User talk:JJMC89/Archives/2019/September

Active discussions

Fair use image

There is a discussion about fair use on the File talk:Donald Dean Jackson.jpg. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 18:09, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Replied there — JJMC89 05:33, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Fair use image: DnD Starter Boxes

Hi, JJMC89/Zav, you probably know me for yoko5000 from DDOwiki ;) You just tagged above files with WP:NFCCP Criterion 8 failure but Im gonna have to disagree here. I was int he process of making Dungeons & Dragons Starter Set page on par with Dungeons & Dragons Basic Set, Player's Handbook, Monster Manual , Dungeon Master's Guide, all of which hosts multiple images. I assumed you do know about thees things and PnP DnD in general so it came as kind of a surprise when I find your name there.

Anyways, these boxed sets have long, complicated history and lead to a lot of confusion among DnD fans. 1999 AD&D2E version vs 2000 3E version with same name, 2004 vs 2006 3.5E versions, 2008 vs 2010 4E (F)RPG versions, yuck, hard to tell them apart without cover images. I was thinking about merging First Quest, Dungeons & Dragons Adventure Game, Dungeons & Dragons Basic Game and some other into that, plus the article obviously needs major CE. Im sorry for being such a wiki-noob but what can I do to get the tag removed? Did I do insufficient with {{Non-free use rationale 2}} {{Non-free use rationale}} field entries or they don't mean much nowdays? Let me know. Thanks. --Yk49 (talk) 11:37, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Hey, didn't realize you edited here. My knowledge of PnP D&D is mostly limited to 3.5E. I've untagged the images. I don't know that how the images are used in those articles satisfy NFCC, but I'll leave that until I get some feedback from other editors. — JJMC89 05:33, 1 September 2019 (UTC)


I think you prematurley deleted {{bugdesc}}, it still has some transclusions that should be fixed which would be easier if the template was restored. Could you temporarily restore it in the holding cell and let them be converted to {{phab}} first? --Trialpears (talk) 08:40, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

I've now fixed the remaining transclusions, so it doesn't have to be restored any more. --Trialpears (talk) 12:53, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
Sorry about that — JJMC89 05:33, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Re: File:1917.ogg

Curious why you marked this approved for transfer to commons as public domain. Sound recordings have their own copyright rules, and so far as I can tell, this is not PD in the US for another few years. I don't really care where the file goes, but if I'm wrong about PD I'd like to know. Thanks. Someguy1221 (talk) 10:17, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

  Self-trout You're right, I don't what I was thinking. I've sent it to FFD since it isn't PD in the US yet. — JJMC89 05:33, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

ACC account approval

It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent to enwiki-acc-admins for ACC account approval. Please check. Warm Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 15:37, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

I can confirm that we have received your email. — JJMC89 05:33, 1 September 2019 (UTC)


Thanks very much for the flag of my F-UR being Windows install screwed up in June and I lost quite a few of my notepad editing templates, so I had to start somewhat from scratch...and I missed the licensing part of my F-UR. Really appreciate the notice. Nate (chatter) 00:46, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Don't you hate when that happens! — JJMC89 05:33, 1 September 2019 (UTC)


Hi JJMC89. Thanks for catching this. I didn't notice that there was actually a basic rationale added.

Would you mind taking a look at this one? I couldn't think of any possible way the file's non-free use could be justified as an icon in Opinion polling for the 2019 Polish parliamentary election one time yet alone six times per WP:JUSTONE; so, I was just bold and removed it. I do think it was added in good faith though so if you feel its better to discuss this at FFD, then let me know. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:50, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

I didn't notice initially either. I removed it from the article first before realizing. Your removal is fine and is what I would have done. Use there is about as blatant a criterion 8 violation as it gets. — JJMC89 05:33, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Page protection

Hi JJMC289, can you protect the Melvin Gordon page? Thanks. -KH-1 (talk) 04:48, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

List of largest political parties

This article is pretty much having non-free images added to it quite regularly. It's mostly being done by IPs, but every now in and then there's a registered account doing it. I think it's mostly being done in good faith by editors not aware of WP:NFCCP, etc. Even so, it's becoming a bit of a time drain to remove the files each time they're added. I've tried leaving some user talk page warnings, but not sure if those are even being read. I thought about WP:RPP, but that might be a bit extreme since whatever disruption there is might not have reached the PP level yet.

There's something transcluded into the editing window of Flags of cities of the United States which might be worth at least a try here. Someone created Template:Editnotices/Page/Flags of cities of the United States for that particular article. Although it hasn't completely stopped editors from trying to add non-free flag files to the article, the problem doesn't seem to be happening as frequently as it is on other similar list articles. I was going to try and create a similar template of the political party articles per WP:EDNO#Creating editnotices, but only admins/template editors/page movers can create such a notice for articles. Do you think something like this might at least be worth a try? Would you mind creating one if you think it might help? I'm pretty sure that exact same notice as the one used in the city flags can be used for this article (as well as most likely other similar list articles) with only the name of the page needing to be changed.

I guess another option might be to try and use hidden notes or placeholder images, like File:Non-free image placeholder.png or File:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg; however, some editors seem to dislike using such images simply for aesthetic reasons and notes are easy to overlook in the editing window. FWIW, linking to files has also been tried before, but invariably someone comes along and just de-links the link to re-display the file. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:07, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

I've created {{NFLISTS editnotice}} from the flags editnotice and transcluded it for both articles. Hopefully it will help. — JJMC89 09:37, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for doing that. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:06, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Would you mind watching They're continuing to try and re-add a non-free file to the article even though I've tried to explain things on their user talk page. Not only are they trying to add a non-free, they're also removing a competitors party's logo as well. Personally, I think all of the logo (regardless of licensing should be removed per MOS:LOGO), but removing the freely-licensed/PD ones probably should be discussed on the article's talk page just to see if their a consensus. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:21, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
I've watchlisted the article. — JJMC89 01:00, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Photo of The Dell

Why have you categorised my photo of The Dell (File:The Dell after conversion.jpg) as Wikipedia license migration not eligible? Rjm at sleepers (talk) 06:19, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Based on the upload date, it does not meet the migration criteria. — JJMC89 06:23, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IPhone 11


Thank you for you closure. So could you add the fact that the article have been moved to Draft:iPhone 11? --Panam2014 (talk) 15:59, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Fair use image:Marine Commandos (MARCOS) logo.jpg

Hello! I am new to uploading images. I recently uploaded a fair use image. Can you please review it’s rationale for me? I am requesting this because I don’t want that image to get reviewed by extended confirmed users, like this one. My request may be silly. Please forgive me if you also think the same. Thanks. Vaibhavafro (talk) 07:32, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

  Done Many of the non-free images don't get reviewed by anyone, let alone an admin. — JJMC89 07:55, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
Thank you so much! Vaibhavafro (talk) 08:15, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Camilo Sesto

Yes, he died. This has been reported in his official social media and websites. Please find the references instead of reverting. --Amitie 10g (talk) 04:11, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

No. It is a BLP violation to assert that someone has died without a source. Given your tenure, you should know that. — JJMC89 04:23, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

  Hi, thanks for protecting Ram Jethmalani. I was browsing the page history when I found that you were huggling and eventually protected it. Did you use huggle to protect the page, I am just curious if Huggle provides this feature. regards. DBigXray 07:33, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
Huggle does, but I used Twinkle. — JJMC89 07:46, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

  The Original Barnstar
Thank you! You made the article very smooth with a deft touch! Speculative Boting (talk) 02:04, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Global Wireless Solutions

Hi, I noticed you deleted Global Wireless Solutions, but there was not a reason cited. The user that marked the page for deletion cited a lack of notability. However, the firm has been featured in many notable, nationwide third party media outlets, including the Washington Post, Forbes, Washington Business Journal, and London Evening Standard. Furthermore, Global Wireless Solutions is the oldest and largest firm in its industry, and smaller and younger firms such as RootMetrics and OpenSignal have Wikipedia pages that were deemed notable. I would appreciate any insights or advice you may have to help the page meet Wikipedia standards and be restored. Thank you and I look forward to hearing from you. Scwiki3 (talk) 17:48, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

The reason reason was given by the participants in the deletion discussion, specifically, lack of notability as defined by WP:NCORP. The existence of other articles is irrelevant. You should have participated in the discussion. My talk page is not the place to discuss what should have been discussed there. — JJMC89 01:55, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
The deletion "discussion" only consisted of a single notability comment from the user that marked the page for deletion. There was no "deletion discussion". As there was no discussion taking place on the page, I discussed the deletion tag with the user on his own talk page. The page was then deleted unprompted by you without your own participation in the discussion. By deleting the page unprompted, there was no way for the notability tag to be resolved which does not help to improve the Wikipedia community. I hope you will restore the page so that this issue may be resolved properly. Scwiki3 (talk) 22:54, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
A user's talk page is not the correct venue to discuss the matter once a formal deletion discussion is opened. (In any case, you clearly didn't convince them to change their opinion.) The closing (deleting) admin is not permitted to participate in the discussion. The role is to assess and implement what the consensus. The notability issue was resolved by deleting the article. Unless you can show coverage meeting WP:CORPDEPTH that wasn't already in the article, I'm not going to undelete it. — JJMC89 05:06, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Recently blocked IP editor

Can you remove their[1] talk page access please? Thank you. Lupin VII (talk) 01:15, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

  Not done They are permitted to remove the notice. You should stop edit warring over it. — JJMC89 01:19, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
In the time this was denied, the IP started doing the same thing they were blocked for on their talk. Might want to reconsider... SkyWarrior 01:24, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
  Done — JJMC89 01:27, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. Also I sent you an email related to this. SkyWarrior 01:36, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
  Done — JJMC89 01:37, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. SkyWarrior 01:39, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
Oops, sorry. I misinterpreted WP:BLANKING. Lupin VII (talk) 01:26, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of Osijek Faculty of Teacher Education

I noticed you closed and deleted the first in the list article, are you going to delete the other articles as well or should we just change them out to redirects? McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 02:22, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

  Now deleted Thanks for letting me know that I forgot to delete them. — JJMC89 02:28, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Avoid files tagged with Template:Non-free reduce

Hi JJMC89, in this edit, your bot "Request[ed] revision deletion of orphaned revision". I think it should avoid pages that have {{Non-free reduce}} because DatBot will do that at the appropriate time once DatBot has completed the image reduction. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 19:43, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

It should ignore all files in Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests. Cheers. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 19:46, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

The fact that there are should be more orphaned revisions soon is irrelevant since there were orphaned revisions at the time of tagging. I'm not going to program my bot under the assumption that DatBot is running correctly. That bot and its predecessor have had plenty of issues doing the job. — JJMC89 02:59, 18 September 2019 (UTC)


While some of User:PROF.NOUR's edits may have been problematic, I'm not sure how the claim that the person who created Draft:International Islamic Forum for Dialogue is "not here to build an encyclopedia" could be justified, and I note that the block was made with no prior warning and and, other than boilerplate templates, no offer to assist the new user. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:25, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Given their deleted edits (80% of their total edits), I don't think they've done anything constructive since they last touched that draft. I'm sure one of the two reviewing admins would have told me if they thought the block wasn't justified. — JJMC89 03:19, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

File:Football Federation Islamic Republic of Iran (low res).png

Hi JJMC89. JJMC89bot removed this from Iran national football team during its latest cleanup run, but I just thought you should know about Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 February 17#File:Football Federation Islamic Republic of Iran.png. I can't see the deleted file, but I believe it was pretty much the same and thus the FFD close would still apply to it; in other words, that particular use is not just a NFCC#10c violation. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:47, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly. It is the same file – it was just moved from the title in the FFD to the current title. — JJMC89 05:55, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying. Is there a way to let the bot know about this so that if it removes the file again that it leaves an edit sum referencing the FFD discussion? -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:54, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
I think you've brought this up before. No, there isn't. — JJMC89 01:51, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Flag icons

I notice that when JJMC89 bot is removing files from articles like List of micronations, List of flags by color combination, List of micronation currencies, etc. that it leaves an empty template. Maybe it would be better (if possible) to just remove the template as well since it seems that others are mistakenly assuming that there was some kind of error and that they are "fixing" the problem by re-adding the file syntax. Of course, it does fall upon them to check to see why there is no file being used, but not many people bother to do that as you probably are well aware. To be honest, many of those article don't need any flag icons regardless of file licensing in my opinion, but that's a whole different debate. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:04, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

The bot doesn't have a way to know which templates could be removed when it removes a file. If there were a category that has templates that are safe to remove, then I could try to use that. I'm concerned about removing templates incorrectly though. — JJMC89 01:51, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Help Delete my Draft

Hello Good day, can you help me delete a draft I created.. This Draft:Universal Music Group Nigeria and this Draft:List of Universal Music Group Nigeria artists. --Goodie9696 (talk) 08:00, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

I've deleted the second one. The first one had substantial content added by another editor, so it doesn't qualify for G7. — JJMC89 01:51, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Could use your help

With a vandal. Thanks, 2601:188:180:1481:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 04:45, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Handled — JJMC89 01:51, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Fair use image review

Can you please review this image for its rationale? —VaibhavafroTalk 11:40, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Done, but you don't need to ask for them to be reviewed. — JJMC89 01:51, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

@JJMC89: Also, can you please convert this file’s format to “png” from the current “jpg”? You must be having some secret administrator-only tool for that. —VaibhavafroTalk 17:13, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

You have to convert the file on your computer and upload in the new format. — JJMC89 01:51, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Takayuki Yagami

For some reason, the image I uploaded is quite big to the point the infobox is huge. When I see other pics like the one from Kazuma Kiryu, I notice they aren't that big. Is there possibility to find a smaller one? Tintor2 (talk) 19:37, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

It has to do with proportions. If you use a wider image, then it won't be so tall. — JJMC89 01:51, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

You think this will be better?Tintor2 (talk) 19:39, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

That looks like the same image but without being cropped to the character. Since it is wider, it may display more to your liking. — JJMC89 01:51, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

List of United States Air Force squadrons

Perhaps you would like to share your thoughts on this article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United States Air Force squadrons. --''Paul, in Saudi'' (talk) 05:17, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Joyce Wang

I am beginning to create a draft for an interior designer and it says that a previous draft existed by a person of that same name. The draft is Draft:Joyce Wang. I cannot see the old deleted draft and was wondering if there is a way to see the old draft to determine if it is about the same person and if there is any usable information in it. Assuming it is the same person, I don't need it restored unless you feel there is something of use. Thank you. --RTotzke (talk) 01:35, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

@RTotzke: The previous draft is unrelated to the interior designer and had one sentence about a high school student. — JJMC89 19:40, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Disputed tag

Greetings, JJMC89,

I hope you're having a nice day.

Please take a look at   ticket #2019031210009393 concerning your {{Undisclosed paid}} tag at Winston Branch. I've left the ticket unlocked for you.

Cheers,  JGHowes  talk 19:47, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

  JJMC89, I've split this to a separate OTRS ticket at info-en here: ticket #2019092810000646, since it pertains to your en-wiki article tag and not copyright permissions.  JGHowes  talk 12:50, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

I've left a note on the child ticket. — JJMC89 20:27, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Copyright issue flagged on Locusts (film) page

Hi - you flagged a copyright issue on Locusts (film) page Locusts (film) re two linked article citations which is now pending a copyright permission investigation.

Just querying what the issue was, as the links on the page connect to two articles that are independently published by reputed media outlets in the public domain. I have contacted one of the publishers (Film Ink) who has verified the content is indeed open access and its use is permitted under CC-BY-SA and the GFDL regulations. The publisher will verify this with Wiki submissions. The other publisher (Inside Film) we are attempting to contact to confirm copyright permission. However if the publisher doesn't respond, would it not be simpler to just remove the article than to suspend the page, as there are numerous other independent citations on the page. Thanks for your comments. Angus Watts (talk) 02:59, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

I didn't flag the copyright issues, Duffbeerforme did; I just fixed the blanking (and shifted it again now). According to Duffbeerforme, the issue is close paraphrasing of those two sources. Once someone investigates the issue, the affected content may be deemed OK (from a copyright point of view), rewritten, or removed. Until then, it will remain blanked. — JJMC89 05:03, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Draft restoration

Hello, I had made this request at GiantSnowman's talk page a few days ago to restore some drafts. I got a bit sidetracked by a few other projects during the week, and it seems that you've deleted many of the pages again before I've had a chance to review them. Would it be possible to restore these pages to the draftspace? Thanks, S.A. Julio (talk) 23:36, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

  Done Please take care with the clean-up. — JJMC89 05:37, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
Thank you! Also, would it be possible to histmerge the old SvG version of Draft:Eva Larsson into the page? S.A. Julio (talk) 18:53, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
  Done — JJMC89 22:42, 29 September 2019 (UTC)


Hi, I think there was more on Talk:Dalecarlian language than there is now. Can you check the version you deleted please? DuncanHill (talk) 10:13, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

The only thing missing pertains to the deleted redirect that was there before the article was moved to that title. If you would like it undeleted, please let me know. — JJMC89 22:42, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

TfD close

Hi JJMC. You recently closed Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 September 19#Template:Infobox probability distribution 2 as a merge. I certainly understand that there was a general desire to do so, but no one seemed to be able to demonstrate how it could be done (the comment about the 3-column version won't be useful, and the one that's generally optimistic about the possibility doesn't explain how either). I don't know how TfDs that are closed this way tend to be processed – is the nominator expected to do the work? could it just sit in limbo if no one bothers with it? I'm a little skeptical that this is really possible without a significant upgrade to the base infobox features. Thanks, –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 14:34, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

I don't know why you say the 3-column version isn't useful. Implementing the merge using {{infobox3cols}} looks straightforward to me. The merge is listed at WP:TFD/H until someone (anyone can) completes it. The time until a merge is completed varies depending on complexity and interest. — JJMC89 23:16, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
@Deacon Vorbis: I've drafted a merged version at {{infobox probability distribution/sandbox}}. Please check the test cases. — JJMC89 00:41, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
I guess I was just confused about what it was capable of; looks pretty good to me. Thanks for taking the time to sort it all out. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 00:49, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "JJMC89/Archives/2019/September".