User talk:JGabbard/Archive 3

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:28, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

You wrote "The song is notable in and of itself". Can you explain what you mean by that? Thanks.
Vmavanti (talk) 15:10, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Sure, the song is notable because it is a "perennial jazz standard," the topic of academic works, and also because its view counts are higher than even for the artist himself. Plus, the cover by the

McGuire Sisters became a chart hit. So if anything, I would redirect his article to the song before I would redirect the song to him. - JGabbard (talk

) 15:30, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Do you understand the differences between the everday use of the word "notable" and Wikipedia's rules about Notability?
Vmavanti (talk) 16:37, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

(

Wikipedia's rules about notability. GirthSummit _(blether)

16:42, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Don't butt in, Mrs. Kravitz. That's treating people like babies who can't speak for themselves. This doesn't involve you. There was no offense intended in the question. It's a simple question of fact. It deserves an answer. It's civil and proper to answer plain, direct questions.
Vmavanti (talk) 16:56, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't see how anyone could be proud of calling themselves a "talk page stalker" or how this fits into any of the nicey-nice talk about collegiality and civility on Wikipedia. A stalker is a bad thing.
Vmavanti (talk) 16:58, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

insult. Please don't tell me not to butt in though - absent a request from JGabbard that I don't post here, I'll make whatever observations I wish. Best GirthSummit _(blether)

17:49, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

You feel that butting in is productive and helpful? Have you done an internet search for Mrs. Kravitz yet?
Vmavanti (talk) 22:12, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Vmavanti, no, I haven't. If you'd like to give me a link I'll look at it; alternatively, you could just explain what you mean? I don't accept that commenting on a talk page equates to butting in: I've never heard anyone say anything like that before here, it seems unconventional. GirthSummit _(blether) 23:22, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't try to be unconventional, but it does work out that way sometimes. I'm talking about prudence. How often do you peek into the neighbors' windows? I'm leaving aside whether you have some connection to JGabbard, so if there's some understanding that you speak for this person, then I guess it's okay. I've seen this phenomenon before, and I'm trying to understand it: Two people have a conversation, then someone shows up, interrupts the conversation, often trying to bring it to a halt. It's something like ventriloquism. Given that discussion is the foundation of Wikipedia, this strikes me as bad form, as does tut-tutting simple, direct questions. I know that we're free, within certain limits, to write posts on the Talk pages of others. But that's not what I'm talking about. I'm curious about whether certain comments and actions are prudent, helpful, wise.
Vmavanti (talk) 23:32, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Regarding "I don't know who that is, and since you haven't provided a link, I can't easily find out". How long have you been using the internet? You really don't know how you would solve that conundrum?
Vmavanti (talk) 23:38, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Gladys Kravitz was a colorful character from the 1960s American TV show "Bewitched," and again, that reference was also inappropriate and their entire demeanor uncalled for, even apart from the fact that you are an admin. I am declining to respond any further to him/her. - JGabbard (talk

) 03:42, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Vmavanti, if by 'peeking into neighbor's windows' you mean 'looking at my watchlist, which includes the talk pages of numerous editors I've interacted with in the past', then the answer is 'daily'. You've seen this phenomenon before because it is entirely commonplace for other people to join (not interrupt) discussions on what are public talk pages - you surely can't have expected to be able to question JGabbard's competence in private? Notwithstanding your coyness about what you meant by the Kravitz remark (I'm still none the wiser - never having watched the show, I'm not sure what I'm meant to infer from the comparison), you say that you are in favour of simple, direct language, so I will be frank: I thought your question about whether they understood notability was quite silly, in light of what they had just said to you, so I pointed out that if what they said was true, there would be no question of notability. I did not comment on your follow-on question, asking whether they would be willing to add sourcing to the article to demonstrate the truth of what they said - that seemed reasonable, so I left it alone.

Now, I don't imagine that JGabbard wants the pair of us bickering on their talk page, and they have said that they no longer want to respond to you. If you want to continue to discuss talk page etiquette, you would be welcome to do so on my talk. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 09:47, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

If "Weary Blues" has been a "topic of academic works", would you be willing to add sourced material to the article using those works as sources?
Vmavanti (talk) 17:00, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

People on Wikipedia have a habit of taking literal questions figuratively. I discourage that kind of thing. I avoid it because encyclopedias are about facts, not opinions, agendas, or reading between the lines. I encourage people to read the lines rather than the blank spaces between them. Figurative language takes us into the clouds and is best left to poets. I'm an American with his feet happily on terra firma, though I do own a West Highland terrier who also loves terra firma—but he's an American Westie, right? I can see why people are afraid to talk to me. I'll take honest American plain speaking, insults even, over deception and concealment any day of the week. The phenomenon I referred to earlier? The ventriloquist act? I know what you're doing. I admit, it took me a while to figure out. I had to see it happen several times. Then calling me "coy", something that has never happened, was also a giveaway. I don't care much for this kind of thing. Very likely it will self-destruct.
Vmavanti (talk) 14:15, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Vmavanti, I have literally no idea what you're talking about. Ventriloquist act? You know what I'm doing? Please feel free to explain, but again I'd urge you to do it on my talk page, rather than JGabbard's - your continuing to comment here after they have indicated that they don't intend to respond to you any further could be seen as intrusive. GirthSummit _(blether) 14:33, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

This smokescreen has obscured the question I came here to ask JGabbard: If "Weary Blues" has been a "topic of academic works", would you be willing to add sourced material to the article using those works as sources? Now that's a simple, relevant question that ought to be easy to answer.
Vmavanti (talk) 14:15, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, JGabbard

Thank you for creating

Any chance you could reformat the references? They are listed separately, but I think that ref 1 and 4 are the same book, as are ref 2 and 3. Publisher, page number and ISBN would all be helpful too to help readers

verify

the information. Thanks

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Girth Summit}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

GirthSummit _(blether) 16:51, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@Girth Summit:I will look into reformatting at least one of them when I am able to revisit the project, if no one else has done so in the meantime. - JGabbard (talk) 17:55, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

JGabbard, thanks. With online sources I'd do it myself, but not having the books I can't add page numbers - better for someone who has access to the offline source to do it. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 18:10, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading

).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:58, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of one-hit wonders in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Into the Night (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:45, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Laura Branigan 'Dim All the Lights' US Dance Club Songs chart peak

Hi, just wondering where you sourced the US Dance chart peak for Laura Branigan's "Dim All the Lights" from, as it is not currently listed on her chart history on the Billboard site. I've noticed that the site is missing some peaks for some artists, but if you could provide another source, that would be appreciated.Nqr9 (talk) 04:09, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

I simply imported that entry from the notation which is already on the song article. - JGabbard (talk) 10:59, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

I don't know what you're referring to, sorry. The only reference cited for Billboard Dance Club Songs peaks on the page is the Billboard URL, which does not display the peak.Nqr9 (talk) 11:56, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Category:Steve Dahl songs has been nominated for deletion

Category:Steve Dahl songs has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Richhoncho (talk) 21:54, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

Something 'Bout You Baby I Like, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gary Klein (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver

).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:17, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Timothy - Buoys.jpg

Thanks for uploading

claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:28, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

Hello. Please see this discussion. Bionic (talk) 17:54, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Woodstock (song)

In your edit of 05:44, 24 December 2019 of Woodstock (song), you introduced the markup [[UK Singles Chart|UK]] <ref>{{cite web|url= |title=Official Charts Company |website=Officialcharts.com |date= |accessdate=2019-12-24}}</ref>. Two problems, one fix: {{cite web}} requires a valid URL. The accessdate parameter also requires a valid URL. I commented out the ref for now, but will you please edit the article and supply a valid URL in support of UK Singles Chart? —Anomalocaris (talk) 23:01, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Sure, no problem! — JGabbard (talk) 01:56, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Mel and Tim songs

A tag has been placed on

section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion

, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:00, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Kimberly Klacik, Candidate for Maryland's 7th Congressional district.jpeg

Thank you for uploading

image copyright tag

; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:34, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Kimberly Klacik, Candidate for Maryland's 7th Congressional district.jpeg

Thank you for uploading

image copyright tag

; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the

talk

) 01:00, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kimberly Klacik, Candidate for Maryland's 7th Congressional district.jpeg

Thanks for uploading

claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:29, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

This is Don Mansfield. Drmjr78 (talk) 03:15, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Don! Many thanks for the burger bro!  :-) - JGabbard (talk) 03:44, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

A couple of discretionary sanctions notifications

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called

page-specific restrictions

, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the

guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.  Bishonen | tålk

11:46, 15 September 2020 (UTC).

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called

page-specific restrictions

, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the

guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.  Bishonen | tålk

11:46, 15 September 2020 (UTC).

Republican In Name Only

This edit is a BLP violation, and your edit summary is especially offensive. Bishonen | tålk 11:46, 15 September 2020 (UTC).

It wasn't my edit; I only restored what had already been there previously. The edit summary reflects not my own opinion so much as prevailing attitudes in political circles.

WP:RS. Be it offensive or not, Romney certainly has this type of coverage, so how can he be an exception? JGabbard (talk

) 15:07, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

If you restore content that has been removed as belonging in an "enemies list", you take responsibility for it. It's not useful to tell me, here, on your own talkpage, that there are reliable sources. The trick is in providing those sources in the article. Bishonen | tålk 20:58, 15 September 2020 (UTC).

Nomination of Trump 2024: The World After Trump for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Trump 2024: The World After Trump 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/Trump 2024: The World After Trump until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Slatersteven (talk) 12:58, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Hmm does this sanction still stand? I see other entries at Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement log with one expired, but not exactly about this. In case it stands, this movie is somewhat under the topic (conspiracy theories propaganda) and thus risky territory... —PaleoNeonate – 00:49, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the word of caution, Paleo. The topic is different and the pertinent phraseology was added just a few hours ago, but either way will take that under advisement. Its deletion discussion is looking anything but favorable right now anyway. - JGabbard (talk) 01:19, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Trump 2024 - The World After Trump.png

Thanks for uploading

claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 05:12, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Archiving talk page

Hi, JGabbard, You have over 400 notices/discussions on your user talk page which makes it difficult to navigate. Please consider archiving or deleting old messages that are no longer relevant, say, those over a year old.Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:39, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Liz: After perusing the page detailing the archiving technique, I have no interest in navigating its complexity, nor am I feeling a compelling urge to do that in the first place. But thank you for the suggestion. I may choose to revisit it in the future. - JGabbard (talk) 23:37, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

JGabbard,I can set it up for you if you like. You just have to stick a template at the top of the page and a bot will do the heavy lifting. Ping me if you're interested, ignore me if not... GirthSummit _(blether) 23:40, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Sure Girth, if you're willing to do that, go for it! Thanks very much. - JGabbard (talk) 01:52, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

JGabbard, that ought to do it. Nothing for you to do now, a bot ought to swing by at some point and wave its wand. GirthSummit _(blether) 05:53, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks again! I appreciate your help. - JGabbard (talk) 11:56, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Threads that don't have a timestamp will not be automatically archived, so you may want to move/delete them at your discretion. It would be possible to find when they were created and add a timestamp, but considering that they're old and that some threads were also blanked in the past, it may be more trouble than worth. If you need to prevent the bot from archiving particular threads, they can also be marked with {{

subst:DNAU}}. —PaleoNeonate

– 03:52, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Noted, thanks, Paleo. Is there a way to access and/or index the archive? - JGabbard (talk) 11:33, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

The {{Talk header}} template above should automatically display links to archive pages when they'll exist (and also allow to search them). —PaleoNeonate – 12:36, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

I noticed that because the |count= parameter was wrong the pages the bot created were not visible for the template to auto-index them. I have moved the pages and adjusted the parameter. Feel free to ping me if any trouble surfaces, —PaleoNeonate – 09:22, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

PaleoNeonate, thanks for fixing my mess - that count parameter was my bad. GirthSummit _(blether) 09:44, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

@Girth Summit: the intention was good and to err human. Speaking of errors there's a redirect I inadvertently left at User talk:JGabbard/Archive 9 but then CSD tagged for technical deletion. —PaleoNeonate – 10:07, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

PaleoNeonate, gone, cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 10:08, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

"Jessica Jones (singer)" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Jessica Jones (singer). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 2#Jessica Jones (singer) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Narky Blert (talk) 12:41, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Roberta Flack discography, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Let It Be Me.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:16, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Dang Me - Roger Miller.jpg

Thanks for uploading

claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:28, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ahab the Arab - Ray Stevens.jpg

Thanks for uploading

claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:27, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

A bit late but

An IP editor recently undid these edits of yours to Vicarius Filii Dei (which is what brought them to my attention), where you cited this source to claim that the phrase "Vicarius Filii Dei" was consistently used for centuries in papal canons and other Catholic publications.

However, that source is

a single primary source

that fails to demonstrate a trend. It also does not discuss the use of the title "Vicar of the Son of God" in Catholic history. It does not even refer to the pope as the Vicar of the Son of God. It is not even about the pope, but Fernando Póo being appointed over Thailand (Rivi Muniensis) as a Vicar of the Apostles (vicariatu apostolico). It was not even signed by the pope. The closest it comes to the pope was that it was issued by some bishops on behalf of an office the pope is technically in charge of.

However, I see that you have since moved on to music edits, where I can only assume that you are editing far more in line with our policies and guidelines (such as

WP:NOR). May you have plenty of fun making good edits there. Ian.thomson (talk

) 07:26, 23 October 2020 (UTC)