User talk:Graeme Bartlett/archive 22

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Older talk is in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 archives.
Please add your talk at the bottom of the page:

Orphaned non-free media (File:Logo darden.gif)

Thanks for uploading

You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media
).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 05:41, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stavros Damianides

Hi again. Graeme Bartlett I have recently come under some personal attacks by admins of Wikipedia sparked by my edits on the Kastellorizo article. As a consequence you will notice partners or the same person with alternative names, or a gang, have launched personal attacks on every article i have edited. I would like you to initiate a prtoection for the page of Stavros Damianides. He was a well known Bouzouki player in Australia and in his younger days played with the best artists in Greece. He comes from a pre-internet age and few digital sources are around. He shares a similar story to Robert Johnson in the USA where he was never professionally recorded. The other matter is that despite evidence being given of well respected sources, these particular admins have repeatedly attacked and vandalized his entry. This photo will most likely also be deleted: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Stavros_Damianides_Hyde_Park_Festival,_Channel_9_Stage.png as was this one: http://image2.findagrave.com/photos250/photos/2011/130/69704596_130517932940.jpg as was this one: http://simg.rcdn.in/images/pages/348987/stavros-damianides.jpg the Admins who deleted this page have been monitoring my editing and have in the process destroyed one of the most significant pages of history for Perth Australia. The man not only played on his chin as shown in the picture, he was one of the best bouzouki player around. The article was sourced and confirmed because it was essentially part of Wikipedia for 10-15 years. I wish this page to be restored but also protected against similar juvenile admins. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ephestion (talkcontribs) 20:19, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Article Feedback Tool update

Hey Graeme Bartlett. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the

Article Feedback Tool
in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just

drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 21:43, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Hey Graeme-- I noticed you declined my speedy deletion on this particular file due to this file being used off-wiki. How did you check for this exactly, because I wasn't aware that you could look for usage of a file outside of Wikipedia / commons / etc.? I, JethroBT drop me a line 13:55, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

AfC

Looks to me like

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Eden primary may be salvageable. What is the next step?--SPhilbrick(Talk) 21:09, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

OK, I see you userfied it.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 21:13, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Military badges

Thank you for following up my speedy deletion tags on Wally Wiglet's files. He seems to have created a one man epidemic of copyvio. Can I ask you to look at File:Cambridgeshire Regiment Badge.jpg, that one seems to be slipping through the net. I've re-tagged it this morning. SonofSetanta (talk) 11:52, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I did not delete it yesterday as it was unclear that it was any kind of infringement, but deleted now that you pointed out where it came from. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:55, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I see another admin released some of the badges from possible deletion last night because he/she was still only considering the NFU versus Free Use criticism. I've still got another small handful of free use badges from my main donor awaiting uploading but when I'm finished I'll be combing Mr Wiglet's editing history to tag any remaining files which haven't been deleted. I had no idea people could be so blatant in the abuse of copyright. do you think it's because he just didn't know the right way to go about it, or did he know and was trying to bluff his way round the guidelines by inserting these elaborate summaries? I've raised the possibility of an ANI case with someone else privately but he thinks it would be wrong to do that. What's your opinion? I would feel like a real heel doing it but if it has to be done then let's do it. Of course I have little experience in this sort of thing. He may well be quite a small fry in terms of copyright violators in the overall scheme of things vis-a-vis Wikipedia. SonofSetanta (talk) 12:05, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Chances are he does not know. Most people do not realise they are not allowed to copy images off the web. They may even assume that an image of a public domain object is public domain.
WP:AGF applies. Until you talk to the uploader you cannot be sure. Only after lots of warnings and continued infractions will you know if it was blatant knowing infringement with bad faith and no hope of reform. ANI is not the first step, but perhaps step 3 or 4. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:17, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
Thank you. That clarifies things for me. It would help if the user would step forward and interact with myself and Stefan2 but thus far he seems to have gone to ground. Not surprising really. SonofSetanta (talk) 12:35, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Probably disappointed or angry at losing hours and hours of uploading and labelling work. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:38, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I made that very clear to him on his talk page when informing him of what was going wrong. I can see how much work he's done and it's a shame to have to wreck a considerable part of it. I've salvaged a large part of it by finding new badges from a friendly donor but a lot of infoboxes will have no badges on them for a while which is a shame. SonofSetanta (talk) 12:43, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I'm just embarrassed at having caused all this trouble. All I can say is that I did ask. Wally Wiglet (talk) 05:09, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Incidentally, I did get an email from you this morning, but I have no idea how to respond to it without telling you and the NSA who I am. Wally Wiglet (talk) 05:13, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well if you received the email perhaps you have revealed your identity! One technique I use if I don't quite trust the receiver is to register another email account on yahoo and send from there to the email of the person I got the Wikipedia email from. Of course if you are happy to have it discussed in the open then, Wikipedia talk pages are fine. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:52, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The summary for UK badges: If they are old enough crown copyright has expired, before 1946 the design will be public domain in the UK and the USA. After that there is a legal hole where copyright is expired in UK but not legal to copy in the USA. Since the object is 3d a new copyright exists for those that photograph it or draw it. You can photograph it yourself to get your own copyright, but you cannot just take others work. Lastly fair use may apply for the more modern objects. But it will require that the image is not replaceable. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:52, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Wally, the e-mail you received was from me. You can reply using a hotmail or google account if you wish and we can keep out discussion between us or you can respond on your talk page. I can see now you were given the wrong information and understand (as I think I did all along) that you didn't set out to do anything wrong. What's been annoying me all along is the amount of your work I've been obliged to destroy. We all know how long it takes to acquire these images, upload them and then insert them into articles. Graeme has got me thinking I can save all the graphics files if I can find a reason to label them {PD Old} and reupload them on Commons as free use files: as I did with many of your badges which I had donated by a non-member. It's a helluva big learning curve mate and I understand the difficulties in trying to recognise the various copyright standards. I need to point out to you that I'm not an admin or copyright enforcer. I'm just an ordinary editor like you so don't think you have to defer to me in anyway. SonofSetanta (talk) 13:02, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment at
WP:UND
(Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Xsyon))

I'm getting into the space of challenging those editors who had 30 days notice that their article was Speedy-able, did nothing, and as soon as the article is deleted they post malformed requests asking for the undeletion. From the ones I've been able to wiki-stalk, the petitioning editor has been idle for a very long time and the indignation they show when they could not take even the minute-est effort to actually do something about the page prior to deletion makes me give them the hard eye. Hasteur (talk) 21:26, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you can motivate them to do better! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:27, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, regarding the declined speedy deletion of this article, I originally tagged it as a hoax, but then changed it because it was not the obvious vandalism I'm supposed to use G3 for. However, looking for sources before I tagged the article, it seems pretty clear to me that all information presented in the article is false, that the band doesn't exist (if they do, nothing covers them), and that they never sold the amount of albums that article says they did. What should I do regarding this? I'm hesitant to immediately send it to AfD because it is obviously a hoax and would probably be an obvious delete. TCN7JM 07:43, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you think it is obvious use {{db-hoax}}. This raises my suspiscions of a hoax, but not confident enough for a speedy delete. you could just add {{hoax}} at the top. An AFD would certainly sus it out. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:47, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I still think it's speedy worthy, but I've sent it to AfD nonetheless. Thanks. TCN7JM 08:00, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Flag nominations

Hi Graeme. Thank you for your message on my talk page regarding flags I've nominated for deletion. Can we discuss this in more detail because I'd like to save the editor's work if possible. The reason I nominated those particular flags for speedy deletion is because they all appear to be downloads from other websites and are missing permission from the author of the images. From what I have read before nominating them is that this makes them copyvio and eligible for speedy deletion. Is there a way round this? SonofSetanta (talk) 09:41, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well I think they can be fair use as the flags are recent creations that I can see. This means there are no free old versions available to use. SO either they are fair use or not used at all. If not used we delete. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:56, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We need to see a permission ticket to keep them though - don't we? SonofSetanta (talk) 10:04, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No permission needed, but they must satisfy every point of the
WP:NFCC. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:12, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
Can you explain to me why we don't need a permission ticket in these instances? I've e-mailed Wally privately to see if I can't encourage him to interact with us. In the meantime do I tag his graphics {Puf} as I've been doing? SonofSetanta (talk) 10:15, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Take a read of Wikipedia:Non-free content. Some content can be used without permission. Things that are used to identify the organisation. This can be logos, flags, seals or badges. However if they are replaceable by a free image that is better. There is no need to lodge a PUF entry fo something used under fair use, becase we expect it to be unfree. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:27, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. I've read that and now understand what is required. I'll check through the graphic files from yesterday and ensure all the {Puf} tags are removed and leave a message for Wally to that effect. All of this is still a learning curve for me but it'll help me in the future when doing similar things myself. I can assure you I won't be applying for a post as a copyright enforcer. I'm only involved in this instance because of my knowledge of the military. SonofSetanta (talk) 10:51, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just a thought - what about Wally's claims of "Own Work" when the image has been copied from elsewhere? SonofSetanta (talk) 10:53, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well if it is identical showing it was copied then remove the claim. This can count as a copyright infringement, but of we want the picture just fix it up. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:18, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. All understood. I'll have a go at that then. Once I've done the first one I'll check with you to ensure I've got the licencing correct. SonofSetanta (talk) 14:47, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed up File:RTR Distinction.png as Crown Copyright but I want to double check in case it is {PD Old}. I've run out of time for today though. My mammy will spank me if I'm late for dinner ;) SonofSetanta (talk) 16:54, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It is good to have a source. Since one requirement is that the item has been published, and it is important that we know it is genuine. Also your image is low resolution. The portion used is probably the front (if this is a badge). If it was issued in 1945 then it would be public domain. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:56, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the flags and badges, I drew them myself using Inkscape and the Gimp but, obviously, I based them on other images. For example:

I can dig out the rest if you need, but these should give you an idea of what I was doing. I thought they were original enough to qualify as my own work (obviously, if they did not resemble the originals there would have been no point in drawing them) but please let me know what copyright tag and source I should have used. Thanks. Wally Wiglet (talk) 08:00, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that your work is not a derivative of the photographs but of the flags in the photos. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:22, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Graeme. The priority now is to save as many of these images as possible and, if possible, get them uploaded to Commons as "Free" files. Wally I'm going to send you another e-mail. We have work to do me old mucker. SonofSetanta (talk) 13:05, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Andrew Frances, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Healer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:12, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Graeme Bartlett. You have new messages at Talk:Datification.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jianhui67 Talk 14:18, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi There Graeme,

This article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/David_Marks_(politician) received your attention, and you had stated that Councilmen do not normally receive Wikipedia pages. However, Baltimore CityItalic text', not county, councilmembers all of Wiki pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skahl7180 (talkcontribs) 17:09, 4 November 2013 (UTC) [reply]

AWB

Hi Graeme. Can you review my AWB request again on

Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage? Thanks. Jianhui67 Talk 14:20, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Talkback

Michaelzeng7's talk page.
Message added 14:22, 7 September 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply
]

talk) 14:22, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Talkback: 4 benzyloxy phenol

Hello, Graeme Bartlett. You have new messages at Kolbasz's talk page.
Message added 14:38, 7 September 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Nomination of James Moran (supercentenarian) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article James Moran (supercentenarian) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Moran (supercentenarian) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.--FoxyOrange (talk) 22:55, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Prof.Dr Nasir Ansar

Hello, Graeme Bartlett. You have new messages at Ajaxfiore's talk page.
Message added 00:45, 8 September 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Graeme Bartlett. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion#File:795px-Combos.JPG.
Message added 06:33, 8 September 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 06:33, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK Nomination

Hi Graeme, I found your name on a list of active DYK reviewers. I've submitted the

Charles R. Chickering (artist) article for DYK nomination, which I created shortly before its nomination
. It was approved by one reviewer but with a reservation about wording in the hook, so we need another opinion. Could you check it out if and when you have the time?

Also, I am reviewing some other DYK nom's but being sort of new at it, I'm having a difficult time checking for QPQ. Is there an easy (or easier) way to do this besides combing through someone's contrib's? -- Gwillhickers 18:31, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Usually they will indicate on the nomination if they have done one. But on the one you considered it was not a self nomination, so no QPQ was required. Also a move into article space counts as the date created. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:59, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads up. As I said, I'm knew at DYK reviews. Also, my
Charles R. Chickering (artist) nomination is no longer listed under Sept. 6, and it has not hit the main page yet. What happened? What is really strange is that when I went to View history, for Sept. 6, it's not listed there, while there are edits made on Sept. 11. How do edits made on Sept. 11th show up in Sept. 6 View History?? -- Gwillhickers 22:53, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
Okay, after a little digging I found out the
article was promoted by Allen3, so I guess it will take some time before it appears on the main page. However, I am still puzzled that it doesn't show up in View History, and that edits made on the 11th show up under View History for the 6th. (Look at the Capture of the Dutch fleet at Den Helder nomination: The last edit there was made on the 11th.) -- Any ideas? -- Gwillhickers 23:16, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
Your dates are being confused because there is a template transcluded on the
Template:Did you know nominations page and the real page you should look at the history of is Template:Did you know nominations/Capture of the Dutch fleet at Den Helder: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Capture_of_the_Dutch_fleet_at_Den_Helder&action=history I agree that the referencing is not good enough, and if no one will fix it it will miss out. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:09, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks for the info! Some wording (near paraphrasing) issues came up, after the nomination was promoted, which I have resolved and I was hoping you could take another peek at the nomination if you have the time, as things seem to be moving kinda slow over there.
Also, are QPQ reviews cumulative? IOW, if I reviewed ten nominations, am I good to go for ten of my own nominations? Once again, thanks for the info and your time and effort. -- Gwillhickers 23:52, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes you can certainly build up a reserve. To keep yourself organised you can have a page called User:Gwillhickers/DYK reviews with a list and then strike them off when you use it for QPQ. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:36, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Datification

Hello from Afghanistan, thank you for the note on datification. I made quite a few changes, hope it meets the intent. Awaiting your direction...This concept is going through many changes that I have tried to capture 180.94.73.12 (talk) 17:01, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jewish American actors

Category:Jewish American actors has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 September 11#Jewish American actors on the Categories for discussion page. Liz Read! Talk! 11:02, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Accepting a G13-eligible submission

Hi Graeme, I'm one of the developers for the

Article for creation helper script. I saw your comment at User_talk:Hasteur#Bot_limits
:

I still find about 1 in 20 articles queued for G13 delete that were worth accepting as they were. My complaint about the AFC tools is that you cannot accept a declined article. So then I have to do it by hand, more work, and not all the bits get done then (like notification).

...And thought I could help! I've updated the source code to display the "Accept" link for all G13-eligible nominations, even if they've already been declined. It won't be available in the main gadget for a few weeks, but you can install

WP:BYPASS your cach). Hope this helps, Theopolisme (talk) 22:08, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

excellent, I will be trying this out. (If I see something worthwhile) Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:56, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined

Hello, you declined

message me! 04:09, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Just put a prod tag on it. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:28, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I do not understand how that explains your dismission, but okay if you say so.
message me! 20:33, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

DATIFICATION

Good day from Afghanistan, there appeared a ... new .... "different" deletion notification...something to the effect of marketing campaign??? The two individuals I reference in the article are in the datification field BUT I do not know them? Should I take their quotes out? Seems that would hurt the credibility...I'm at a loss?? Thanks for your patience, please advise? 180.94.73.12 (talk) 19:50, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lovetone

Please clarify whys you have removed tags from this article lacking in references and with uncertain notability. Thanks.Tomintoul (talk) 14:21, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am acting on behalf of
WP:AFD process. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:43, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
Articles for Creation
. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.


Teahouse logo
Hello! Graeme Bartlett, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!

Disambiguation link notification for September 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rosine Guiterman, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages South Sydney and Mungo MacCallum (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:53, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme. I see you restored this. However, after reviewing the sources, I thinks it's extremely spammy. It's also a creation by a very multiple sock. Perhaps it should be deleted after all. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:27, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will see if G5 should apply wHen I check the investigation. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:47, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
deleted. You may wish to block or check user Editlets who asked for restore. These checkuser pages are too complex for me to use. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:10, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'll look into Editlets. I admit that SPI is complex, especially this case, and aren't everyone's cup of tea. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:21, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
SPI filed. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:57, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed and blocked. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:37, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

October 2013 AFC Backlog elimination drive

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive

WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from October 1st, 2013 – October 31st, 2013.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 3300 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

A new version of our
AfC helper script is released! It includes many bug fixes, new improvements and features, code enhancements, and more. If you want to see a full list of changes, visit the changelog. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks. --Mdann52talk to me!

This newsletter was delivered on behalf of

WPAFC by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:27, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Not a troll

I am not a troll. Please restore my comment, and retract your attack against me. My comment was an attempt to draw attention to an ongoing problem. Jehochman Talk 13:11, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've reposted my comment in a way that does not use irony, since that obviously went over the head of at least one editor. Jehochman Talk 13:13, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I was considering whether to just close off the discussion or just remove the comment.. The reason I called the comment a troll comment was that it was obviously designed to stimulate an argument. Especially since a recent RFC on the subject was closed, I did not appreciate starting an argument on the topic again. I think that the discussion on that talk page way exceeds the importance of the problem, which is now over. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:47, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think that there's a general problem of home page content having certain topics over-represented, possibly including Gibraltar, mushrooms, professional sports, and video games. I'd like to start a broader discussion about how we can encourage home page diversity, to make our site more pleasing to a wider audience and encourage more editing. Jehochman Talk 21:28, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

M60-UCD1

FWIW, Yobot added the underlinked template. -- 76.65.129.3 (talk) 04:38, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, sometimes I get riffed by useless tags. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:58, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

Rate of living theory, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lifespan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject
.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:25, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External Links notice on MDG_Achievement_Fund

Dear Graeme,

First thank you for helping with the page MDG_Achievement_Fund. There is a notice at the bottom saying "This article's use of external links may not follow Wikipedia's policies or guidelines.". Does the link to the official homepage not follow the guidelines? Could the notification be removed?

Thank you very much in advance.

Chriz the wiz (talk) 15:48, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it as official site is a fair use of the section. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:05, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Online Ambassador Education Program

Hello, Graeme! Would you be willing to be the online ambassador for

talk • contribs
)

Thank you for helping out with the course! We look forward to your insight. 20:04, 10 October 2013 (UTC)BJC — Preceding )

Feedback on Page

Hi and thank you for the rapid response! I will definitely look into adding a section with the Kubler index as well as other prior methods. Also you mentioned leaving the sandbox. I am not yet a wikipedia pro, so i may or may not have messed up when trying to get the page to be titled "Illite crystallinity". I hope i didnt make the page live or anything like that. Also to change the "C" in the page title to a "c" do i need to move the page or can this be edited?

Again, thanks for the reply and any other feedback is welcome!

Sosbor6 (talk) 16:23, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

REFUND

Would you like to make the formal reply at

WP:REFUND#M.I.R.T.- Major Incident Reconstruction Technologies, as I actually deleted this article? Regards, JohnCD (talk) 10:25, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Dark Vengeance

There were many films with that title, but this one was only theatrical movie (1992). Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 10:25, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well User:Leszek Jańczuk you are welcome to make this into a disambiguation page with all the entries. That would be more useful than nothing. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:32, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Why not, but please delete redirection before. Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 11:42, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Borinic acid

Just found this article. Nice work and nice to see a new well structured article with references for a change! Two very small queries- references to binderx xx what are these? Secondly the old 1950's reference about hydrolysis that you quote actually refers to the hydrolysis of diborane, and said a plausible explanation of the kinetic data was that BH3 was the reactive intermediate. Axiosaurus (talk) 12:32, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I had better expand out the binder references, they are references to the thesis. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 19:27, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
there is some debate at iron(II) hydride you may not be aware of. It is just BH3 and GaH3 all over again, the articles misleadingly read as if the amphotericity refers to the molecular form but any references (as expected) go back to either the dimer (in the case of BH3 and GaH3) or complexes. As an afterthought I know of one iron(IV)trihydride complex, I can try to dig out a reference if you are interested.Axiosaurus (talk) 07:25, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I found one at
doi:10.1073/pnas.0604402103. But I don't expect that I want to write about it at this time. However if you find substances like CF3ClF4 or SF5ClF4 or other trifluoromethylhalofluorides, that would be exciting. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:24, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
Guess what, I found that perfluoroalkyliodine(V)fluorides and perfluoroalkyliodine(III)fluoride sexist, like CF3IF4 Trifluoromethyliodine tetrafluoride (de=Trifluormethyliodtetrafluorid). This is in the category of organic polyvalent iodine. There is also the [(C6F5)2IF2]+ ion with BF4-, 10.1039/DT9740000119 10.1021/ja01039a039 10.1002/zaac.200700499 (iodonium salt) 10.1039/dt9740000509 10.1002/zaac.19976231206 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:51, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CF3IF2 Trifluoromethyl Iodine Difluoride: PMID: 11195384 10.1021/ic980503u 10.1016/S0022-1139(00)82874-2 10.1002/zaac.200800269 10.1002/(SICI)1096-987X(199909)20:1 (F=2,4 and 6) Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:59, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Will keep those in mind. currently working on nitridoborates- nice examples of pi bonding or are they! Thanks for the iron hydride intervention. Axiosaurus (talk) 11:05, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Noticed on your page "jj coupling" as a possible new article - however this famous science fiction author (aka John R. Pierce) already has an article! Axiosaurus (talk) 11:39, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment

As you previously participated in related discussions you are invited to comment at the discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC for AfC reviewer permission criteria. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:02, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Possible recommendation for a GA article to FA status.

Hi Graeme Bartlett. Your user page seems to indicate a faith-oriented background which may provide good editing experience for related articles. I am thinking of recommending a page upgrade for a GA article to FA article status which may involve the reading of one book review if this might be possible for you. The book is the popularly received "Evil and the God of Love". Any possible interest? AutoJellinek (talk) 17:46, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well I can read a review, and topic sounds interesting enough. But where is the article? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:57, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme Bartlett. With appreciation for your quick response. After my note, I noticed that Amazon books currently has a free ten page preview available of the book itself. Also, if you have JSTOR available at your desktop then there are two book reviews available on-line:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/40021034.pdf?&acceptTC=true&jpdConfirm=true

This is for Prof. Puccetti's essay titled "The Loving God" in the journal titled "Religious Studies", Vol 2, No. 2, Apr, 1967, p255. A second book review is also on JSTOR and is by Stanley Kane titled "The Failure of Soul-Making" in the Int'l Journal of Philos, Spr. 1975, p1. Either one of these should be sufficient, and possibly you could let me know what you think? AutoJellinek (talk) 18:07, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can see the page 1 only at Jstor, however I can give you a clue that I have never had anything pass at FA before, the only thing I have done is prevent an article from being demoted! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:41, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme Bartlett. This all sounds good and better that you state it at the start. The essay is at GA in good shape and a strong review should be able to get it within an FA nomination. This is the ten page Introduction to the book by John Hick, Evil and the God of Love, on Amazon Books by this url (just single click on the page cover image):

http://www.amazon.com/Evil-God-Love-John-Hick/dp/0230252796

Also, the complete book review is available on the following url by a single click:

http://www.sewanee.edu/philosophy/interlocutor/archives/2009/Climenhaga.pdf

Between the two of these links it should be sufficient for the review upgrade purposes if the material looks like it is of interest to you. Possibly you could let me know what you think of them? AutoJellinek (talk) 14:57, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Hi Graeme Bartlett: Only a short update from last week. If you have had a chance to look at the review above, then maybe the FA review can start. Of the two choices now, if you think its ready to nominate it (the Ireneaen theodicy page) for FA status, then i will put {{subst:FAC}} on the top of the article's talk page, fill out the "initiate this review" form, then i'll put {{Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/name of nominated article/archiveNumber}} (with the appropriate name and number filled in) at the top of the list on

WP:PR is the place i will go first. Any preference for option one or option two? AutoJellinek (talk) 17:43, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings

Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list
. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter


Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:16, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for approving me for AWB. Have a great day. - WPGA2345 - 19:35, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Louie Simmons

Thank you for undeleting the article on Louie Simmons. I have added some references to the article to demonstrate the notability of the subject, and will work on adding references to substantiate the descriptions of the Westside Barbell method. 75.180.29.69 (talk) 02:17, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the pending registeration request on
WP:AWBCP

There are 6 pending requests on

WP:AWBCP. --Kc kennylau (talk) 13:12, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Thanks, . 866ƖǝǝɾɹǝuɐqɯɐɥoS 08:02, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Creation: David Marks (politician)

According to a comment that was left on this page back in 2012, Councilmen do not typically receive Wikipedia pages. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/David_Marks_(politician) However, Baltimore CITY (not County, in David Marks') Councilmembers all of pages. Where is the discrepency? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skahl7180 (talkcontribs) 18:08, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can read an essay on this
WP:POLITICIAN explains the criterion I used. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:59, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Hello. I noticed that you blocked Johnnybee99, so I thought I'd point you to his tag-team buddy when vandalising, Jlaramore1999. Because he has earned a block too. Thomas.W talk to me 20:29, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ghulam Haider Wyne, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kanal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please de-authorise AWB of User:ChrisGualtieri

Please remove the AWB authorisation of User:ChrisGualtieri. He's recently been warned by multiple editors about disruptive editing without effect, and acknowledged it by deleting the warnings from his talk page, then proceeded to make several hundred more edits without visible effect, in blatant and wilful disregard for the AWB rules of use and the requests and then demands of the community. Josh Parris 07:45, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think there has been a misunderstanding here. And that is partly my fault. The edits which are shown to "convict" me are actually
MOS:REFPUNC. Many of the edits include additional fixes. Such as LATISM – Orphan tag, multiple issue tag, #61 [1] Lateralization of brain function, #61, spacing per mos, spacing after punct for ref. [2], K-epsilon turbulence model – link text same as link, #61, false br, pipe in external link, uncategorized tag added [3], Joe Lamont, fixed broken link, added persondata, #61 – [4], Jessica Mauboy - #61, reforder, combine duplicate ref – [5]. While far from being the greatest edit in the world, it has consensus and even Yobot routinely fixes these. I'd also like to note that the issue Josh Parris brought up was not repeated and I did actually bring the discussion up at User_talk:Magioladitis#Questions after Parris's warnings while I was offline. I am not angry over AWBs removal, given the appearances, but I would like it restored as the edits which resulted in its removal do have consensus. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:14, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
ChrisGualtieri asked me to comment here: I would suggest the following: ChrisGualtieri please do not remove any comments from your talk page and assume good faith in people critising some of your edits. Please user more informative edit summaries to at least display your main goal each time. I also suggest that you start doing some typo fixing with AWB to slow your edit rate. I also think that there was a misunderstanding on this last series of edits and I personally encourage editors to fix pages according to the Manual of Style but you need to be more careful in the future. It's up to Graeme Bartlett to restore the AWB access. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:45, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair, I had a rough day and I backed them out it out when I saw Lucia Black's post at the end. I didn't realize the template substitutions were not covered by any consensus yet and I did not repeat the edits that caused concern - but I suppose it my method of relaxing, which I find such fixing to be, caused some issues. I compiled with the warning; but I was not in the mood to argue or fight - in hindsight it was better to leave it and make a post of acknowledgement because I doubt Parris read the other post on your page as to my inquiry. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:53, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds to me as if everyone is being constructive. So I will certainly consider restoring AWB for ChrisGualtieri. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:45, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I await your decision. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:36, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I had already re-enabled it. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:21, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ah, thank you. I won't be doing CHECKWIKI stuff for a bit; got a few GANs that need tending and several more 16 hour days ahead of me. I go to work early and come home late and leaves very little time for Wiki. Three weeks down, three weeks left. A library sale tomorrow looks promising however and I tend to get sucked into content pretty big when I'm happy and go deep into AWB fixes when I am stressed or sad. How I wish I had university access still. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:33, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stayfree Page

Hello ,

We would like to add the content in the stayfree page for women cause in India . Johnson and Johnon India would like to add more information about the women period cycle and how to maintain hygiene in these days . We have tried to add the content but rejected by the wiki administrator , so i thought to contact you to get help for approval of the content . Please can you help and guide us for approval of the content .Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Getdpg (talkcontribs) 13:58, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for El Tigre Fault, Argentina