User talk:Jo-Jo Eumerus/Archive 45

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

23:00, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Hey, do you think the images here are considered free use? I would think the answer is no, but I figured I might as well ask. ceranthor 18:07, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

I don't think so, unless {{PD-US-no notice}} applies. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:49, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Got it. thanks! ceranthor 17:30, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
392		Diamond Head, Hawaii (talk)	Add sources
2,647		Sailor Moon (talk)	Add sources
32		Hawai'i Department of Education (talk )	Add sources
38		Yareta (talk)	Add sources
51		talk )	Add sources
107		Santa María (volcano) (talk)	Add sources
52		ʻIolani School (talk)	Cleanup
16		Transportation in Hawaii (talk)	Cleanup
71		JFS (file system) (talk)	Cleanup
67		Index of Hawaii-related articles (talk)	Expand
2,565		Volcano (talk)	Expand
225		Honolulu County, Hawaii (talk)	Expand
35		Hālona Blowhole (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
12		Sediment Profile Imagery (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
4		Antarctic Technology Offshore Lagoon Laboratory (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
163		Dante's Cove (talk)	Merge
323		Anticyclone (talk)	Merge
1,295		File system (talk)	Merge
34		Red Hill Underground Fuel Storage Facility (talk)	Wikify
18		Jelly-falls (talk)	Wikify
485		Aurora Snow (talk)	Wikify
2		Polybaric melting (talk)	Orphan
2		Whitix (talk)	Orphan
3		Koolivayal (talk)	Orphan
42		Tim Ritchie (talk)	Stub
8		Cerro Bravo (talk)	Stub
82		Koʻolau Range (talk)	Stub
3		Payachata (talk)	Stub
144		HotelTonight (talk)	Stub
3		Pako Guyot (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:32, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to

Lake Tauca (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Cordillera de la Costa

Macdonald seamount (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Plate

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:19, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:18, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

19:08, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello and apologies for the random message. I was wondering if there was a way to delete my Wikimedia Commons account while retaining my Wikipedia account? I have no interest in the Wikimedia Commons side and I always message it up anyway. Thank you in advance!

@

Aoba47:Greetings. Deleting accounts is no more possible on Commons than it is on enWikipedia, so no, there is no way. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions

) 05:29, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

• Thank you. That is what I assumed, but it is nice to get confirmation on that. I am honestly just frustrated with it, but it is probably just best for me to ignore it completely.
  Aoba47 (talk
  ) 05:30, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

That one's done. Pending now are Pluvial theory and Johanna Alida Coetzee. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:23, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

As well as this one. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:37, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Amendment: [9] and [10]. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:15, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

And this one.

talk

) 14:47, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Finally [11] this one. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:31, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Also Waw an Namus in German sources such as Pachur and Altmann 2006. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:01, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

22:27, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Enterprise marketing management. 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. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:59, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Could you give me some more background about when you decide to relist an AfD discussion? Thanks and Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 19:04, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Greetings. As a rule of thumb I relist when a) there are less than 3-4 opinions and no more than 2 relists or b) when I sense that the discussion is not yet settled, e.g when good arguments have been marshalled on both sides and now additional people need to be convinced. Are you concerned about a particular AfD? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:13, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks

WP:SOFTDELETE is actually inappropriate" which I could actually get behind because I don't think REFUND would be appropriate. But then my third thought is "Well let me take a look at some other recent relists to figure out if it is strange or not". In looking at your relists from today I see 7 total. WittyFeed and 4 others that would seem to qualify as expired PRODs [19] [20] [21] [22] and I see 2 which are being relisted for a third time (including 1 which had no discussion between relist 2 and 3) without any sort of statement [23] [24]. But then my fourth thought was "Well maybe there's something else I'm missing" which how I ended up with the question above. I really don't think that SOFTDELETE is the right way forward given Witty's article history so I'm in the end good with a relist, and obviously you shouldn't use the toolset if you don't think a particular action is the right course, but I would suggest that these relists are not following the deletion guideline. Best, Barkeep49 (talk

) 20:42, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

I don't really agree. The "deletion process" page says If a deletion discussion receives minimal participation, the article may be deleted. and I am going to try to get more comments before declaring the discussion as "minimal participation". Even a "soft deletion" is still a deletion. Perhaps I am working off my content review experience, where wait times can exceed a week by far. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:25, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

I agree it may be deleted. You certainly don't have to be the one to do it. But in the case of

WP:RELIST "should write". Best, Barkeep49 (talk

) 14:53, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Well, that procedure applies when Users relisting a debate for a third (or further) time, or relisting a debate with a substantial number of commenters which wasn't the case in the three AFDs you link there. Besides, PRODs per their own policy are for uncontroversial deletions; an user might very well think that their PROD might be contentious and thus go to AFD instead. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:57, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

What am I missing about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chuck Whittall and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nason Schoeffler not being third relists? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:58, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

The former has only one detailed keep argument, the second has only thinly supported arguments on all sides. I'll remember to state the arguments in these relists. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:33, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for that. So I've now looked at all of your relists since the start of April (by my count 52 of them) and looked at a smattering of your other AfD closes. It seems like the 7 relists from yesterday were a bit unrepresentative. Outside of the NOQUORUM and 3rd relist without explanation (thanks again for that) I found nothing which comes close to troubling me. So let me return to NOQURUM for a moment because it essentially seems like you're saying there's no situation in which you would close something with that method - in essence if someone nominates it for AfD that's inherent proof it's controversial and needs discussion. Is that correct? If it's wrong under what conditions would you follow NOQUORUM and do a SOFTDELETE? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 22:51, 3 May 2019 (UTC) If you're curious of the 18 noms which would have been eligible for soft delete 2 later closed as no consensus and 1 later closed as keep. The rest either were still going or closed as delete.

I am quite willing to do a SOFTDELETE close if a discussion still has no input after some relists, but I haven't had opportunity so far. If you look at my closure history carefully you'll notice that a couple of years ago I was quite busy at AFD (including SOFTDELETE closes), then ceased when I focused on content work (and real life work) and now am working back at AFD ... but a lot of discussions are already closed by the time I get there. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:49, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

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

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:58, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Signing so that it gets archived; my comments will be at User talk:Iridescent if need be, and the discussion (which among other things says 2FA is not mandatory, apparently) is at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Return of permissions to administrators notice. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:50, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

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

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)

An editor has asked for a

16:27, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for closing that. Now that it is closed, am I to understand that the accomplishment of that tfd falls to me? I don't mind doing it, I just don't want to get in the way of someone else.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:33, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

@Trappist the monk:Greetings and welcome to my talk page. Seeing as I know that you are the chief maintainer of the various "cite foo"/"citation" templates I indeed think that you are probably the best person to carry out the action. Someone else might also be able, but I don't see anyone else doing the work, and I don't feel like screwing around in that code ... assessing a consensus is one thing, working with complicated code is a mite different. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:36, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Paleotempestology (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Proxy, Delta, Dolomite and Georgia

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Hey, I've listed Boring Lava Field for peer review here if you have any time to give feedback. I'd appreciate if there are any important sources you think I need to add to the article. Hope all's well, ceranthor 16:47, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ceranthor -- Ceranthor (talk

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk

I'm not disputing your closure or anything, but I'm vexed by this IP edit, made immediately before your closure. Is that some random act of trolling, or something more significant? —⁠烏⁠Γ ^(kaw) │ 03:53, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

@KarasuGamma:Someone who thought they had made an account but actually hadn't? Based on a quick Googling, it doesn't look like trolling to me. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:05, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

That's certainly a possibility, but I was more confused by the choice to copy the timestamp of the comment above theirs (and, of course, to put it in the middle to begin with). I don't know. It looked weird, so I thought I might as well ask. (Also, I'm watching your page for now, so you don't need to ping me if you reply.) —⁠烏⁠Γ ^(kaw) │ 09:15, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Maybe someone who does not know how to sign their posts properly? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:38, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Also an option. It doesn't particularly matter, since it didn't affect the discussion; thanks for indulging my curiosity. —⁠烏⁠Γ ^(kaw) │ 09:44, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

The article Arago hotspot you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Arago hotspot for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk) 11:02, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

• Cyclone Monica - MDPI source is questionable.
• Paleotempestology - Finishing
• Ubinas - Update needed.
• Salar de Hombre Muerto
  - Expand.
• 1820–29 Atlantic hurricane seasons#1826 Atlantic hurricane season
  : Source?
• Hurricane Hyperactivity Period
  - Create?

Also check out "diatoms" and "tropical cyclones". Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:22, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Need also updating

Lake Minchin and this source. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions

) 20:43, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Ojo de Maricunga, Ojos de Mar and Chao Dome. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:41, 18 May 2019 (UTC)