User talk:JJMC89/Archives/2019/October

Active discussions

NFCC violations

Since your JJMC89 bot keeps removing the coat of arms images at List of mayors of Leeds, then perhaps your bot should remove them from the Leeds, City of Leeds and Leeds City Council articles, per WP:NFCC violation(s). HLE (talk) 22:47, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi HLE. Instead of trying to argue WP:OTHERIMAGE or WP:DELETEALL, it might be better to first try and understand why JJMC89's bot is removing the file. The bot is leaving an edit summary containing a link to WP:NFC#Implementation. Have you taken a look at that page? All images uploaded to Wikipedia require two things: a file copyright license and some general information about the source, etc. of the image. Non-free images further require a separate, specific non-free use rationale for each use. What the bot is doing is removing files from articles which are not provided with a non-free use rationale for that particular use. It's the responsibility of the editor wanting to use a non-free file in a particular way per WP:NFCCE to provide a valid rationale for that use and then add the file to the article; otherwise, the file can be removed per WP:NFCC#10c. However, there are actually ten non-free content use criteria which need to be met for each non-free use for it to be considered acceptable, and providing a rationale is just one (actually just part of one) of these criteria; in other words, providing a missing rational will stop the bot from removing the file, but it doesn't automatically mean the particular non-free use is policy compliant.
So, if you think the way you want to use the file meets all ten of the aforementioned criteria, then add a rationale for the use to the file's page. You should try as be as specific as you can in the rationale and try and avoid simply copying and pasting the details from one use for another use. If another editor then disagrees with the rationale then they can challenge it perhaps by adding {{di-disputed fair use rationale}} to the file's page or by starting a discussion at WP:FFD.
Some things to consider when writing the rationale is whether the coat-of-arms (COA) is actually for the mayor's office or for the town itself; in the latter case, it could be reasonably argued that it's OK for the article about the town, but perhaps not OK for a list article about the town's mayors. Sometimes a political office has it's own seal or COA and if Leeds does then that image would mostly likely be fine; the default, however, is not to automatically use the town's COA if the mayor's office doesn't have it's own. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:41, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Voicemail draft

Hello! It appears that you have deleted my draft for the song Voicemail by Poppy. I understand this, but please could you momentarily restore it so that I may take some screenshots of it, purely for nostalgic purposes. Thank you! --Rubensbathsheba (talk) 08:50, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

  Done Please tag it with {{db-author}} when you are done. — JJMC89 05:04, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Edward P.F. Rose

Latest revision as of 04:24, 30 September 2019.

Please note the various items of text :
"Rose was elected a Fellow of the Geological Society of London (FGS) in 1963, and a Senior Fellow in 2013, having been accredited as a Chartered Geologist (CGeol) in 1991"
"In 2014, he received the Sue Tyler Friedman Medal of the Geological Society of London for excellence in research into the history of geology."
Please check whether this image can be reinstated. --Richard Tennant —Preceding undated comment added 12:46, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

No it may not. Usage in that manner does not satisfy criterion 8 of the non-free content policy. — JJMC89 05:04, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Atheist portal

Hi. Why was it deleted? Was it not maintained or had enough material? Was there a discussion about it's deletion? I can't find any record of it. Thanks. Shabidoo | Talk 07:18, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Atheism. — JJMC89 04:13, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

I need help

Hello. I contact you regarding the page Kamp Koral. New information has appeared (release date, who works on the show etc.) If you can, please remove the protection, so i can remade the page with the new information. Have a good day. Signed: AlbForLife4 (talk) 13:21, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi AlbForLife4. If the article is protected and you're unable to edit it, you can make an edit request on the article's talk page as explained in Wikipedia:Edit requests. Another editor, who can edit the page, will review your request and assess whether the proposed change is in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. If you're requesting that new information be added to the article, your edit request should include a link a reliable source which can be used to verify the change your proposing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:41, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
No, I won't. None of those things establish notability. — JJMC89 04:18, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

DA poster

File:First Downton Abbey Movie poster.jpg No objection to it's deletion as uploader at this time.--Mark Miller (talk) 04:50, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

  • I made a change to the explanation that I believe demonstrates that the poster itself is discussed with a reference. It was the original poster first put out by Focus features.--Mark Miller (talk) 07:35, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
    (talk page watcher) I don't see how the reader seeing a non-free image of a poster showing the abbey with a list of cast members significantly improves the reader's understanding of what is basically a section whose content is nothing more than an embedded list of same people. A non-free file which is basically a list of names located next to a Wikipedia list of names doesn't really seem to be needed at all per WP:NFC#CS, WP:FREER or even WP:TEXTASIMAGES. Moreover, the source cited in the caption of image doesn't even seem to be referring to the same poster, but rather the poster used in the main infobox and there's no critical commentary of either poster (e.g. their design, any controversies associated with them); the word "poster" seems to have been only actually been used once throughout the entire cited article and used in a way more likely considered to be a trivial mention than significant critical commentary. If this was being discussed at WP:FFD, I don't think a consensus would be established that this type of non-free use even comes close to complying with WP:NFCC, but perhaps some others would feel differently. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:29, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Admin newsletter signup

Hi! I notice that JJMC89 bot is signing new admins up to the Admin Newsletter automatically - was this discussed somewhere? Initial discussion around the newsletter resulted in somewhat of a consensus that the newsletter should be purely opt-in, so just not sure if I missed a discussion. Thanks! Sam Walton (talk) 15:25, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

No. It was just me not setting the configuration correctly. I added the list three months ago with the intention of only dealing with renames. I've corrected the configuration now. — JJMC89 07:04, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
Oh, great, thanks! Sam Walton (talk) 08:56, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

College Basketball DRV

I got a ping that you mentioned me in the college basketball DRV you closed but I can't figure out where or what you said. Am I missing something? Smartyllama (talk) 12:51, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

I don't know why you got a notification. The only think I added there was the close. — JJMC89 02:48, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Kabir Helminski

Hi there. You deleted my article on Kabir Helminski on 12 September. Is is possible for me to be given access to the article as a draft so I can re-work it in light of the comments? I believe I can add plenty more independent sources that will show that Kabir Helminski is notable figure in his field. Thanks. Danthedervish (talk) 14:53, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

What sources do you have that would establish notability? — JJMC89 02:55, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the prompt response. I'll need to compile a list and get back to you. In the meantime, one query: Do endorsements from independent, leading figures in the field which feature on the back of Helminski's books not count as 'independent sources'? This is what I infer following the feedback on my first attempt at this article, though it was not made explicit in any of the comments I received. Many thanks for your help. Danthedervish (talk) 16:57, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
No, those aren't going to help. — JJMC89 01:51, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
Here are some sources I would use to establish notability:
Articles in academic journals that cite Helminski's work/books:
'Muslims in the United States: Pluralism under Exceptional Circumstances' by Kathleen M. Moore,The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 2007; 612; p. 116
'Peace in Islam in the light of Quran and traditions of Prophet Muhammad' by Nazar Ul Islam, G K Sharma, Riyaz Ahmad Ganai, Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, Volume 2, Issue 1, January 2014
'Eclectic Sufism in the Contemporary Arab World' by Mark Sedgwick, Tidsskrift for Islamforskning 11 (1), 2017, p.65-82
'Hybrid Identity Formations in Muslim America: The Case of American Sufi Movements' by Marcia Hermansen, The Muslim World, 90, Spring, 2000
'Mawlana and the west: with special reference to translation' by Amin Karimnia et al, Elixir Linguistics and Translation, 46 (2012)
'Sufism in Latin America: a preliminary survey' by Mark Sedgwick, Melancolia 3 (2018) pp. 4-34
'How does Prohibition stop working? The visibility and legitimacy of Mevlevi ceremonies in modern Turkey' by Sağlam, Burcu, thesis submitted to the Graduate School of Humanities and Social Sciences of İstanbul Şehir University
'Geschichtstheologie aus eschatologischer Sicht' by Rüdiger Lohlker, Arabische Miszellen: Studien zur arabischen Welt.
Reviews of Helminski's books in periodicals:
Library Journal, September 1, 1992, Marilyn E. Schafer, review of Living Presence: A Sufi Way to Mindfulness and the Essential Self, p. 180
Library Journal, May 1, 1999, Graham Christian, review of The Knowing Heart: A Sufi Path of Transformation, p. 86
Parabola, 'Number and Symbol,' 24.3, Fall 1999, Erik S. Ohlander, review of The Knowing Heart, p. 102
Publishers Weekly, May 13, 1996, review of Jewels of Remembrance: A Daybook of Spiritual Guidance: Containing 365 Selections from the Wisdom of … Rumi, p. 68
Publisher's Weekly, December 12, 2005, review of The Beliefnet Guide to Islam, p. 60
Helminski has been interviewed by many organisations with an interest in spirituality. If you think it would help establish notability, I can list a number of them.
Popular novel that cites Helminski as an influence:
The Forty Rules of Love by Elif Shafak
Danthedervish (talk) 13:20, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
International Influence:
Helminski has been an advisor to Ansor, the World's largest Muslim youth organization, as it formulated a detailed roadmap for the reform of Islamic Orthdoxy. He is is prominently quoted on the second page of their "Declaration on Humanitarian Islam."
Danthedervish (talk) 12:27, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
@Smartse and Pharaoh of the Wizards: Since this is not my area of expertise, I'd appreciate your input. Does any of the above sourcing change your opinion on Helminski's notability? — JJMC89 20:36, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
One final thing: I'd like Smartse and Pharaoh of the Wizards to be aware that Helminski was named as one of the "500 Most Influential Muslims in the World" by the Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Center in association with Georgetown University - see here:
His books have been translated into 11 different languages by reputable publishers (not self-published - these publishers can be listed if necessary). He was the first Westerner to be initiated as a teacher within the Mevlevi Sufi Order (independent citation can be provided), and is also one of the original signatories of "A Common Word Between Us and You," an open letter by influential Islamic scholars to Christian leaders, calling for peace and understanding which drew a lot of media coverage. See here:
These sources were included in my original attempt at this article and I was a little surprised that they weren't enough to establish notability. Hopefully though, with the new ones I've provided above, his notability can be clearly seen.
Danthedervish (talk) 08:46, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
Pinging @Smartse and Pharaoh of the Wizards: again since the first one seems to not have gone through. — JJMC89 02:50, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Some help please

Hello JJMC89, I made a draft on a subject mentioned in the reliable media as "noted philosopher". His books have been commented on and referenced by Jean-Luc Nancy, Bernard Stiegler, Robert Bernasconi and many others. There are exclusive articles on him in reliable sources including journals. There is a biographical essay too. Artists too have made works inspired by him. Will you please have a look and help to improve it? Draft:Shaj Mohan WWorringer (talk) 19:20, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you're asking me – I don't have any expertise on the subject. In any case, you've already submitted it for review, so a reviewer will get to it in due course. — JJMC89 02:53, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Bugzilla merger

Thanks for catching my enormous mess up. I really feel like I deserve a {{whale}} right now. I will fix it tomorrow when I'm a little less sleep deprived. Also how did you do the mass reversions that quickly? I was thinking there would have to be a major AWB run or something to fix my mess. --Trialpears (talk) 01:13, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

I went through AnomieBOT's contributions and reverted any with {{bugzilla}} in the edit summary. Hopefully I got them all. — JJMC89 02:55, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Some help please

Can you please help me ‘import’ File:Research and Analysis Wing.svg to Wiki Commons? I have seen some images which are marked as ‘imported’ from Wikipedia, but not sure how to do it.— Vaibhavafro💬 11:08, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

No. There is no evidence that the uploader is the copyright holder, especially given the number of logos they uploaded with similar claims. As such, the file should be treated as non-free. Such files are not permitted on Commons. — JJMC89 23:11, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

About Bangladesh Chhatra League Article

Hello, Dear, hope you are well. Yesterday, I have been added a original colour logo on Bangladesh Chhatra League article. Their official logo colour is now black. But, today you removed my edit from the article. Please you can see their original logo on Bangladesh Chhatra League's official website and then please add my uploaded logo/file. Thanks Al Riaz Uddin (talk) 06:08, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

  Done In the future please be more careful. — JJMC89 23:24, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Portal unlinking

Hi JJMC89, I noticed you were removing links to Portal:Library and information science. In the future would you allow one of us with WP:AWB access to remove the links manually? This has traditionally been the role of @BrownHairedGirl:. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 08:15, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Why? The tool used to remove them is irrelevant. — JJMC89 19:35, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
Because the links can be recycled to point to more important portals. It's not good to leave links unclickable, like here Mark Schierbecker (talk) 20:10, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping, @Mark.
For the last two months or so, I have been trying to leave a note at every MFD with my proposal for what to do with the backlinks. In the case MFD:Portal:Library and information science, I noted that I saw no viable alternative, so the backlinks should be removed.
Same with MFD:Portal:1970s, where I also proposed removing the backlinks.[1].
In both cases, there was no alternative suggestion for the fate of the backlinks. So as far as I can, @JJMC89 did the right thing in both cases.
However, on closer inspection, it seems that the tool which JJMC89 is using (User:Evad37/Xunlink) is applying a logic better suited to body text than to portal links. In body text, the aim should be to leave the displayed text in place, but unlink it, and that's what the tool is doing. However, portal links are different: in nearly every case, the displayed text should also be removed.
I wasn't aware of this glitch arising, and I doubt that JJMC89 was aware of it either. So I think portal deletions is one of those quirks where the Xunlink tool is best not deployed, and the links are best removed by other means ... even when they are just being removed rather than replaced. I will add a comment about that to my backlink notes in future.
Thanks to Mark for being so eagle-eyed, and to JJMC89 for the exceptionally high quality of his many many closes. I guess we have all learnt a wee bit more today. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:39, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
In the cases you've pointed out there is no "more important portal" and removal was explicitly requested by BHG. So, the only issue is the links outside mainspace. I'll try to remember to clean those up manually. — JJMC89 22:34, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Mark Ruffin

Hello. I am requesting the article for Mark Ruffin be restored. It was deleted due to abandonment (G13) and I would like to work on it. The individual has established notability– he currently is listed as program director on Wikipedia article: Real Jazz - for Sirius XM radio Satelite station. Mark Ruffin has also won two Emmy Awards and has production credits for many public radio and tv stations. Boldtypev (talk) 21:12, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

  Already done at WP:REFUND — JJMC89 21:36, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
This Draft can be deleted, the page has already been created. Thank you (Boldtypev (talk) 22:50, 6 October 2019 (UTC))
I've history merged it into the article. — JJMC89 22:54, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boldtypev (talkcontribs) 22:59, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Untitled from Brunčević Bekir

Deleted this drafts: Draft:FK Ras, Draft:Serbian FSO Cup, Draft:FK Novi Pazar 1928. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brunčević Bekir (talkcontribs) 22:37, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Your request is unclear. Since you've blanked those drafts, I've gone ahead and deleted them for you. — JJMC89 22:41, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brunčević Bekir (talkcontribs) 23:32, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia talk:Wikidata

 Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia talk:Wikidata has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:03, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

FYI, swpb since you requested it. — JJMC89 05:15, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Deletion review for Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Victoria

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Victoria. 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. Bookscale (talk) 00:41, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Kabir Helminski

It seems this conversation has been archived without a decision having been reached and without a response from the administrators from whom you requested input. I would really appreciate it if you would keep this conversation live and help me create an article that meets Wikipedia's requirements. Thank you in advance! Danthedervish (talk) 12:17, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, JJMC89/Archives/2019. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 19:32, 14 October 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk (We are the champions, my friends) 19:32, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Jewish Nobel laureates

Could you please stop deleting the talk page and allow some constructive discussion about the proposed category?-- (talk) 06:37, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi IP You're trying to add the non-existing Category:Jewish Nobel laureates to various articles, and then trying to create a talk page for a non-existing page. There's no real need for to have a talk page for a non-existing page and it's going to continue to be deleted per WP:G8 as long as there is no category page corresponding to it. So, if you believe that there should be a "Category:Jewish Nobel laureates", create the category page as explained at WP:CAT#Creating category pages and then create its talk page. If you're not sure how to create a category page or want to but cannot because you're not a registered account, you can ask for help at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Awards, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Jewish history or maybe even at Wikipedia:Teahouse. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:19, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

October 2019

  Hello, I'm CentralTime301. I noticed that you recently removed content from KYTV (TV) without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. CentralTime301 (talk, contribs) 23:56, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)@CentralTime301: The bot which removed the file left this edit summary explaining why the file was removed. The non-free file is question doesn't have the separate specific non-free use rationale required by WP:NFCC#10c for that particular use; so, the bot removed the file per WP:NFCCE. If you click on the WP:NFC#Implementation link that the bot included in its edit summary, you should've seen this as well. If you feel the file's non-free use in that article is justified, provide the required corresponding non-free use rationale for it and then re-add the file to the article. Most of bots removing files like this are doing so not on a whim, but because they've been designed to find problem files or problem non-free uses like this. It's possible that they might be mistaken, but you should not just revert them unless your absolutely certain they are because most likely you'll just be recreating the same problem which led to the file being in the first place. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:44, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
I see you actually did add the missing rationale, but the file was removed again. The second removal was done by mistake and I've re-added the file. Most likely the file was removed again because you just reverted the bot, but didn't leave an edit summary adequately explaining why. Edits without edit summaries often get flagged as potential problems by scripts like Twinkle; so, it helps to leave an edit summary explaining why you're reverting, especially when reverting a bot. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:00, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Non-free flag images in LGBT demographics of the United States

Hi JJMC89. Could you add {{NFLISTS editnotice}} to LGBT demographics of the United States? It might help prevent well-meaning, but non-NFCCP compliant edits like this. Can only administrators/template editors add that kind of template to an article? Just curious because I couldn't figure out how to do it myself. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:55, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

  Done Yes, only admins, template editors, and page movers can create/edit editnotices. — JJMC89 03:18, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Suriyawong (character)

I made a mix-up earlier. The orphaned talk page that was at Talk:Suriyawong (character) should have been at Talk:Suriyawong (Ender's Game). Would you mind restoring it? Thanks. --Paul_012 (talk) 10:07, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

  Done — JJMC89 03:18, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

MCS building

Hi JJMC. Regarding your edit here, I read up a little on license migrations, and followed links to read up on licensing updates, etc. But the implication isn't yet clear enough to me to proceed with a move to Commons. Does it also mean the pic cannot undergo a migration to Commons? That part confuses me because the uploader states he took the pic himself and he also released it the correct license to qualify for a transfer to Commons. Do you care to comment? Thanks, 01:03, 20 October 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mercy11 (talkcontribs)

It doesn't impact moving the file to Commons, which I've just done. — JJMC89 03:18, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia talk:Wikidata

Hi JJMC89. I recently closed Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 October 12#Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia talk:Wikidata as delete, but your bot recreated the template. Is there anything we can do about this? Best, FASTILY 00:40, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

If this discussion is closed as delete, the page will need to be salted, or else it will get recreated by a bot. I knew this would happen when I posted my nomination. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:47, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
What Pppery said, or use {{bots}} if it fine for the notice to exist but be blank. — JJMC89 03:18, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

I recently changed the license at File:Twicklogosmall.png from {{non-free logo}} to {{PD-textlogo}}. Since then, JJMC89 bot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) has been tagging the file with {{orphaned non-free revisions}}. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 21:29, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)@Fourthords: You changed the copyright license, but you left the non-free use rationale as is; so, the bot is seeing a conflict between a PD license and the non-free use rationale. If you think this file is {{PD-logo}} '(be careful because c:COM:TOO United Kingdom is not the same as c:COM:TOO United States, and a "PD-logo" file needs to be PD in both its country of origin and the US), then you should convert the non-free use rationale to {{Information}}; this should stop the bot from flagging the file as having non-free issues.
One option if you're not sure the file is PD in the UK would be to re-license it as {{PD-ineligible-USonly}} instead, but you'd still need to replace the non-free use rationale with "Information". -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:45, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
I'm glad to know that {{information}} will stop the box from tagging, but shouldn't the bot see the public-domain license and not tag the file with {{orphaned non-free revisions}}? The license tag is more relevant to the file's copyright status than the layout template for sourcing information. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 15:37, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
When a template is added to a page, the page is usually then added to a corresponding category page. I also think their may also be something also added to the page's Wikidata, but I'm not sure about that. A bot isn't capable of "seeing" what's on the page in the sense that it can determine why a copyright license or a non-free use rationale was added; it just "sees" that they've been added. It's not uncommon for a non-free copyright license to be changed to a free one by someone wanting to use a file in a certain way; sometimes it's done in good faith, but other times it's not and there's really no way for the bot to know which is which. Since non-free use is highly restricted on Wikipedia, the bots may be applying the more restrictive policy in such cases. Perhaps you noticed that another bot like FastilyBot operated by Fastily added {{Wrong license}} to the file's page because of the conflict created when you changed the copyright license.
One other thing, you added {{nsd}} to the file's page; so, now the file has been added to pages tagged for speedy deletion for lacking proper source information per WP:F4. I'm almost certain that a bot cannot determine why you did that; so, now basically a human file reviewer or an admin is going to have to determine the "why". The file has also been added to Category:Wikipedia files lacking a description and Category:Files lacking an author as well since you left those parameters blank as well; so, once again a bot only knows that you did this, not why you did it. It would be better for you to complete the parameters of the template you added (at least to the best of your knowledge) instead of expecting someone else to come along a clean things up. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:35, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
A bot isn't capable of "seeing" what's on the page This is what I didn't know. I've never done any programming or coding, so I didn't realize what Wikipedia bots can and cannot do. I appreciate that. It would be better for you to complete the parameters of the template you added (at least to the best of your knowledge) instead of expecting someone else to come along a clean things up. I did. I actually didn't realize that the NFC rationale template was doing so much heavy lifting by assuming description, source, etc. I was going to copy-and-paste Sb1982 (talk · contribs)'s sourcing information, but was surprised to find they hadn't added any! I'm not expecting anything except for an automatic deletion of the file on 31 October UTC. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 21:42, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
I'm not expecting anything except for an automatic deletion of the file on 31 October UTC is a bit of an odd statement to make because it makes it seem as if you want the file to be deleted. First, files aren't really "automatically" deleted, but need to be deleted by a admin; so, an admin is going to have to review the file and determine whether an F4 deletion is appropriate. So, if you really do feel the file should be deleted, then this is not really a good way to try and go about having that done. It's better to simply tag the file for deletion or take it to WP:FFD under the old license.
Do you think this file is {{PD-logo}} in both the US and UK? I assumed you did since you converted the license and then asked why older revisions were being flagged for deletion per WP:F5. You may be correct in converting the license, but you should do so in a way that's not going to lead to the file's deletion. Many non-free use rationale templates have "boiler plate" text which is automatically added when a parameter is left empty; this is just some generic statement that's meant to apply to most common uses. So, if you feel this is OK for a description, etc., you can use it in the "Information" template too; if not, you can add your own description, etc.. Same goes for the other parameters, but leaving them all empty is unintentionally creating file related issues which don't need to be created. As for the source, usually logos can be found on official websites so a link to that often does the trick as long as the logo can be seen used there. FWIW, I don't use bots and only know what I know from pages like WP:BOT, etc. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:18, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
Salavat has relicensed the wordmark to {{PD-ineligible-USonly|United Kingdom}} and completed the missing parts of {{information}}. As for the bot, it works on files in Category:All non-free media since there are many different free and non-free licenses and a file is either free or non-free. The non-free license templates and non-free use rationale templates all add this category. Not keeping the two in sync, will at best end up being tagged for possible licensing conflict or other issues like the one you encountered here. — JJMC89 03:55, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Quick quetion

Hello there, Am still new to Wikipedia so am not completely sure what the rules and regulations are yet of the website so am trying to be careful. I saw that your bot removed File:Nigeria Basketball Federation logo.png from Nigeria women's national basketball team but it wasn't removed Nigeria national basketball team I just want to ask if that particular file can only be used on the mens page and not anywhere else thanksOmoYoruba45 (talk) 05:33, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

User pages on the titleblacklist

Back in February you kindly added all the foreign language versions of "User:" to the titleblacklist and created MediaWiki:Titleblacklist-non-English-userpage. It occurs to me that, since the editor is obviously starting to spread across multiple wikis, it might be helpful to include in the message's text a pointer suggesting the possibility of creating a global user page at meta.

Riffing on your existing text...

* If you are trying to create a user page for {{#titleparts:{{#invoke:string|replace|{{FULLPAGENAME}}|^[^:]+:|plain=false}}|1}}, please do so at [[User:{{#invoke:string|replace|{{FULLPAGENAME}}|^[^:]+:|plain=false}}]], or create a [[Wikipedia:Global user page|global user page]] at [[:meta:User:{{#invoke:string|replace|{{FULLPAGENAME}}|^[^:]+:|plain=false}}]].

-- Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 15:32, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

  Done — JJMC89 03:44, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. Cabayi (talk) 07:03, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Kabir Helminski

It looks like this conversation was archived again today, but I am still waiting on a response. Can you let me know if I can have access to the article again in light of the new sources I presented? Thanks, Danthedervish (talk) 17:51, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Since the other edits did not respond, I've moved the article to Draft:Kabir Helminski for you to work on. If you can get it to a state where it overcomes the reasons for deletion, then submit it for review by following the instructions at the top. — JJMC89 03:36, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you! Danthedervish (talk) 10:51, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Conceptual models

Your bot is repeatedly reverting edits I'm making in respect of this CFD. I've blocked it until you can unattach it from this category. SpinningSpark 10:15, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Now unblocked. SpinningSpark 11:21, 26 October 2019 (UTC)


Would you please undelete 17th Lux Style Awards that you deleted on 12 July 2019 due to it being created by a banned or blocked user? Looking forward to a prompt and positive response. Solo Samaritan (talk) 13:45, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

No, I will not. You are free to start an article on that subject. — JJMC89 18:09, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Suspiciously similar user names

Hi, as an active SPI clerk, what do you make of these four?

Their usernames all begin with the same six characters, and all have edited the article Dipalmitoylphosphatidylcholine. Is there a case for an SPI here? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:57, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)(Non-administrator comment)@Redrose64: The similarity in user names may be explained by this post made by one of the accounts and if they're all students from the same school using the same IP then a CU check might only show that; for sure, it could be one person WP:SOCKING to pretend to be others or possibly even WP:MEAT, but the usernames seem to be OK per WP:ORGNAME if they are different people. The question then is whether this some kind of behavioral type of thing like WP:DE than a WP:SOCK type of thing, and that might be something more appropriately discussed at WP:ANI than WP:SPI. If "these" accounts are students trying to use Wikipedia for some sort of class project, perhaps giving one of the Wiki-Ed advisers a heads up about "them" at WP:ENB might be a good idea since students often (at the behest of their badly informed teachers) try to use Wikipedia for their coursework in a way that it shouldn't be used simply because they're not familiar with Wikipedia's various policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:41, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
@Redrose64: They are part of a class. This group posted on Edgar181's talk page a few times, including the post that Marchjuly linked. Special:PermaLink/923637204#Usernames with “BQUB19” prefix points to ca:Viquiprojecte:Bioquímica UB, but I don't see anything for this year. Unless they are acting as one to edit war (or something) rather than all just editing the same article, then I don't think there's a case. If there are problems with the class, then Wiki Edu or ca:Amical Wikimedia may be able to help. — JJMC89 03:37, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Craig Hanna Un-Delete Page

Hi, I'm trying to work on the Craig Hanna page to update and write a better page about him. Can you undelete the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arianajarvis (talkcontribs) 22:26, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

No, I will not. What is your connection to Hanna and the Thinkwell Group? — JJMC89 04:08, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
I don't have a connection, I just wanted to shed some light on the leaders of the company. Craig's done some significant work in the industry, so I was hoping to expand past just Thinkwell and incorporate more background on those that run it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arianajarvis (talkcontribs) 19:52, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
Sure you don't.... — JJMC89 03:01, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Frank Tashlin.jpg

This file was shadowing c:File:Frank Tashlin.jpg which is why LysteriaBot keeps re-adding it to User:Gamaliel/Billy Ireland. I've brought this up before at WP:VPT with respect to LysteriaBot and other files, and it appears to have something to do with the metadata the bot is working of off. Perhaps it will stop re-adding it now that the Commons file has been deleted, but if not then the bot operator might need to tweak something to stop it from doing it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:55, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that commonly happens with LysteriaBot. The operator needs to fix their bot. It is easy to detect if a Commons image is shadowed. Usually, I just deactivate the list when I notice it happening. — JJMC89 04:21, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "JJMC89/Archives/2019/October".