevate the Wiki-quality and help me to improve my article. As far as I can see, you are quite experienced in copyright issues. Which I appreciate as an author and publisher for many years. The issue of Samuel Kunz and his whereabouts after Nazi-Germany is relevant, it will become a theme in a publication. Insofar there should be a crystal-clear, sober Wiki entry. Please help me: to find out about the alleged copyright violation in my entry I should have access to the original text. Though I am seasoned in publishing, the Wiki-world is quite new and sometimes confusing to me. Where can I find it? Please leave a note on my talk page (rudygu21). Thank you for your support in advance! Rudyguy21 (talk) 08:52, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Rudyguy21, you can access the text of the page through the page history; the most recent non-blanked version is this one. You can rewrite the article at this special temporary page. Please don't copy any compromised text from the old version, as that will make the rewrite useless. If you prefer, I can clean up the article for you and you can then add to it as you wish. Please let me know. Oh, and you shouldn't be using Wikipedia to promote a future publication. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:10, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Trident13 copying from books

Just curious, do you ever know if he copied from books? Asking because I'm worried that he copied a lot of content on Rolling stock of the Keighley and Worth Valley Railway from this book. 💵Money💵emoji💵^💸 15:23, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Not that I can specifically remember at the moment, Money emoji. I think the only available choices there (as just about everywhere) are to either presumptively remove all text added by T13 unless it can be securely verified by reference to the source to be free of copyvio; or to blank the page and list it at WP:CP. I took a quick look at the initial text on No. 68077, and most of it seems to be adequately re-phrased from the cited source. As you know, we just can't take anything on trust. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:51, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Question

Re this, who do you see as COI editors there? Indianapolis schools have been a hotbed for COI for years, especially but not limited to, private schools. It's almost like they had a meeting and decided to do it. Email is open if you'd rather. John from Idegon (talk) 23:27, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Please stop

Hi--you don't know me and your accusation that I have a conflict of interest on the Touro College page is completely unfounded, as is your accusation of plagiarism. My changes are not copied from anywhere; all content is written by me and is unbiased and in line with Wikipedia standards. Your behavior on the Touro College page, along with JesseRafe's, is not in the spirit of making the page better. If you have constructive edits or additions to make, please feel free. In the meantime, please stop reverting changes and putting up maintenance tags. Also please stop threatening and harassing me, thanks! Lillibetsy (talk) 15:07, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello JLAN. If you want your link to the COI complaint that you left at Talk:Touro College to be a permanent link that goes to the correct section, I think this one works better. EdJohnston (talk) 17:29, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Indeed it does! Thanks, EdJohnston! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:36, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Lillibetsy, I understand your frustration. Unfortunately Justlettersandnumbers receives lots of complaints from many different people on his way of acting on Wikipedia articles. He accuses many people of non existent conflicts of interests and he thinks he is the only one that knows "the truth" and doesn't accept that others can create pages or add information to existing pages. Wikipedia senior managers should look into Justlettersandnumbers behaviour. Just look at how many people had troubles with him on his talk page. Endless! I think he should create his private Wikipedia. A real pain for all users in good faith that dedicate many hours of their lives to modify, with reliable sources, Wikipedia articles and make them better every day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.59.199.207 (talk) 08:18, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Samuel Kunz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_KunzRudyguy21 (talk) 12:40, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Dear Justlettersandsnumbers,

thank you for the link (it works)! Tomorrow (Monday, July 1) I begin to compare the compromised Wiki entry with the source you cited. I won't exclude having worked somewhat hastily, maybe not appropriate, we will see. Anyhow, the current entry is the most complete sourced article about Samuel Kunz. Please compare it to the German version https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Kunz which lacks many relevant sources. Though I appreciate your offer to support me in cleaning up the entry, I will do so myself in the first place. Of course, if you have some notable new information and sources, I would be happy if you improve the entry. No, I am not preparing a publication on Samuel Kunz, though the issue may be an issue in coming discourses about the lackluster engagement of After-Nazigermany-Germany in regard to bringing Nazi criminals to justice.

Rudyguy21 (talk) 12:40, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Smithson's shenanigans at Commons

After our friend's recent machinations via 151.21.138.187 and 151.21.152.64 here and on Commons. I started a query at Commons about what to do with all their uploads and edits there. It's at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Problem with dozens and dozens of uploads and edits by socks of globally banned User:Alec Smithson. Doubt if we'll get any joy. But it's worth a try. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:00, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Follow-up. See Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Giannino Castiglioni. It's a start. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:37, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Samuel Kunz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_KunzRudyguy21 (talk) 14:07, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Dear Justlettersandnumbers,

uff, indeed I have worked sloppily in the start-section of the entry. Sorry, shouldn't have happened.

Here is my take 1. Structure: I cannot change the facts and the chronology of Samuel Kunz's life and the events. Therefore I didn't touch the order. 2. Sources: as mentioned before, the entry reflects the best researched and checked sources about this issue for the time being. So I prefer a rework than crafting a new entry. 3. Rework: because you refer (correctly) to the https://trialinternational.org/latest-post/samuel-kunz/ article in regard to copyright issues, I reworked, in particular, the parts in question. 4. New source: anyhow, I put in a new source which I found while checking the sources.

Regrettably, by reworking the article, the copyright-infringement flag disappeared. This was not my intention! I am not as skilled in Wiki-work to assess this situation. This is up to you or an administrator.

If this is not enough from your angle, or if an automated Wiki tool gives a hint, please let me know on my talk page. Thank you!

Rudyguy21 (talk) 14:07, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Time's Convert

Hi, I am creating a draft named Time's Convert which has the similar concept as the one you have deleted before. Is it ok? I am doing this as an assignment. User: minh3010 —Preceding undated comment added 02:37, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

That's fine with me, Minh3010. I see that it has already been restored. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:05, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I am responding to the edits re: David Levy article

Hello. I received your messages on my talk page, and I see that additional templates have been added. Over the past month, I have been trying to get people to help me to edit this article, and I have received advice from multiple people. I believe I have addressed all the issues that people have brought up, (i.e. getting rid of any "peacock" language, making the article neutral, providing citations, etc.) I even tried to reach the first person who put up the COI template, and there was no response. So I used the Live Chat Channel to ask other editors, and I received this comment, "the editor who put the tag on the page is fine with removing it, so it looks like anyone can go ahead and do that," which is why I removed the template a few days ago. I saved the chat log if evidence is needed.

I am not being paid to edit this article, and I went ahead and made a statement of disclosure on my talk page. I am a complete beginner regarding Wikipedia editing, so if I am committing any offenses, they are all unintentional. I respond to every issue that is brought up, and I am doing my best to address all of them.

I believe I have addressed the issues that you brought up, but if there is more I can do, please, let me know. Thank you.

Update: In reviewing the edits that you have made in the view history, a couple of the edits seem opinionated and personal, especially in regards to your comment of removing the Graduation Ceremony picture, "we don't really need two bad pictures of him." There is no explanation as to why it is unnecessary, and insulting the photo seems very personal and subjective.

Update: Regarding the BLP template. What additional citations are needed? Please, give specific examples. I believe you have removed the statements that needed additional citations, and the ones that remain are cited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kmh1011 (talk • contribs) 20:01, 6 July 2019 (UTC) Kmh1011 (talk) 04:40, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Kmh1011, if you want to discuss David Levy (psychologist), the best place to do so is Talk:David Levy (psychologist). You are quite right, my comment "we don't really need two bad pictures of him" was incorrect and inaccurate. I should have written something like "we don't need two pictures of him; remove this even though the other recently-added one is very poor indeed". My apologies for that. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:29, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Help understanding Vienna Secession

I'm trying to quickly clear out sourcerey's CCI to avoid an even larger backlog, and I'm very confused about what happened with this article. Have his contributions been reverted and there was already a vio on the article which is why it was blanked, or are you just blanking out of percaution? Thanks, 💵Money💵emoji💵^💸 18:16, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Money emoji, as you may have seen from the history there, I was confused myself. I've presumptively reverted all his/her edits since the previous copyvio. Please let me know if you think I've missed anything. This user did not have a good command of English, so if you see anything that seems well-written, it may have been copied. Thank you, a big thank you, for this and all the other clean-up work you are doing. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:17, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Submarines

I would like to add that the US Navy uses these different salient levels to help locate submarines that hide between these levels. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rover411 (talk • contribs) 21:23, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Rover411, I'm afraid I have just no idea what you are talking about. Which article? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:20, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Electoral history of Pierre Trudeau

Hi, Justlettersandnumbers, I don't understand why you restored my user page draft for Electoral history of Pierre Trudeau and then created a re-direct? Usually when I've asked for a delete for a User page draft, it's just been deleted and the finished article is a stand-alone, the way Ritchie333 originally did with my request. Your comment for the restore was to have the history, but clicking "history" of the article page just brings up the history for when I made that page, and clicking the history of the user page draft just brings up the merge report. So, I'm puzzled what the point of having a redirect from a user page draft is? I will ping Ritchie 333 and also Fastily, who's normally been the admin who responds to my delete requests, because I'm curious if there is a consistent policy? @Ritchie333 and Fastily:inquiry about deleting user drafts Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 18:35, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Mr Serjeant Buzfuz, instead of moving it to the new title in the normal way, you copy-pasted the content of the draft into a new page, thus breaking the continuity of the page history. In this particular case that isn't big problem, as all the earlier edits were by you; they now appear in the history of Electoral history of Pierre Trudeau. If I was wrong to do that I'm sure someone will let me know and/or fix it. Maybe next time you could just move a page if you want it to have a different title? Justlettersandnumbers (talk)

Thanks for the reply. The reason I've been doing the cut and paste approach is that some other admin told me some time ago that if I do my work in a user page draft and then move it myself, that might look like I'm trying to avoid new page review, which I obviously don't want to do. By starting a new article page, that puts the article into new page review. But if it's okay to move it myself now, thanks. I just don't see the point of keeping an empty user page draft as a redirect? Previously, when I've asked to have them deleted after the new articles are complete in the article area, the admins have deleted the user pages entirely. I view the user space drafts as a working space, and want to tidy up once I'm done, so have asked for them to be deleted, which is what normally happens. I'm just confused now. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 01:50, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

I've deleted it for you, Mr Serjeant Buzfuz. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:46, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks!Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 13:30, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Minden High School

Could you possibly email me a copy of that so I can use some of the sources to create a viable article? Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 20:17, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes of course, John from Idegon! It goes without saying (but I'll just say it anyway) that no running text from the deleted version should be used. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:24, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Nivedita Singh Chandel

Prabhash987 (talk) 09:29, 11 July 2019 (UTC) Sorry for the copy paste mistake in my Article Nivedita Singh Chandel . Had a question Can i delete the Draft:Nivedita Singh Chandel and the create a new fresh cited article or what must i do please guide me

Prabhash987, that page as it stands would not last ten minutes in article space – it just isn't ready. I suggest the following steps:

• declare any conflict of interest you have in relation to the subject
• ensure that every single fact in the draft is supported by an independent reliable source, and remove all unsourced material
• when you think it's ready, submit the draft for review by an experienced editor.

Please remember, there is no deadline – you can take all the time you want to complete the page before you submit it. Good luck! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:38, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Can you please closely visit Draft: Nivedita Singh Chandel and tell me the main problems in it. Because i think i have cited everything.

THANKYOU justlettersandnumbers Prabhash987 (talk) 09:51, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

G13 on DRAFT:Rafael Bonachela

Hello,

I just wanted to let you know that DRAFT:Rafael Bonachela already exist in mainspace here thats why i tagged it. Please check and reconfirm. Lapablo (talk) 10:27, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, Lapablo, I found that out – but only after I'd spent a good number of minutes of my life cleaning the copyvio from the draft. I was not too pleased by that discovery! I think I've now also cleaned up the article, but do please let me know if you think I've missed anything. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:38, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you

For your earlier attention to the plagiarism in the Gunness article. The encyclopedia clearly needs careful, discerning editors such as you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:246:C700:2DB2:F991:606B:C2B4:E94F (talk) 16:57, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Mina Margaret Ogbanga

Please how can I improve on this article so it can be in the main stream? Livingstone Imonitie (talk) 16:45, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Livingstone Imonitie! As with any other article, you'd need to find and add to the page enough independent reliable sources to demonstrate that the topic is notable and thus deserving of a Wikipedia page. Those weren't there when I moved it to draft, and I think are still not there. Without them, there's essentially no chance that there will ever be an article. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:08, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Request to remove Notability: Amotz Plessner

Hi Justlettersandnumbers, I am reaching out to you per WP:WTRMT, since I believe that notability has been established on the Amotz Plessner page. If you I should write this on the talk page, please let me know. Thanks --UberVegan🌾 21:49, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi! Yes, UberVegan, I think the talk-page would be the best place. I don't have to look at it again myself right now, I'm afraid. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:03, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

"afraid" meaning you don't think it has reached notability? UberVegan🌾 23:10, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City temp article

Hi! Just a heads up, I've proposed a temp article to address the copyvio issue at Talk:Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City. Thanks! Mary Gaulke (talk) 00:20, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Stewart Vaughan

This is what the French call "acharnement".

I was told by Mjs1991 that this article was to be deleted because there was no proof that the subject was notable. I responded to that, within the day.

Now you are telling me I do not provide enough independant sources.

Please explain what more you want.

I have provided, in 4 cases, internet sites, set up by the Theatre where the show was presented, and whose home page clearly shows the names of the adaptors.

For the shows which don't have a website I have provided

- Link to the French National Library archive site

- Link to the Belgian Performing Arts Yearbook site

- Link to the site of the publisher of the script

- Link to the Society of Parisian Theatres

For the lyrics, I have provided links to independant sites where three of the songs can be heard.

How can you say these links are not independant ?

I have just looked at the English wikipedia page for Gerard Depardieu. For this man, with an enormous career, it has 29 references.

I then looked at the French wikipedia page for Jean-Luc Moreau, who directed most of the plays featured in my article. The article for him has 3 references.

You are complaining because the page I have written has only 11 ?

Please tell me what more you want. I will provide it.

Until then, please restore my page.

There are many, many, Wikipedia pages, with far fewer references, (and often ones with broken links) that have not been removed.

Kirkleyditch (talk) 20:58, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

A request

Hi, it would be very much appreciated if you would step back from the situation with Elisa.rolle. As I posted earlier, several of us have formed a mentoring group with a view to presenting a plan to AN. Four of us are admins, so we can handle anything that needs to be dealt with. What I'm hoping is that the admins and editors who dealt with her before will step back so that the same issues don't repeat themselves. We're hoping for a fresh start. As for the copyright issues, she has agreed not to copy any text, including public-domain texts, but to learn to summarize in her own words, and we will make sure that she follows through on that. SarahSV ^(talk) 19:32, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

No, sorry, SlimVirgin, you don't get to tell me to step back. I tried – unsuccessfully – to warn a good-faith editor against behaviour I believed to be unwise, that's all. Would you perhaps care to explain to her the dangers of making edits on behalf of a banned editor? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:54, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

I didn't tell you to step back. I asked you to. Other experienced editors and admins are dealing with the situation, and we will very soon go to AN with an unblock request and the mentoring plan. No one is making edits on behalf of a banned editor. SarahSV ^(talk) 20:01, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Humphrey Bradley

On 5 August 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Humphrey Bradley, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1599, Henry IV of France appointed Humphrey Bradley maître des digues du royaume ('master of dykes of the kingdom'), in effect a monopoly of all dyking and land reclamation work in France? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Humphrey Bradley. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Humphrey Bradley), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:01, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Town of Salem

If a salted page is created, does the salt protection level carry over to the created page? I think Town of Salem would be a good redirect to Salem, but don't want to accidentally invite the disruption that led to it being salted mere hours ago. Wug·a·po·des​ 08:43, 7 August 2019 (UTC)−

Hi, Wugapodes! That page is protected only against creation. If you decide to create the redirect and there's more disruption, you can of course request protection, but that's likely to be only temporary. I'm not sure that the benefits outweigh the possible disadvantages, but it's your call. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:07, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Good to know. You're probably right about the pros and cons so I'll leave it for someone else to make if the need comes up. Wug·a·po·des​ 16:32, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Gboyega Nasir Isiaka

The speedy deletion tag that was added to the now deleted Gboyega Nasir Isiaka page is not supposed to be. I never made use of the supposed source when writing. I will like to see the copyright infringement you spoke of. Thank you. Timmylegend (talk) 09:02, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Timmylegend! This can happen – sometimes there are several versions of a text at different addresses on the internet, and software or an editor may identify overlap with the "wrong" one. However, it doesn't really matter whether the content was copied from this page (which you clearly did use) or from his facebook page – the two are the same. The point is that you may not copy material from non-free external sources into Wikipedia (unless it is as a brief quotation properly formatted as one). Everything you write here must be entirely in your own words. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:31, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Justlettersandnumbers can you kindly revert it back as a draft page. Thank you. Timmylegend (talk) 10:46, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Gboyega Nasir Isiaka. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:15, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Question about Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Elisa.rolle

Hey Jlan; Glad you're back! Since you were involved in the origins of the er case, would you be knowledgeable as to how many of her copyvios were from offline sources? Thanks, 💵Money💵emoji💵^💸 22:36, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Your deletion

Your deletion of the article being created --Gili_Haimovitz -- should be reversed. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Gili_Haimovitz&action=edit&redlink=1

It was based on this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Gili_Haimovitz

That was a different article, half a decade ago.

And the notability standards are different now as well.

That should have been clear from the note on the talk page here -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Gili_Haimovitz I can't understand your deletion at all given these points.

I am pinging User:Joe Decker as well who was involved in the prior deletion. And User:Lugnuts who is expert in these matters.

--2604:2000:E010:1100:5956:F4E9:2329:39C3 (talk) 22:48, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes, my mistake – see Draft:Gili Haimovitz. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:36, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks.2604:2000:E010:1100:859:A12B:DB1:7246 (talk) 07:14, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Samuel Kunz

Hi Justlettersandnumbers, you were the first to discover a copyright flaw in the entry Samuel Kunz, written by me. Erroneously I copied an unredacted chapter into the "real thing". During the complicated procedure, I proposed to delete the article and to write it anew. Which is done right now. I hope, now everything is alright. If you have recommendations, please let me know. Thanks again for your attentiveness. Rudyguy21 (talk) 13:06, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Don't bother

Trying to find sources for that V D Pawar article. it's a hoax just like everything this guy has ever created ;) Praxidicae (talk) 14:02, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

School of Paris - close paraphrasing?

Hello Justlettersandnumbers, It appears to me that Soulberia may have just re-inserted the same material you removed from School of Paris as a copyright violation. The byte count is the same. What was added looks like close paraphrasing to me - but I'm not a good judge of that. Gab4gab (talk) 18:54, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, User:Gab4gab! Yes indeed, you were right – I've removed the same content again. Most of it was copied straight from the source website, with only minimal attempt to rephrase. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:51, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Evelyn Songco

Hi, Justlettersandnumbers. I added sources to the page of Prof. Evelyn Songco. Please review. Thank you very much.

Marilu Madrunio

Hi, Justlettersandnumbers. I added sources to the page of Dean Marilu Madrunio. Please review. Thank you very much.

Deletion review for Galbraith (property consultancy)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Galbraith (property consultancy). Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 51.148.106.137 (talk) 12:00, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 51.148.106.137 (talk) 11:45, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Requests for permissions

The Requests for permissions page has not had any grants or refusals in two days. Can you grant or refuse permissions please? Thanks! :). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wyatt2049 (talk • contribs) 20:53, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Response Regarding OneStream Software

Hi there - thank you for the helpful information regarding the OneStream Software article. I have taken action on your recommendations (username change / user disclosure). What else needs to be done before I can begin working on this article again?

Thanks LMF2019 (talk) 16:23, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for taking those two steps LMF2019, that's a good start! You are expected to refrain from making any edit about the company in mainspace, but may start a new draft version of the page if you wish. As with any draft, you will need to show that it is a notable topic by citing a good number of reliable, secondary, published sources that are entirely independent of the subject and cover it in depth and in detail (i.e., not just mere mentions); you'll also need to ensure that it is written entirely neutrally – something that's often not easy for those in your position. You are welcome to visit the WP:TEAHOUSE to ask advice, but should ensure that you disclose your paid status if you do so. Good luck! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:36, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Question

Take a look at Oliver Scholfield. The copyvio report basically says the first two lines were cut and paste. Is this something that I should request a revdel on? I left it in the article only for you to see, I'll remove it once I get your advice.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:48, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Onel5969! I've gone ahead and removed those sentences, and revdeleted the history (it just seemed easier all round to do it myself while I was looking at it). I've also spot-checked a few other page creations by the same editor without finding any other cause for concern. My take on revdeletion for a brief passage like that is roughly this: if it's relatively recent and/or the page history is not long, do it; if the page has a long or complex history, it's likely to be better not to – the fallout probably exceeds any benefit. I'll leave it up to you to decide whether to leave a {{cclean}} on the talk-page and/or a note on the editor's talk – I don't see either as essential. Regards, and thanks for your sharp eye! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:21, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll keep those in mind. Seems to be quite a few revdels recently. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:55, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Drama Studio London

Hello, I can see that you have literally removed everything I have just contributed to Wikipedia as a new editor and you are automatically accusing me of having a close connection to the subject without even discussing it with me first. I do not have any connection whatsoever to the school, I only like researching all of the drama schools in the UK, which are highly prestigious and accredited. I find it strange you even add red links backs to the article, which is against Wikipedia policy itself and you have removed even more information from the article than what it had before I started editing it. I will revert everything that you have removed from me so far and then we can discuss together what she be removed or edited before you literally delete everything that I have done so far in good faith, which would be more fair and more in line with Wikipedia policy. Please see my discussion with User:Ganbaruby --Coreyar (talk) 13:15, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

• Hello again, I would invite you to join in my discussion where I have explained my edits with Ganbaruby (talk · contribs). Please do not remove my edits again without discussing it with me first and giving me a chance to update my edits.--Coreyar (talk) 13:34, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
  • P.S. I really do not want to start an argument and just honestly want to discuss my edits with you. I hope we come to a solution together.--Coreyar (talk) 13:36, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Please do not do that, Coreyar ... oh, I see that you already have. That was unwise – if you look my edit summary here, you will see that it reads in part " ... Grossly promotional content, copyright violations from [url] ...". By adding the same content again you also restored the copyright violations, so I have again removed it and again hidden it in the page history. Please, for your own sake, do not even think of adding it back – everything you write here must be entirely in your own words, and copying from non-free external sources is not allowed. Repeated violations of our copyright policy can lead to loss of editing privileges. Another of our basic rules is neutrality – any text you add should be written in the neutral and dispassionate tone appropriate to an encyclopaedia. That means that stuff like "... the most prestigious and most selective officially accredited leading drama schools ..." has no place here, and is likely to be removed on sight. I'll leave an invitation on your talk. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:55, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

But it is also against Wikipedia policy to add red links and highly inaccurate information to an article and claiming ownership of an article, whih you are doing yourself....Please allow me to re-add this information back to the article while I am in the process of editing it. That seems only fair. Please join in my discussion with Ganbaruby (talk · contribs) which you have refused to do so far.--Coreyar (talk) 13:58, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

And you added it a third time! The page is now listed at copyright problems for investigation by someone else – I'm not prepared to continue this back-and-forth any longer. You may not edit any of the blanked content, but can work on a rewrite here if you wish. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:09, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

What gives you the right to claim ownership of an article or to tell another editor what he can or cannot do? Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia free for all to edit. You have also repeatedly refused to discuss any of my edits with me or to give me a chance to edit the article..and you violated Wikipedia policy by adding red links and inaccurate information casting the subject of the article in a negative light and removed sourced information (even information that the article had before I edited it) which in itself is against Wikipedia policies..but you refuse to acknowledge any of this yourself..yet again--Coreyar (talk) 14:25, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Undiscosed tag, Ric Lewis

I noticed that you added an undiscosed tag on https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ric_Lewis&action=history, yet when I check the article Talk page he has in fact disclosed that he is a paid editor. Might I ask for my edification, why you added the tag after he discosed? Thanks. Ping me to a reply or reply on my talk page.Oldperson (talk) 23:10, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Oldperson! I'm afraid you've lost me: Talk:Ric Lewis does not have any paid-editor disclosure on it, nor is there any record in the history of one being placed there. I added the tag because the editor's contribution history strongly suggests an undeclared paid relationship. Do you think I was wrong? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:05, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Right, let me correct that – there is a disclosure of paid status, from the editor who requested the page move. There is no disclosure that I can see from the page creator. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:09, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi: I asked the question because this statement is in a template on Talk:Ric Lewis Am I reading this statement wrong? "Richard Wayne Lewis → Ric Lewis – I am a fully disclosed paid editor representing Ric Lewis on behalf of Tristan Capitol Partners via Wikinative. The subject of this page asks that the page be moved from its current location to 'Ric Lewis' as this is what he is refered to in the RS. Moreover, Wikipedia's own policy on titles WP:AT clearly states, "Generally, article titles are based on what the subject is called in reliable sources". If you need to verify Ric Lewis's name here is an interview he did with Krishnan Guru-Murthy of all people, https://www.channel4.com/news/season-2-episode-15-ric-lewis Essayist1 (talk) 14:58, 15 August 2019 (UTC) This is the statement which you mentioned and I referenced. It does appear that the statement fulfills the requirement, as he stated that he is a "fully disclosed paid editor representing Ric Lewis". Checking the revision history the only name I see is Essayist1. Who then is the original editor and how do I check that?. Also why would Essayist1 fully disclose he was a paid editor representing Ric Lewis, if he wasn't the person that created the article?

As the case appears to be presented You are stating that an undisclosed paid editor created the page Richard Wayne Lewis, but a fully disclosed paid editor is asking that it be moved to Ric Lewis. However I cannot locate the original editor, and whether or not he was paid, a perceived fully disclosed paid editor has posted and because he has not demurred or altered the content of the article, thus agrees, he is taking ownership of the authoring and thus fulfills the requirement. I have no idea who Ric Lewis is,and not interested, in fact I haven't read the artice, only the talk page, just trying to understand the nuances and how various editors interpret the rules.Oldperson (talk) 14:12, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes, you are right – the editor who proposed the page move disclosed a paid connection on the talk-page. That editor has no edits to the article, and nowhere took any ownership (which of course he can't do anyway). The editor who created the article has no edits to the talk-page, and shows every sign of being an undisclosed paid editor. I believe the tag is justified, but of course am open to discussion. If you do want to discuss it further, the best place is probably Talk:Ric Lewis. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:23, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Your emaiL?

I don't remember getting an email from you yesterday ... sure you meant me? Daniel Case (talk) 17:21, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

You replied to an email I sent to oversight. I can easily mail that address again if it's better. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:23, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Oh, that was what it was about ... I don't always remember the names of people who send stuff to oversight; the software on our end doesn't prominently display the sender's name; sometimes I remember it, sometimes I don't.

You could email me directly if you want to followup, I suppose. Daniel Case (talk) 21:34, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Establishing guidelines

Hi, JLAN - did you happen to see User:Atsme/sandbox? I've started jotting down some thoughts about establishing guidelines WP:WikiProject Dogs can add to GNG regarding RS and N. I would very much appreciate your contributions there whenever you can find a little extra time. Thx in advance - ^Atsme _Talk 📧 14:51, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Please

i understood, please hold the block of my user page...Ekspertiza (talk) 22:18, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Please sir Undo my deleted page - User:Sahilberiwal22/sandbox

This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... (Shiv Mangal Sharma is one of the biggest Lawyer of India and he deserves a Wikipedia Page, He is Additional Advocate General of Rajasthan Government, He was also appointed as a Senior Panel Counsel by President of India in 2012, for representing the Government of India. he represented Rajasthan Government against Bollywood actor Salman Khan in Chinkara Poaching Case at Supreme Court of India. I have the best references for this page then how this page violating Wikipedia policies. If it's looking promotional due to clients then I can remove them but please see his major cases and reference links. This page is not about promoting him it's about to tell peoples about one of the biggest advocate of India) Sahilberiwal22 (talk) 05:06, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Koh-Lanta: La Guerre des Chefs

When I created a note (Efn), it doesn't seen when I click it.

I have putted it on Challenges category on the 21 March 2019 date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.92.89.83 (talk) 13:33, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Koh-Lanta: L'Île au Trésor

When I created a note (Efn), it doesn't seen when I click it.

I have created it on contestants category. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.92.89.83 (talk) 13:40, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Autobiography template on Robert Whyte page

Dear Justlettersandnumbers,

You have applied Autobiography template to the Robert Whyte article. If is my understanding this template is to flag an article that may need editing to conform to Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. Your applicatioon of the Autobiography template implies the article does not conform to Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. The appropriate steps if you are so concerned would be to discuss this issue on the article’s talk page. Autobiography template I believe is not about the connection of the major contributor (undisputed) per se, but the implication that the article DOES NOT conform to Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. It should be supported by evidence of non-conformance with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, or rewriting (editing) of those parts which are deemed by you to be non-conformance. Such evidence might include questioning the inclusion of material that is not on the public record or unreferenced.

If your action is not supported in this way, see guidelines. "If the maintenance template is of a type that requires support but is not fully supported. it should be removed. ... If the tagging editor failed to do so, or the discussion is dormant, the template can be removed"

I have invited any editors with an interested in this issue to contribute to discussion on the Robert Whyte talk page. If the editors have concerns that the article does not conform to Wikipedia's neutral point of view or any other policy I have invited them to discuss the matter there. It has been my aim to comply with and encourage Wikipedia guidelines that articles satisfy the criteria of notability, proper referencing, neutrality in point of view and encyclopaedic in tone.

It is not my understanding that the template autobiography should be used to merely reflect the factual situation, rather it is a flag to the article possibly not satisfying these criteria, in which case it is incumbent upon the editor using the tag to show how this might be so.  

Not to give me any special knowledge or authority in the matter beyond what is provided by the Wikimedia community, as evidence to support my willingness and enthusiasm to comply with and encourage Wikipedia guidelines that articles satisfy the criteria of notability, proper referencing, neutrality in point of view and encyclopaedic tone, I draw your attention to my service on the Wikimedia Australia committee.

In my view if another editor feels an article does not conform to Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy that person is, by principle and practice entitled to make whatever alterations they wish by editing the article, and invite the scrutiny of the wikimedia community in doing so, hence my use of the Admin help tag to draw attention to this matter. The Robert Whyte page grew out of other pages associated with Brisbane (Australia) social and cultural history such as Cane Toad Times. That its upkeep involves the topic is as inevitable and obvious as the Australian Football League and its teams being involved in the upkeep of the pages about the Australian Football League and its teams. I believe the issue is of defensibility regarding Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, which is inherent in the capacity of any editor to contribute material and edits, in other words the very nature and function of Wikipedia. To me the Autobiography template suggests the contributor is of impure motive, and rather than that be accused, I would prefer the page removed. Please discuss on my talk page, including this text. Robertwhyteus (talk) 22:44, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Mata Mehasya

Can you check this out? The original source was published in 1904, and another admin stated this puts it in the public domain, however, the site says "©2002-2011, JewishEncyclopedia.com. All rights reserved", and looking at the rights page, section 3 seems to clearly say that it is not in public domain. I've deleted it for now, and requested a revdel, but would like your expertise. Thanks as always.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:05, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Onel5969, thanks for your vigilance! This came up just recently (Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2019 August 15), so I'm quite confident in saying that text of the 1906 edition of the Jewish Encyclopedia is indeed PD, whatever claims the website makes. Since there seems (for once!) to be proper attribution in the article, I think that in this case the content should be restored. On to the next! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:20, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. And thanks for getting back so quickly. I'll remember if this comes up again. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:23, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Volta (Cirque du Soleil) and others

I believe we have a problem with several articles all related to Cirque du Soleil tours - I was going to post to an admin noticeboard to ask how to deal with it but as I see you are an admin who has recently been involved yourself I thought I would run it by you first, if that is ok.

These articles are being edited by a group of registered and unregistered users to give them a fairly consistent look and feel, but the result is clearly promotional content, and the content is largely unreferenced and contains copyvios. I have removed some of the unreferenced content (as have you) and copyvios but they have been put back again - most recently with a note on my talk page that "what [I am] doing is considered wrong towards the Cirque du Soleil community" ([13]) and is vandalism ([14]).

The principal issues are:

1. The tour dates. These are in the main unreferenced - you have yourself removed such content ([15] but were subsequently reverted ([16]). One has to ask why the tour dates are even there - it would certainly seem to be of encyclopaedic value to retrospectively list the duration of a tour and places visited, but individually itemised upcoming performances looks a lot more like advertising. This suspicion is only highlighted by the fact that past events regularly get archived - see, for example, Koozå#Tour: the encyclopaedic value is in the events past; the promotional value is in the events upcoming.
2. The copyvios. Many of the articles contain word-for-word copyright violations of Cirque du Soleil press releases. For example, the section Toruk – The First Flight#Characters is lifted straight from [17], and has been present since 29 October 2015 (except briefly between my removing it and being reverted; it should probably be removed and revdel'd). Even if permission were to be granted it is clearly way too promotional in content, e.g. "No wonder everybody rallies behind Ralu – his is a doer and a thinker with a heart of gold!" - which is hardly surprising given its provenance.

The pages I have edited, and been reverted on, are Toruk – The First Flight, Amaluna, Koozå, Bazzar (Cirque du Soleil), Volta (Cirque du Soleil), Kurios (Cirque du Soleil) and Crystal (Cirque du Soleil), but I did not get as far as reviewing all of the articles in the canon - Cirque_du_Soleil#Other_shows has a list of them all.

So, I am not really sure what the correct procedure would be, going forward. It is not unreasonable for a group of editors to work together on a project and make up some policies between them for maintaining related articles, but obviously not for them to override Wikipedia's core principles. If there is a formal wikiproject for this group I have not found it, so I cannot discus my concerns with them directly.

Thanks in advance for you advice and assistance! Dorsetonian (talk) 12:34, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Dorsetonian! This unsourced content seems to be quite an intractable problem, with several different (?) editors persistently adding and re-adding it. I've removed quite a bit of it from a couple of the articles over the last year or two, but can't get the removals to "stick". If the problem is more widespread, a discussion could perhaps be started either at WP:RSN or at WP:COIN – more eyes on the problem might be enough to resolve it.

Copyvio is a different matter – it needs to removed from the page and from the history, and I'm available to deal with that at any time. But it may sometimes be tricky: for example, the document you give as a source for the awful nonsense in Toruk – The First Flight is actually dated 17 December 2015, so after the content was added to our page. Presumably both were copied from somewhere else, but I've not so far been able to identify where. I'll remove it, but I can't really revdelete it without a source that predates it. If there are other copyvios that you've noticed do please flag them in some way (a note here, or copyvio blanking of the affected section(s)). Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:55, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Oh, and please, whatever you do, please don't allow yourself to get drawn into an edit-war! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:14, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Very many thanks for the updates, info and advice! I will look more at the various pages later on - but in the meantime, it can be shown that the copyrighted text predates its appearance on Wikipedia - this is the same press release dated 2015-09-29, and this is a snapshot on archive.org of the same text on a different site, which was taken on 2015-10-12. Dorsetonian (talk) 13:07, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Predictably, your cleanup of Toruk – The First Flight got reverted. Dorsetonian (talk) 15:36, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City

Hi! Would you be up for looking over the temp rewrite for Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City? I'm working on a more dramatic overhaul to the article that will improve its quality, but can't move forward with that until the copyright issue is cleared up. Thanks! Mary Gaulke (talk) 15:30, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Coreyar

I saw that Coreyar has been adding content to drama school articles, latest being "It is one of the twenty accredited drama schools part of the Federation of Drama Schools (FDS) in the United Kingdom." Is best option to delete these or add a citation needed? The editor in question is prolific and persistent. David notMD (talk) 06:27, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi, David notMD! I removed a few instances of that text before I went to bed. I think both options you mention are reasonable, but that better still would be to discuss with the user; someone other than me will need to attempt that, as a glance at his/her talk-page (or this) will confirm. I'm concerned that the spammed text says "accredited" while our article specifically says that it does not provide accreditation. I'm not seeing where COI he's been either disclosed or denied, either. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:38, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

I share that concern about "accredited" and also whether "twenty" will remain accurate over time. Revising sentence to "It is a member of the United Kingdom Federation of Drama Schools." Not so much concerned about COI with the Federation as I was with Drama School London entries. David notMD (talk) 11:59, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

New concern: Coreyar has begun to change the sentence I created to "It is one of the twenty selective drama schools part of the Federation of Drama Schools in the United Kingdom." On C's Talk page I have challenged the unreferenced use of the word "selective." This editor is persisting in wanting to promote FDS. David notMD (talk) 21:22, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Hilpolith Rothschild

Is it worth salting Hilpolith Rothschild, or does leaving it unsalted make it easier to spot any further socks of User:Hilpolith Rothschild who originally created it? DuncanHill (talk) 09:51, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

I thought about that just now, DuncanHill, but it seems it's only been deleted twice, so salting seems a bit premature at this point. I have it watch-listed. I expect it's also been created under other titles, but I don't this moment recall them. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:01, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

It's been linked from WCB Wasafi and Jacob Rothschild, 4th Baron Rothschild before. I think you've dealt with the original user on Commons too. DuncanHill (talk) 10:05, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Just found two more of the picture - File:Hilpolith.png and File:Hilpolith - Rothschild.png. DuncanHill (talk) 10:08, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Unsure

ADBA appears to be legit but are they notable? ^Atsme _Talk 📧 14:58, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Atsme! Quick answer: not sure! I had a quick look; there's some coverage in news, a few mentions in books, but a LOT less than you'd normally expect for an association 110 years old. I'd not really expect it to survive AfD. One thing's for certain, though: it's been a copyvio since the day it was created – now blanked and listed. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:33, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Pomps and works at Giorgia Fumanti

Hi JLAN! A different task to our usual chasing of Signore Bloccato Globalmente... Giorgia Fumanti needs to be rev deleted from this revision through this one. See the latest copyvio report. The SPA who repeatedly added this has the same name as her manager (and husband) [18]. It's unclear if it's actually him or one of his employees or both. I've left warnings on his talk page. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:09, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi, VdT! Yes, our friend has been a little quieter, which is something of a relief! As for Giorgia, you certainly do pick them! Happy to revdel, but am too dense to see where the 2013 content was taken from (I enjoyed "the greatest opera singer of time", though). Looks to me as if there may still be BLP violations in that page, btw. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:13, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

The tripe that he added in 2013 [19] contains a large chunks from here and here, amongst other things. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 06:04, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Vikram sachora

Thanks for taking care of that. BTW, I just noticed there's a version of it in user-space, see User:VikramBannaVR/sandbox. Is that problematic or can they keep that? --SVTCobra 11:33, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Oh, I see you noticed too. Cheers, --SVTCobra 11:34, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

A special award

	"Ass In High Gear Award"
	Your work as an admin is not being graded, But it certainly is much appreciated, To know that you see with vision that's clear, And don't mind keeping your ass in high gear. Atsme Talk 📧 19:33, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Help a user

Hello Justlettersandnumbers! Could you help me with a question?

So today I received a message called "Sockpuppet investigation", but I didn't quite understand what it means. From what I translated, it says I'm being accused of it. But I only use this account and use it to improve Wikipedia, I never did anything wrong, and I don't understand why I received it.

Could you help me clarify this? Thank you. -- Brunolima17 11:42, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Brunolima17! You've already done what you should do in this situation – leave a message at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jsmithn22 (better still would be if you go back and sign it using four tildes, ~~~~). My comments at that page do not concern you, but four other users. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:40, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Ok, thank you so much. But do you know why I'm there on that page? I swear I did nothing... Brunolima17 (talk) 19:34, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Brunolima17, I can't tell you because I haven't looked at the matter in detail – it will be looked at by an investigator in due course, though. Just at a guess, the surprising degree of overlap of your edits with those of Bruno Meireles may have triggered an alarm bell. A good-faith editor should have nothing to fear from an investigation of this kind, which is aimed only at rooting out a kind of abuse of our policies that is unfortunately very common. You may need to wait a while to hear the outcome, I'm afraid, but that should not prevent you from editing in the meantime. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:47, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Got it, all right then. I was afraid of having my account banned, I really like editing, writing and improving articles and it has helped me a lot to face certain personal problems like anxiety... Thank you very much! Brunolima17 (talk) 20:11, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

User:Stub maker 2000

Thanks for that. I thought I was going to have to slog through the hundreds they had created over the past few months. How did you delete them all so quickly? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:16, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

I boldly used this weapon, trusting that there will be no fallout. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:21, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

But please note that the correct designation would/could be https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Stub_maker_2000 - from the initial SPI which sat there like a smelly sock in a storm water drain waiting for rain... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/D_A_R_C_12345 - your summary of nuking is a red link that goes nowhere, as far as I can tell, maybe thats the nuke part of it all - carpet bombing ? - my bad - edit history shows it was all done well - I am wrong... (ohno not again) JarrahTree 12:31, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

just to keep the confusion up - I fully support all draft space to be nuked (what a cute weapon ) JarrahTree 12:37, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Were you thinking also of deleting creations by User:110.174.62.147, which is apparently how the above edited between their first block and their reappearance as User:Stub maker 2000? Ingratis (talk) 12:39, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

wow - what a great find - the SPI case failed on stale criterion - is the behavioural evidence in your mind clear enough ? (asking someone who had more editor name changes than I did in the last 15 years) maybe someone needs to log the info at the SPI as well https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/D_A_R_C_12345 JarrahTree 12:56, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi. (Apologies in advance - I don't know how to do diffs). I'm basing the assertion on edit histories like Roman Catholic Diocese of Bayeux, where the history shows a series of edits between 18 and 24 Nov 2018 by D A R C 12345 which includes one on 23 Nov by the IP address, surely by the same editor. Also, the combination of subjects - Australian local government, mediaeval French church subjects and ancient titular sees - is very distinctive. Also, the editing errors in the historical articles across the three identities are identical - to name just one, linking dates and centuries. I haven't yet got an explicit overlap between Stub maker and the IP address but is one needed? Is that enough for your purposes? All best, Ingratis (talk) 13:35, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Deleted stub

Among the now-deleted stubs created by the above was one called Teutsind of Tours, which by coincidence I had just rewritten: if you could let me have back my post-Stub maker text I will recreate it. Ingratis (talk) 15:41, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

I've restored the page, Ingratis/Eustachiusz, with my apologies – I trusted the tool to show me only pages that had no edits by other editors, but it seems that that doesn't work quite as advertised. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:53, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks very much! not a big deal, as it will never be more than a stub, but I didn't keep a draft and the refs were a bit fiddly. All best, Ingratis (talk) 19:04, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

John Scholes (mathematician) moved to draftspace

Hi, thanks for you message. In principle the idea of a Draft space looks very appealing. However, I don't have personally the time to elaboratre more on that and I thought that it was the very idea of WIKIpedia to create stubs as to allow people who have more time and/or information available to work out the draft^H^H^Hstub into a full fledged article. (Of course the page should be (and was) clearly marked as such (stub)) so that no-one should take its insufficiency as a downside of the Encyclopedia (but rather as a typical example of precisely how this wonderful encyclopedia works in its constant process of creation). I have in this first draft included just half a dozen books by J.Scholes and a very incomlpete list of web links, I was about to make it more complete by his numerous collections of math olympiad problems and solutions (there are probably a hundred such pages which are very frequently cited in reasearch articles).

Conclusion: In the olden days when I was more frequently working on Wikipedia, creating (often much more incomplete) stubs was the standard way to build what wikipedia has become today. Isn't this encouraged any more? What are the minimum requirements for a stub? Thanks for making this precise, I'd like to help building and improving wikipedia; I frequently add corrections and complements, but sometimes also "stubs"... [I know that a good article needs independent, reliable sources, but on its way there, a stub can't be complete in that sense right from the beginning... How can I attract Wikipedia's workforce to contribute towards that goal as long as the article is in the "drafts" workspace? Thanks again!] — MFH:Talk 00:12, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Draft: Solar Air Water Earth Resource

Hi, I have asked CTU UCEEB - the owner of web https://www.uceeb.cz/en/projects/solar-air-water-earth-resource-sawer for permission to use their text. They agreed and sent the required permission to adress permissions-en@wikimedia.org. May I recreate page Draft:Solar Air Water Earth Resource now? Thank you Tom Cvut (talk) 10:07, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Yes, Tom Cvut, thanks for asking. Please add {{subst:OP}} (exactly as you see it here, with the curly parentheses) to the talk-page of the draft. You should be aware that it is fairly unusual for text from outside sources to be found suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, and that notability will still have to be established. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:32, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Kalinga Literary Festival and socking

Hello Justlettersandnumbers, Can you please take a look at Kalinga Literary Festival that you draftified yesterday? It has been created by the same user again with the same promotional contents so, is it possible to G11 and protect the title to prevent sockpuppetry and undisclosed paid editing? Here is the SPI Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rashmirparida. Thank you GSS (talk|c|em) 09:30, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Copyright question

Hi, Justlettersandnumbers, I am uncertain whether or not the article List of Official Policies from Medical Organizations on Transgender People is in compliance with the copyright policy/fair use exemption: it consists entirely of quoted text taken from various policy statements. Would it be possible for you to take a look at it? Cheers, gnu57 01:32, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Genericusername57, I looked. I can't see any way that that page could be considered acceptable; in particular, it seems to go against WP:NFCCEG: "Extensive quotation of copyrighted text is prohibited". My first reaction was that it should be sent to WP:CP for review. However, I notice that it was Diannaa who actually marked the quotations as such (before that they were just blatant copyvios), so I'd like to see what she says before taking that step (if you have a moment, Diannaa?). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:24, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Jlan. I have no objection to the page being listed at WP:CP. AFD might be a better choice though, since quotations are not actually copyright violations. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:39, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Genericusername57, Diannaa, done that – Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Official Policies from Medical Organizations on Transgender People (wow, that's a mouthful, and All In Title Case Too!). Thanks to both, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:47, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Amebexaminerssydau

FYI, User:Amebexaminerssydau was created 19 minutes before User:Australianmusicexaminationboardupdates, who you blocked. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 10:00, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, AlanM1, I wouldn't have noticed that! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:27, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Help needed at CopyPatrol

Hi, and thank you for your work on copyright issues. Lately I have run into a serious problem: I have been doing an extremely high proportion of the reviewing of the listings at CopyPatrol, having done 50 to 75 reviews daily for the last few weeks. It's not realistic to think that I can keep this up indefinitely, as it consumes many hours each day, and it's not good for me to spend so much time in front of the computer. And if for some reason I become unavailable the results will be dire. What I'm hoping to do is recruit a small group of experienced users who visit Copypatrol daily and clear 5 to 10 cases each, to help spread the burden around a little bit, as well as create a cadre of people who can take over if for some reason I am not able to edit any more. Since you've got some experience in copyright clean-up, I am inviting you to consider visiting the page on a regular basis – even daily, like I do! – and clearing a number of cases. It would be a really big help if you could! Thanks for your time, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:00, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Well of course I'm (rather guiltily) aware that you're carrying almost all of that load on your own, which surely you should not be, for any number of reasons, your own sanity first and foremost! – please, whatever you do, don't do so much that it becomes a burden, or leads to burn-out or whatever. That said, there seem to be so many backlogged areas that sometimes I don't know where to turn; but I'll try to look at CopyPatrol more often and more regularly. Best regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:07, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! Copypatrol is more-or-less the front lines for copyright issues, because we can educate people right from the start and prevent disasters like the messes Trident13 and Epeefleche created from ever happening again. So that's why I feel like it's important to clear all reports as quickly as possible. Any help appreciated. (Things have been much better since I sent messages to you and six other folks. Thanks to all who have stepped up or are planning to do so!) — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 01:57, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Couiros22, again

Given your comments here, you may wish to review my comment on their talk page there. It would seem that Couiros22 has not learnt anything from what went before. - Nick Thorne ^talk 22:58, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Nick Thorne, I have that talk-page on my watchlist. After you posted there I did take a look at some recent edits by the user, and they seemed productive – removing definite articles from before names of the form "Somebody's Foobird". That seems to me correct – it's "Tristram's Grackle", not "the Tristram's Grackle", right? But ... if you see any inappropriate edits, particularly relating to categories, do please post there with a few diffs. I'll surely see that you have done so. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:15, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the reply, I'll keep my eye on it. - Nick Thorne ^talk 00:18, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Can you help me creating a page?

i recently created the page but it keeps gets rejecting can you help me?

No, Chandumx, I can't help you with that – you're trying to promote your company, and Wikipedia does not tolerate promotion. If I may offer some advice, it is this: stop that before someone decides that your account is being used only for spam/advertising purposes (for which you may be prevented from editing). Before you make any further edit relating to the company, you must disclose your paid editor status. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:19, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Awkward redirects

Hi, I saw that you declined my proposed deletion for Bình Tân District, Vinh Long and Bảo Lâm District, Lam Dong. I just want to let you know that I'm not saying that it's invalid. But it's rather awkward, since user will either search for a key word with all diacritics in it (like Bảo Lâm District, Lâm Đồng), or none of them at all (like Bao Lam District, Lam Dong). There's no way a user knowing the spelling with diacritics of the district does not know that spelling of the province. It makes more sense if he/she know the correct spelling of the province, but not that of the district (so Bao Lam District, Lâm Đồng will be a more useful redirect) since a province is definitely better-known than a district. However Bao Lam District, Lâm Đồng does not exist, so I don't see any reason why Bảo Lâm District, Lam Dong should exist. In fact, if you will see that no other articles links to those redirects at all. Therefore, I don't see any reason such awkwards redirects be kept. Cn5900 (talk) 17:57, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Cn5900, there should be redirects from all possible spellings, with and without diacritics. Redirects take little space, and can be helpful; redirects should be deleted only if they are actively unhelpful or blatantly wrong. At Bình Tân District, Vinh Long you've put a notice to say that it's being discussed, but you haven't started any discussion (there's no entry for it at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 September 21). As a general rule, if you don't know what you are doing it's probably better not to do it. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:22, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Cirque de Soleil, again

The article Bazzar (Cirque du Soleil) is another of the Cirque de Soleil articles that contains copyright violations (not to say unreferenced and spammy copyright violations). On 24 March this edit added content from a press release online here dated 9 February. Although I had removed it in August I did not ask anyone to revdel it. Today, the same IP address that originally placed it has twice put it back. Can I take you up on your earlier offer to deal with these copyvios, and ask you to remove it from the page history?

The same IP made a similar addition to Joyà here in 2019, but here is the same text elsewhere on the Internet in 2017.

Many thanks! Dorsetonian (talk) 22:36, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for sorting this out! Dorsetonian (talk) 17:26, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for making it so easy, with clear diffs and links. Please let me know if I missed anything, or if you come across any more of the same. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:36, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Paid editing

Hi, I here by declare that there is no Conflict-of-interest (COI) editing in page Jain FarmFresh. Nor I am paid editor. It might sense you because of I am not native English Language. I just want to contribute Wiki and enhance it. I make utilize my leisure time to help and guide peoples. The page created to make aware people which does not have presence in wikipedia, for a worldwide agroprocessing company within our area, it's origin and brands. I appreciate your work for the society and not have any objection on your action, Hope you will help to restore and enhancement to this just created, stub page in regards with Wiki. With Regards, - MahajanDeepak (MahajanDeepak|talk) 10:39, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm afraid that is patently untrue, MahajanDeepak – apart from anything else, you've been trying to create a page about it since 2016. I have blocked your account for ignoring our WP:Terms of Use. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:01, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Draft:InLobby deletion

Hello, I need help with Draft:InLobby. I wrote to the admin (Jinian (talk)), responsible for the deletion of the draft, but he would not answer, so I am writing to you. Frankly speaking, when I saw that my draft was considered an unambiguous advertisement and was deleted, I was very surprised, because before publishing it I have done a great deal of research on the topic, I have found notable sources for my article and sought to follow all the guidelines. Also I am well acknowledged with the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia and did not have any intention to promote anything. Unfortunately, when the speedy deletion tag was placed, in my country it was late at night, and I had no opportunity to explain myself and to get the chance to make changes in the article. So I am writing to you so that you could help me edit it and remove or change the parts you considered a promotion. I would be really grateful if you mentioned in your reply which parts, you think, contain a promotion. Thank you in advance. Elenmelkonyan123 (talk) 11:51, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

What connection do you have to the company, Elenmelkonyan123? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:55, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

I do not have any connection to the company. Elenmelkonyan123 (talk) 10:22, 25 September 2019 (UTC) Can you give me advice on what to do in this case? Elenmelkonyan123 (talk) 09:24, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

I've emailed you the content, Elenmelkonyan123. Since you have no special interest in this company, may I suggest you choose some other article to edit – we have more than five million to choose from? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:04, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

There is a reply to your email. Please, check it. Elenmelkonyan123 (talk) 14:03, 27 September 2019 (UTC) Good afternoon. I guess you are very busy now as I have not got your reply to my email yet. I am writing to inform you that I am going to publish the draft again. To make sure once more that it meets all the criteria of Wikipedia, I have read the guidelines one more time. Also, to be on the safe side, I have removed the parts I had taken from the primary source. Please, if you have time, read the present version. Your comment on it will be highly appreciated. Elenmelkonyan123 (talk) 11:46, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Elenmelkonyan123, I've really nothing to add to the advice I gave you before, and which you have chosen to ignore. Good luck! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:01, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Removal of speedy-tag on Draft:Jaguar Land Rover India

Aren't you stretching the "not edited by a human" thing a bit too far? Removing the speedy-tag/declining the speedy because of this pure maintenance edit, on an obviously abandoned draft created by an equally abandoned account that judging by their contributions and the messages on their talk page was a paid editor? - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 19:42, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Well, I hope not, Thomas.W! I left it for several hours to see if anyone wanted to delete it out of process, and when they didn't I removed the tag. I imagine that it will drift into oblivion in a few months' time, and I don't see that it is doing any great harm in the meanwhile. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:37, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Audio Video Bridging

Thank you for dealing with the copyvio report! Would you please look into my revdel request for Time-Sensitive Networking - some parts from Audio Video Bridging ended there before I rewrote them, so these edits need to be hidden too. Dmitry _{(talk•contibs)} 08:56, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Done that, DmitryKo – though my reading of the history was little different from yours. Thank you for dealing so capably with this. Were any other articles affected too? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:37, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the prompt action! There were some interim edits that change unaffected text or add entirely new sections - it's not a big deal if they have to be hidden.

I don't think other articles ever used this content, it's quite specific to the agenda of that particular IEEE 802.1 task group. Dmitry _{(talk•contibs)} 18:54, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your review on APM Monaco

Thank you for your contribution and review on APM Monaco. I did provide references to support my publishing. And we all need to start a page somewhere, right? I see that you are also very active on Wikipedia and would really appreciate your input as how we could improve our page and getting more people to contribute to it. Thank you once again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ada Wan (talk • contribs) 08:27, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Ada Wan, I've no interest in helping you to advertise your company in Wikipedia. I will however look at the article again and try to decide whether the company is in fact notable by our standards. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:58, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

: Thank you for your reply User:Justlettersandnumbers. Please kindly take a look. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.78.140.98 (talk) 05:05, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Untitled

Good afternoon, I just found out that the page that I created were deleted due to copyright infringement, I'm still in the process of reading links that you shared that's why I haven't responded to the message that I received regarding the deletion of my page, I am the owner of the website that I used to link in my Wikipedia page, I used it for I do not know how to develop a page specially if it requires some coding, I wish to retrieve my page and hopefully to seek help in developing it, I was given an advice from talkbox that I need at least 3 valid resource, write ups from a reliable magazine or newspaper about myself so they can help me a wikepedia page, I have have a couple of articles and write ups about me from different newspapers like the guardian,vanity fair etc... from europe to asia you can verify it if you search my name (Gines Serran-Pagan) in google, I can share all the links as well, I only need help to create a page because I have no time of doing some coding specially I have various projects in Asia, spending my time travelling from my home in Spain to different countries in Asia I hope we can fix this. I'll be happy to provide more info if needed. Gines — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gineserranpagan (talk • contribs) 08:17, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Gineserranpagan, the links I left you should clarify the copyright aspect, but please ask if they don't. I'm not sure whether you're asking me to restore your page, but just in case: we don't restore copyright violations. May I also recommend a close reading of our guidance on autobiographies? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:50, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

About 1st Technical & Administrative Services Brigade, National Capital Region (Reserve)

Hi JLaN. I noticed you tagged that article for WP:G5 deletion as it was created by a sock of Chewygum. Jin Panganiban appears to me someone, who for all their problems, would appear to be making good edits and is not a sockpuppet . Am I missing something here? Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 11:03, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Shirt58/Pete! The SPI hasn't been closed yet, but I am completely convinced by the evidence – particularly the name of the already-blocked sock, Lt Jin Panganiban – so I've anticipated the result. Was I wrong to do so, do you think? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:11, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

And it turns out that you were right and I was wrong. Pete "I'm someone who is happy to admit they are wrong and then learn from it" AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 09:52, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Shirt58/Pete, we all make mistakes, but we don't all take the time to drop by and leave a note when it happens – thank you (and for your mail too)! And a valid different point of view isn't a mistake in any case. Anyway, if I had a eurocent for every mistake I've made I'd be ... well, perhaps not rich, but not poor! It's just the second part, the learning bit, that I'm not so good at. As for agreeability, there just doesn't seem to be enough to go round, and I'm envious of your gift for it; but – oh! woe! – that article is in need of some serious attention! Best regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:08, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Draft:Weddingz

Hi, I saw you deleted my Weddingz page on basis of promotion but may I know how it was promotional? Last time I created a Weddingz page where Discospinster said it looked promotional & deleted it. But after having a chat with her, I deleted what she said looked promotional like growth in revenue & increase in vendors.

All the information mentioned within the draft are facts. I read all guidelines, refered to similar kind of wiki pages. I even used independent, popular citations which were not some kind of PR. Then how come the page has been deleted as promotional?

Kindly help & retrieve it. If you think any information is promotional then edit or delete it or at least give me chance to keep my POV. I hope you will reconsider. I have worked on this for months & have abide by the rules Shrishti Jhamnani (talk) 12:20, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

University of Law needs eyes

Hi JLAN. Could you keep an eye on this article. An IP (79.66.223.58) has been repeatedly adding promotional material to the lead and making other inappropriate changes. Examples I've reverted/ removed [20], [21]. I don't think it's a COI case. They seem to be doing this with multiple UK 2nd-tier universities, e.g. [22]. Voceditenore (talk) 16:37, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi, VdT, how's it going? I've watchlisted both of those, but it looks as if you're already well in control at the first. What's our friend Alec been up to recently? – he's rather fallen off my radar. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:55, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! I don't want to be the only reverter at UoL because the IP is very persistent. Perhaps he'll get the hint if more than one person reverts his edits. As for our "friend", under this IP, he is still beavering away on other Wikis where it's not blocked. I just discovered this recent article on Simple which he simply copied with a new name and a couple of changes from another of his creations there which I had to rewrite completely last year to correct his idiocies. Onwards and upwards . Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:43, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Draft:Kryton International

Hello, I understand that I have violated copyright infringement by copying the company history. I can summarize the history instead. Will that be sufficient to get my page posted? Best Argyless (talk) 17:39, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Danilo Butorović

Hi there. Can you take a look at this revdel I just submitted. The copyvios weren't large blocks, but scattered throughout the prose, not sure all of it needs to be revdel'd, but I took the first instance and the last instance of copyvio. Thanks. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:19, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Dona Sarkar

The history of this article is inaccessible -- why is that? --Macrakis (talk) 17:34, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Macrakis, I've revision deleted it under criterion RD1, "Blatant violations of the copyright policy". I'll leave an explanatory note on the talk-page. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:43, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Scott Teal page deletion.

Hello,

I wanted to re-do the page I had created for Scott Teal. The reason being as to why it was deleted was because it was taken from Scott's website "Crowbar Press."

Scott had actually emailed me the source material to use for the page, but he asked me to do it because he didn't think it would be ethical if he wrote his own page. I was unaware that he already had the source he'd given me from his own website, but now, that has been clarified, and he wanted the exact source and writing that he sent me to be the bulk of the Wikipedia page.

TL;DR - Scott deleted the source on Crowbar Press, wanted me to re-do the page. I wanted to get permission - as per Wikipedia guidelines - to re-do the page, now that the "ambiguous plagiarism" of the page at Crowbar Press is gone, per Scott Teal's request.

Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by AkiraZueshi (talk • contribs) 19:59, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

No, AkiraZueshi, I'm sorry, the content has already been published elsewhere, and for it to be used in Wikipedia we'd need permission from the copyright holder – see WP:DCM for how that could be provided (but be aware that such content is hardly ever found suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, so following that procedure is usually a waste of time). I don't see that you have disclosed your conflict of interest in relation to Teal; if you receive or expect to receive any form of compensation for your edits here, disclosure is obligatory. Oh, and – sorry again1 – no-one here cares one whit what Scott does or does not want. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:52, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, and I 'appreciate' the snark at the end when I was just attempting to clarify. I was not paid any compensation for this - just asked because he didn't want to do it himself as a conflict of interest and bias. Enjoy your day!

Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Waterman–Smith Building

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Waterman–Smith Building. BigDwiki (talk) 17:28, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Move question

What's the process for a controversial move? Sun Creator^(talk) 19:45, 24 October 2019 (UTC) Hi, Sun Creator! See WP:RM#CM – and feel free to come back and ask if any aspect of that process isn't clear to you. However, as I said before, I do suggest discussion with Plantdrew as a first step – it might save time and effort. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:53, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Don't, please don't.

Hello, you deleted Draft:Suicidal Wedding a day after it was restored, giving me no time to work on it. Please restore. Standardwikiman (talk) 13:39, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Please Restore Article for Cardiff Crack

You deleted the article 'Cardiff Crack' 19 May 2019 citing A7. Would you please restore the article. I can reference 109 Google search results indicating Crack is a local legend and is well known outside of So Cal. I have no relationship with Seaside Market and am not promoting this as a product. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rackmount-guy (talk • contribs) 03:58, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Rackmount-guy, my apologies – I certainly should not have deleted that page as an A7, it was not eligible, as I should have realised at the time. I've restored it, but – since the topic is apparently completely non-notable by our standards – also nominated it for deletion. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:42, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Cirque du Soleil shows Tour dates

Justlettersandnumbers, this will be an endless discussion, but I don't agree that you deleted the tour dates from several Cirque du Soleil shows... a couple of days ago I wanted to see when one of the shows visited my hometown, and to my surprise all the dates had disappeared not only from that show in particular, but for several of them. This unilateral action should not be permitted in Wikipedia... but then again, I'm not experienced here, nor an editor. I would advise you that next time, think twice before doing this kind of damage to the articles in general. Estebanpirazo (talk) 14:45, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Estebanpirazo! Verifiability is one the five pillars of this wonderful project – material added to the encyclopaedia must be verifiable by reference to independent reliable sources. The tour date content that has been repeatedly added to many of those Cirque du Soleil pages was completely devoid of any source whatsoever, and so was not verifiable. You may be able to find the information by looking at the company's website. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:24, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Justlettersandnumbers, after you're finished deleting information on all Cirque du Soleil's shows because according to you they cannot be verified by reference to independent reliable sources, and because you have also explained in the past that they have not received much coverage in reliable sources (so in Wikipedia terms, they are not notable), I suggest you start reviewing and editing some other pages that follow the same trend, such as the Australian TV series Zumbo's Just Desserts, due to some information not being able to be verified (such as contestants information, episodes details, elimination chart, etc). Estebanpirazo (talk) 13:52, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Estebanpirazo, unfortunately we have many articles that are far from perfect; however, poor content in one article does not justify poor content in another. If you think that that particular article needs to be improved, do please go ahead and do it yourself. Just so's you know: I was brought to the Cirque du Soleil group of articles by the numerous and pervasive copyright violations; removing some unsourced content was just an afterthought. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:50, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Swordpoint

Any recommendation on adding more sources / citations to the Swordpoint page you've just moved to draft? Because as far as I can see it has more sources than the Bolt_Action_(wargame) page, which I used as inspiration for creating Swordpoint. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isinfier (talk • contribs) 16:01, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Pinky Memsaab (film)

Hi Justletters: I am wondering why you removed my summary? About the "Plot" of the film, I watched the film and wrote the Plot (every word) myself. I only wrote the "Plot summary" and changed nothing else. I do not find anything unencyclopedic or unsourced about this. If you have objections please let me know on my Talk page or here. I am a decade-old Wikipedia-er and I am as committed as other good intentioned Wikipedia-ers to good, clean information. Thanks and regards, FDA Frisco danconia (talk) 17:27, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Value-based health care

Just a quick head's up, I reversed two RD1 revision deletions on these article, basically those following me scrubbing the copyvio, as I assumed it was a simple mistake. I ran Earwig on the restored version and got nothing. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:34, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Ritchie333! Did you look at this page, which I cited as an "Other reason" when I deleted those revisions – you missed that little bit when you removed the rest of it. I made no mistake, please revert to the status ante quo. I don't know if it's just me, but Earwig seems to be working considerably less well these days than it did in the past. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:48, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

I tried searching for the text "Although value" on the page, which is on the current revision, and got no hits, just the browser beeping at me saying "not found". I think I'm missing something obvious here :-/ Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:55, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

The string "majority of countries are still in the earliest stages of aligning their health systems with the components of VBHC" is present both here and here; copyvio needs to be removed, not copy-edited. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:11, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

The second of those diffs has been (correctly) revision deleted. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:14, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Well, the original copyvio was eventually removed (by me), so I suppose we're kind of OK; no more to say on this. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:45, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Gaucho

Hello, I see you redacted a copyvio on Gaucho a month ago. A new user has been repeatedly adding a sentence from the same promo site, and I've just reverted him. Would you be willing to redact that too? Daß Wölf 23:22, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for picking that up, Daß Wölf. I've revdeleted, and done some cleaning up of edits by that person (under three accounts and an IP). I should probably do something about blacklisting those websites. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:45, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

User talk:Dr Mukesh Kumbhani (Naturopathic MD Harbal)

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 19:14, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Cahk! I've left a note of warning, we'll see how it goes. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:25, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Ecobricks

Hi there! Just wanting to object to the undoing of an edit I did on this page, for the "no soapbox" reason. Yes my username is Upcyclesantafe and I edited the section of the article that described what the my company with ecobricks in an effort to make it clearer to the actual truth. This doesn't really seem like a big deal in the sense that my company was already described in the article. What I'm really blown away by is the deletion of the edit of the starting date of Susana Heisse's work with ecobricks in Guatemala through her organization Pura Vida Atitlan. I talked to her yesterday and she started the project in 2003. I don't want to get too lengthy in this talk post but I'm shocked by the "soapboxness" of this whole article in slant of the Global Ecobrick Alliance, which is just one project of many in the world that are encouraging and working with ecobricks. I posted a talk section for the article and maybe we can continue this conversation there. There is no mention of what I consider to be the most important project, Hug It Forward which has built 126 schools using ecobricks for wall-filler. It is my sincere intention to make this article as unbiased as possible. Thanks. 75.161.138.129 (talk) 21:58, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi! You're free to request a new username and request changes on the talk-page of the article; please be sure to disclose your conflict of interest when you do so. Good luck, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:09, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Justlettersandnumbers. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is WP:RX.
Message added 22:25, 11 November 2019 (UTC). 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.

——SN54129 22:25, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Oh amazing, Serial Number 54129, that was so quick! And yes it is the right article, though I won't know until I read it tomorrow how much useable info it will yield – it's about teaching methodology, not the artist. Anyway, many, many thanks, much appreciated! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:41, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

I invited to you talk on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Draft:Lawrence Lalhlanthara

I invited to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Draft:Lawrence Lalhlanthara please talk on "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Draft:Lawrence Lalhlanthara" .Vivek ji123 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:27, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Kenseth Armstead

Hi Justletters: I understand the deletion of the draft page, due to copyright infringement of https://www.kensetharmstead.com/cv/. This is absolutely my omission. Would you mind restoring all other parts of the page? I will continue working on the draft and re-work it to ensure there are appropriate references for every exhibition and award mentioned. Thus, please delete: Awards, Exhibitions and Publications. Please reply here. Thank you very much in advance, I have not saved the draft, thus it would be a big help towards my contribution. Thank you! Martine K. Martinekay 20:56, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Martinekay! We don't restore copyright violations, and a quick look at the deleted page has convinced me that the problems were not confined to the awards, publications and exhibitions sections (those, as list-type material, are probably not protected by copyright anyway). However, if you enable email for your account, I will email you the text. You should rewrite it entirely in your own words before attempting to re-add it to Wikipedia; you should also take care to disclose any personal or professional connection you have to Armstead. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:46, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

The email is now enabled. Thank you so much Justletters. It looks like I have a lot learning to do. Thanks! MK Martinekay 23:09, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

OK, done that! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:01, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Ingrid okei - Draft on "Skulpturstopp"

Hi Justlettersandnumbers, Can you look again at my draft for "Skulpturstopp": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Skulpturstopp ? The project is situated on Norway, and can be found on Wikipedia in Norwegian: https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skulpturstopp

I have worked on the draft, trying to put in citations from reliable, independent sources: I made a list of References. The references are from books, tourist websites (like Visit Norway and Visit Oslo) and press reports from TV and papers, both national and local (these are all in Norwegian and some are behind paywall).

Appreciate your feedback! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ingrid okei (talk • contribs) 09:37, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Ingrid okei! There seem to be a good number of references, but I've not looked at them or tried to evaluate whether the thing meets our notability requirements for organisations – it seems possible that it may do so. Please read this page for help with incorporating those references into the article; once that is done you might consider submitting the draft for review.

I notice that, despite the message I left on your talk-page, you've not made any disclosure of your conflict of interest in relation to the topic – please do that before you make any other edit elsewhere (I'll leave you a more detailed note on how to do that). Also, you seem to have had a former account; I believe our advice in that situation is to leave a note on the talk-page of each, stating clearly which one you now wish to use. Thank you, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:02, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi[User:Justlettersandnumbers|Justlettersandnumbers]! I have worked on the draft: [[23]]and tried to put in the references in the right format. And I have made a disclosure on being paid, and stated on both accounts (Ingrid ok and Ingrid okei)that I am the same person but will use Ingrid okei from now on. Do you have any other feedback before I send the "Skulpturstopp" draft in for review? Thanks a lot! Ingrid okei (talk) 14:10, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Ingrid okei, I see no reason why you shouldn't submit it if you think it is ready; I haven't checked whether the topic receives sufficient coverage in solid independent reliable sources to satisfy WP:NCORP, but I assume that you will by now have done so? Good luck! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:33, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Ingrid okei, Justlettersandnumbers I noticed this and cleaned it up a bit (talk page stalker!). I'll push it to article space shortly.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 14:58, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

RE deletion of draft

Hi Justettersandnumbers, Thank you for taking the time to review my draft Draft:Alex Binaris . Could I please retrieve the deleted material for improvement? Another editor had previously deleted it and restored it, with advice. However, I was not able to apply it as it was deleted again by you. Futhermore, If you have any advice with my article I would be so happy to hear. Thanks again. Best, Helenamalcom123 (talk) 09:51, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Helenamalcom123, that material has already twice been deleted as unambiguous promotion, and rightly so – Wikipedia is not the place for stuff like "Alex Binaris was passionate about her education". As well as me, three respected editors – Robert McClenon, Athaenara and DGG – have found the page unacceptably promotional; I see no benefit to the project in restoring it, though I will not object if someone else wants to. Meanwhile, do you have some personal or professional connection to Binaris? If so, please make appropriate disclosure. Thank you, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:45, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

I review a lot of drafts. Most of them I rename, and many of them I decline. I only tag a draft for G11 deletion if it has one of three faults: it is not written in the third person but addressed to the reader; it is written to praise its subject; or it contains marketing buzzspeak. I normally leave drafts alone. I only tag them for deletion if they aren't worth fixing. Robert McClenon (talk) 12:19, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt responseJustlettersandnumbers

I completely understand what you are saying. I was merely quoting and rephrasing what the articles stated ( Sunday times, Vogue ect). After reading more into Wikipedia guidelines I have a clearer understanding of how an article must be written. Would it be okay if I try again? I think me rephrasing those articles came across as promotional, which is not my aim. Hopefully, I can try again with Alex's page and then move onto other topics. I don't have any relationship to the subject.

Best,

Helenamalcom123 (talk) 14:48, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Helenamalcom123. Looking at the draft again, I doubt there is sufficient non-promotional content in the sources to write an acceptable article. The best course for you to take is to write an article on another subject of interest to you. Make sure it is one where you do not possibly have a conflict of interest, and remember not to copy of closel paraphrase from the sources. DGG ( talk ) 16:23, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi there,

Thanks for the advice. I submitted another draft on a different subject. After doing much more research I believe that this new page aligns better with Wikipedias values and guidelines. Best , Helenamalcom123 (talk) 20:58, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

More items for deletion?

thank you for taking care of User:Booboo the dog/sandbox. I also just tagged this one for G11, but cannot figure out what tag works for this one. All of the above pages are the work of two blocked socks trying to promote Tondino. Thanks. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:25, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi, ThatMontrealIP! I've nominated the paradox one as WP:U5, let's see how that goes. Have I understood this right: Joseane is the sockmaster, but remains unblocked? Or is there a still older account? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:40, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

you've got mail!ThatMontrealIP (talk) 22:46, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, ThatMontrealIP, fine to do as you suggest. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:53, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

I shall do. This was a while ago, so I had forgotten that the reason Joseane was not blocked is that while it could be seen as the SPI master, the user said that they had forgotten the password, and started a new account User:JOSBRU. That one is blocked.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 15:27, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Horse article that’s a mess

Spotted this while cleaning up WPEQ unassessed articles: Mata (performance). It’s a mess (and a lousy dab too) but not really in my balliwick. Figured you’d want to run your magic toolkit over it, rename if necessary, and do a bit of cleanup. Sounds like an interesting event worth having an article about, but this version might need WP:TNT. Montanabw^(talk) 22:15, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Montana! Well, I read it – it's not exactly perfect but it's not bad and it has a load of solid references. I don't see any serious problems, though I agree we might find a better title for it. Honestly, I wish all our articles were as well written and as well sourced. She wrote Fantasia (performance) too, equally well sourced. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:45, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

I’m tempted to move to a better disambiguation title. “Performance” doesn’t fit. Maybe “competition”? We’ve never really had a need for equestrian sport dab titles before. Thoughts? Montanabw^(talk) 23:03, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

oh, and if you or someone who watches your page happen to be looking for an article rescue job, here’s this: Draft:Snow_Polo_World_Cup_St._Moritz Montanabw^(talk) 23:08, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

How do you pronounce Universidad

How do you pronounce Universidad. Universidad like university or un-iverse? Sun Creator^(talk) 22:03, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Tagging of The Garagiste Festivals

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on The Garagiste Festivals. I do not think that The Garagiste Festivals fits any of the speedy deletion criteria  because Not G11-level promotion: UPE is not a valid speedy deletion criterion.. I request that you consider not re-tagging The Garagiste Festivals for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:48, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

OK, DESiegel, clearly opinions vary on the interpretation of that criterion, which is why I merely tagged it rather than deleting it immediately myself. So, what in your opinion is the correct speedy deletion criterion for UPE? It's a violation of the Terms of Use, so clearly must be immediately removed exactly as we do with all other TOU violations; G11 is the best fit I can find, but clearly you don't agree. The page is demonstrably "unambiguous promotion" – I can send you the proof if you wish, but can't, of course, discuss it here. I've indeffed the editor. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:18, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

In my opinion there is no correct speedy deletion criterion for UPE. There was recently a discussion in an attempt to create one, it did not gain consensus. If you think such a page should be deleted, take it to AfD. If the sole or primary reason is UPE I will oppose deletion if I notice the AfD. If you or anyone deletes a page solely because of UPE and I notice, I will bring it to WP:DRV. In any case this deletion is not uncontroversial. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:34, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

I might Add tht if you send me "the proof" I will post it on-wiki, ore else ignore it. If it truly can't be discussed publicly, I am not intersted. Whether it is promotional depends on nthe content of the articcle, not on who created it. And I do not for a moment accept that UPE clearly must be immediately removed nor is there any consensus for such a position. If I am wrong, point to the RfC that established the consensus, please. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:39, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

It's not a "consensus" as such, but the obligation to remove UPE is here. It is not permitted; ergo, we can not permit it. It's not rocket science. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:45, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

That argument has been specifically rejected, and I would oppose it if it were proposed again. P)lease do not speedy delete or tag for speedy on that basis without a new RfC to establish such a coinsensus first -- wich i do not think you will get. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:50, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

See Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy/Archive 48#Undeclared Paid Editor (UPE) product for one example of such a proposal, that failed. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:56, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

List of Demon Lord, Retry! episodes

Hey there, could you take a look at this. Went to speedy it as a copyvio, but the source it appears copied from (might be a mirror, but couldn't find out when the other page was created), is spam blacklist entry, so tagging it with speedy wouldn't work correctly. The source is the moviedb. Thanks. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:43, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Onel5969! Oh good, my absolute favourite: anime plot summaries! Anyway, I don't know if speedy is the right way forward here. The content was split from Demon Lord, Retry!, where the first of those moronic summaries ("Kunai’s anger awakens the ring, which appeals to his darker side by offering to kill the villagers" etc) was added here. A quick search has not thrown up any source that that was demonstrably copied from – and if I look at it for more than a few minutes at a time my brain glazes over. It may be original content, or perhaps a translation from another language, I can't even begin to guess. One option would be to remove the summaries per WP:PLOT and see if anybody squeaks; otherwise, I suggest blanking and listing it at WP:CP. I'm pretty sure you can get round the blacklist thing by leaving off the https:// from the front end of the link. Sorry not to be of more help, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:37, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Tiger vs Lion

Thank you for nominating the worst article on this project for deletion. It only survives every time because or ARS and the fact that the two single most rabid inclusionists on the project have it watchlisted. If I weren't at the busiest time of year during my work, I would have commented on it explaining like I did last time that a comparison of anything that are roughly similar would meet the GNG and is equally as idiotic: Bears versus mountain lions, pigs versus goats, purple versus blue, Democrats versus Republicans. Anyway, yeah, that article sucks and thanks for doing taking the time to try to get rid of it. It's the only article I've actually read where I think if the public saw it people would stop coming to Wikipedia. End rant/thanks. TonyBallioni (talk) 05:26, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Tony! It's an embarrassment to the project, I thought it was just worth a try, but the outcome was no surprise. Let's just be thankful that we don't still have Bear versus bull! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:23, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Pygmy goat cleanup

Thanks for working on it! At what point does it become more efficient to just whole-sale revert to before all this was added? DMacks (talk) 21:30, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi, DMacks! It's really a mess, but not just because of the recent edits. It conflates two quite different breeds, an American one and an older British one. I plan to split it and then turn "Pygmy goat" into a dab (because the West African Dwarf, at least, is also a "pygmy" breed). I did consider a wholesale revert, but some of the sources are apparently useable, and there may also be a breadcrumb or two of useable content there. I'm working on it, but don't expect to finish this evening. I've already done Nigerian Dwarf and made a start on the Myotonic. How I do wish people would stop using our encyclopaedia as a place for their students to write their essays! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:53, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

I don't know anything about this topic, just popped up on my "often problematic edits" watchlist for image copyvio and simultaneously on my commons watchlist for admin action. I usually work in the area of science articles...same problem with school projects:( DMacks (talk) 03:13, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

It’s that time of year!

Christmas tree worm, (Spirobranchus gigantic) Atsme Talk 📧 16:36, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
	Time To Spread A Little Happy Holiday Cheer!!
	I decorated a special kind of Christmas tree in the spirit of the season. What's especially nice about this digitized version: *it doesn't need water *won't catch fire *and batteries aren't required.
	Have a very Merry Christmas – Happy Hanukkah‼️ and a prosperous New Year!! 🍸🎁 🎉

Block of User:C3tirschenreuth

You blocked User:C3tirschenreuth for having an unacceptable user name that is the name of a business, and for making promotional (in fact paid) edits. This editor has now requested an unblock, saying that s/he has read and understood our policies, that future edits will cite and depend on proper sources, and will not be in areas where the editor has a COI. The editor has made a paid declaration on his or her user page. The editor points to past edits on another topic, where s/he says there was no COI and no payment, and they don't look like COI edits to me, although they did not include sourcing for added statements.

I would be inclined to unblock based on these representations. Of course they may not be true, but I don't see what more we can ask for at this point. Policy says that before unblocking one should consult the blocking admin, which in this case is you. Do you object to such an unblock, or have any comments? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:50, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi, DESiegel, thanks for asking! Essentially no remaining objection once it's renamed; the account is verified on de.wp and has made efforts to be transparent. I've asked her a couple of questions that I'd prefer to see answered, but over to you if you feel like handling it. I'd have responded to a ping from her talk-page, by the way! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:56, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Wikiproject Poultry

Justlettersandnumbers, why did you change the status of WikiProject Poultry to semiactive? A project only has to meet one of the criteria for inactive projects, and this one meets all but the first. I include the second criterion (no reduction in the number of unassessed articles in 6 month) because they don't even have a way of monitoring assessments. RockMagnetist(talk) 18:22, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi, RockMagnetist! I'm afraid I wasn't even aware of any criteria. I took a more pragmatic approach: I'm a part of the project and still active in it (see my recent edits to Scots Dumpy and Creeper chickens, for example), so I don't think it can be considered totally inactive. I was surprised to see that it been so marked without any discussion on the project talk-page. But really it doesn't matter to me – I won't edit any more or less regardless of how it is marked! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:53, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

If you're still active in the project, I'm happy to leave things the way they are. When I see an apparently inactive project, I just go ahead and tag it because anyone who disagrees can easily undo the action. This is the first time anyone has, and then only after six months had passed. Just out of curiosity, how does the project help you? RockMagnetist(talk) 22:27, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, RockMagnetist – not that marking it as inactive again would make any perceptible difference to me that I'm aware of. To answer your question, I think that in practice the only real benefit is getting article alerts when pages within the scope of the project are marked for deletion/renaming/GA review etc. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:23, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Cheers

Merry Christmas, Justlettersandnumbers! Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. And for all the help you've thrown my way over the years. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 TT me 19:13, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Speedy decline

Hi, I declined your nomination of Kamerfer Kadın for G3. I'm afraid from just reading the article I really can't tell whether it's a hoax. It may well be, but G3 is for "blatant hoaxes" and so it should be easy to see from just looking at the article. If you have good reason to think it's a hoax then it might be a good idea to try WP:AFD instead. ElAhrairah ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 12:08, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

OK, Elahrairah, no problem. I should probably have linked to this discussion. I'll admit that I'm faintly concerned that we have a page created by a sock of a known hoaxer, but can't find a criterion under which to delete it – G5 was declined because the history of a previous draft was histmerged into the page after the sock created it. But on to the next! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:03, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

I think the only option within current policy is AFD, unfortunately. Unless you can get consensus for some sort of ad-hoc mass deletion of creations of those socks at ANI or similar. ElAhrairah ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 14:14, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Probably, yes. I've posted briefly at WP:AN but will probably leave it at that. There has been a person by this name, but I can't read Turkish and don't know if it was the wife of the sultan (as in the article) or his son (as Google translation tells me). Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:36, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Io Saturnalia!

		Io, Saturnalia!
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:32, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas everybody!!!

"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,

I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)

Chris Troutman (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas.

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.

Spread the cheer by adding {{Subst:Xmas4}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Merry Christmas from London

Merry Christmas from London, JLAN ...

and may the New Year be filled with peace and plenty.

Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 10:35, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

~~~ Merry Christmas! ~~~
Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten!
¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua!
God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus!
Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce!
Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством!
圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스!
สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส! ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành!

Hello, Justlettersandnumbers! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:45, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}}

To anyone and everyone who watches or visits this page

Pisanello, detail of St. George and the Princess of Trebizond, in Sant'Anastasia, Verona

My very best wishes to all for the holiday season and for the New Year. I'm likely to be on Wikipedia only infrequently, if at all, for a few days at least. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:22, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

"Furioso (horse)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Furioso (horse). Since you had some involvement with the Furioso (horse) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 22:17, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Request Removal of CoI Template at the Top of the Page

Dear justlettersandnumbers, thank you for your advice on Teck-Hua_Ho. Rather than directly edit the article, I have and will continue to request other editors to make the changes, if they see fit. Now that I understand the procedure, I am writing to ask if the CoI template message at the top of the page can be removed. Thank you. Dprrja (talk) 10:41, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Deletion

Did u delete my page??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HuntyHunty111 (talk • contribs) 19:39, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

No, HuntyHunty111, neither I nor anyone else has deleted any page you have contributed to – you have two edits to Wikipedia, and both are still visible. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:57, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Oh, ok Justlettersandnumbers. It said that u deleted it for some reason. Maybe it was just Wikipedia people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HuntyHunty111 (talk • contribs) 15:45, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Swanee songs

Hi. I'm OTRS agent and I've validated OTRS ticket:2019010210005105. Please restore the content of Swanee songs. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 17:09, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Ganímedes! I'm afraid I can't do that – the licence that's been provided is CC BY-SA 4.0, which is not a compatible licence for Wikipedia. You've correctly noted that licence in the parameters you've supplied to {{ConfirmationOTRS}}, but it seems that the template has ignored your input and is displaying CC BY-SA 3.0 instead. I'll see if I can get someone to change the behaviour of the template, but I'm afraid you may need to go back to your correspondent yet again. As I've already told the creator of that article (higher up this page, today), instructions for releasing text to Wikipedia are here. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:38, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Customer agreed to use CCBYSA 3.0. Can we proceed now? Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 00:34, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Ganímedes! I've unhidden the previous revisions of the page. Whether all or any part of the previous text should be restored can be discussed on the talk-page. Thank you for your patience dealing with that long ticket. One observation: CC BY-SA 4.0 is not a compatible licence for text on any Wikipedia, not only the English-language one. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:32, 29 December 2019 (UTC)