User talk:JJMC89/Archives/2020/May

Active discussions

Help regarding threat on Talk pages

Hi, JJMC89 while patrolling against vandalism I came across an edit that I found as unsourced see here so I reverted. I also placed a {{subst:uw-unsourced2}} as per norms. But as per history the person still added unsourced data see here. See the warning list on his User_talk:Raje_Ranveer. Now the guy is threatening all the persons who have placed warnings see evidence [1], [2]. Please suggest what to do. Thank you. Amkgp (talk) 06:33, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Yall are smart

Hi - I'm not sure whether I should be raising this here, at the Admins noticeboard, or not at all! Figured I'd come here first as you've had engagement with this user already. Please could you check out its edit summaries & its insistence on calling others editors dumb & lacking brain cells.

Examples: Diff Diff Diff Diff Diff Diff

Doesn't look like it's here to build an encyclopedia to me  , but then I'm new(ish), so it might be standard. Thank you! --DSQ (talk) 11:48, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Blocked (again). Thanks for letting me know. — JJMC89 08:17, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Page Deletion

Hi you recently deleted a new page The Speakmans TV Show , i’m wondering what part you deemed copy-write , is there anything i could change ? this is my first article Thank you (talk) 08:54, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Jasuthers, you should log in to your account. Almost all of it was copied. The CopyPatrol link in the deletion log has a link to an iThenticate report that shows significat copyying, partularly of plot summaries. — JJMC89 08:30, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

ANI discussion involving you

  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Disruptive forumshopping by Nehme1499. . --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:41, 4 May 2020 (UTC)


Regarding this SPI, Venue9 has been blocked only for his poor editing and would get unblocked if he promises to change his ways but if SPI has been concluded then he would need to appeal from his main account. So can you reopen SPI for further investigation? Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 06:04, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

No, I won't reopen it. Investigating socking is a waste of time when the user is blocked and unlikely to be unblocked. — JJMC89 06:23, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Khadim ahlesunnah waljamaah

Thank you for your actions at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Khadim ahlesunnah waljamaah. But please could you also merge Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Anatomycbmcb/Archive into this case, and add Anatomy iggmc to the list of sockpuppets of Khadim ahlesunnah waljamaah.

Anatomy iggmc was blocked as a sockpuppet of Anatomycbmcb on 10 April 2020. But we now know that Anatomycbmcb is a sockpuppet of Khadim ahlesunnah waljamaah.-- Toddy1 (talk) 05:45, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

  Done — JJMC89 07:12, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Objecting to your removal of NFCC images on the History of LGBTQ characters in animated series page.

I added them back to the article. The poster for Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts and the cover of the first volume of Princess Knight of fulfill the requirements of minimal use, and the use of the content increases "readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding," so please do not remove those images again, especially since I have created justifications for the use of those images. Every NFCC image I have used has a justification in keeping with Wikipedia's rules.--Historyday01 (talk) 17:44, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Policy is clear that you must establish consensus for inclusion once it has been challenged. — JJMC89 17:53, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
Ok, you mean post something on the talk page? Also, why did you challenge it begin with? I mean, I had justifications for all the images.--Historyday01 (talk) 17:55, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
My edit summaris linked to the relevant criteria of the policy. Just having a rationale, does not mean that the criteria are satisfied. — JJMC89 17:56, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
Well, you didn't respond to my first question. In terms of the second question, I still believe you are incorrect, per my other post justifying the use of those images, fulfilling all the policy criteria.--Historyday01 (talk) 20:37, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Just as a comment to JJMC89, its fine to remove images you think will quick fail NFCC, but I would strongly recommend not removing the rationale added to file pages to support their inclusion, at least as immediately as you did in some of these cases. There's no harm to extra, unused rationales on file pages, and this allows the image use or removal on that page to be discussed. After a few months, if no challenge has some and the image isn't then used on the page, then removing extra rationales is fine, but would be low-priority cleanup. --Masem (t) 13:57, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Here are my justifications

Discussion about a page (article, file, etc.) belongs on that page's talk page, not here.

After giving further justification of this image, and reducing the number of NFCC items on the History of LGBTQ characters in animated series: 2010s page from six to five, ensuring I am following the rule on minimal usage of NFCC images, I am also following what it says on, where it says that "A file with a valid non-free-use rationale for some (but not all) articles it is used in will not be deleted. Instead, the file should be removed from the articles for which it lacks a non-free-use rationale, or a suitable rationale added. A file on which non-free use is claimed that is not used in any article (criterion 7) may be deleted seven days after notification. **A file in use in an article and uploaded after 13 July 2006 that does not comply with this policy 48 hours after notification to the uploading editor will be deleted. To avoid deletion, the uploading editor or another Wikipedian will need to provide a convincing non-free-use defense that satisfies all 10 criteria. For a file in use in an article that was uploaded before 13 July 2006, the 48-hour period is extended to seven days.**"

For "[File:Princess Knight-1.jpg|thumb|left|180px|alt=Princess Knight cover|Cover for the first volume of Princess Knight from the Osamu Tezuka Manga Complete Works edition]" on the History of LGBTQ characters in animated series page...

  • 1. There is no free equivalent of this image, as the original source of it notes copyright by the Tezuki Corporation. It is unfortunate that the Wayback Machine does not show the original image, but that is a fault of the Wayback Machine's software, not my own.
  • 2. The use of this image does not replace the original market role for this manga, which is currently sold by the comic's creator on Amazon as noted here and here. It has also been reviewed on sites like the prominent yuricon, to give one example.
  • 3. This image is used minimally, connecting the text. In that article it specifically mentions the manga, connecting to this image. Here is a quote to illuminate my point:

Tezuka Osamu began drawing shonen manga[26] like Rob no Kishi (Knight of the Ribbon), which later became Princess Knight, trying to appeal to female readers, while also pioneering shoujo manga. Around the same time, Japan had a so-called "gay boom"[27] with the appearance of magazines such as Amatoria which focused on homosexuality.[28]...By the time Princess Knight premiered, black and white anime had begun to ebb while color productions had swept in.[33] This anime, which began airing in April 1967, wasn't meant to be revolutionary but influenced other works such as The Rose of Versailles,[34][35] Revolutionary Girl Utena,[36] Sword of Paros, and Sailor Moon.[37] This anime followed the introduction of comic magazines aimed at girls beginning in the early 1960s, with many women artists entering the field.[26]...This anime [Rose of Versailles] influenced American anime fans, although it was unavailable in English for years, and throughout Europe, giving "more strength and equality to women" than shows like Princess Knight, in the view of some critics.[52]

  • 4. This work is displayed outside of Wikipedia proudly. A search on tineye for the same image shows it appearing on at least 87 websites across the net.
  • 5. The content is inherently encyclopedic, adding to the page, making it more interactive for the reader.
  • 6. The content meets the image use policy on Wikipedia, as it can be considered a form of cover art, as per
  • 7. This content is already used in one article at this present time.
  • 8. The omission of this image would be detrimental to readers' understanding of the topic and how Princess Knight contributed to LGBTQ representation moving forward.
  • 9. This image is used in an article, not a disambiguation page or anywhere else.
  • 10. While I mainly modeled the image description on what another user had added before, I feel that it is adequately explained the source of the original copyrighted material, with information about the copyright holder and year of copyright. Although it is hard to find the original image at the present, there is no doubt that it is copyrighted.

For "[File:Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts.png|thumb|right|180px|alt=Kipo Season 1 promotional poster|Promotional poster for Season 1 of Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts.]" on the History of LGBTQ characters in animated series page

  • 1. Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts is a show released by DreamWorks Animation. There is no doubt that this poster is copyrighted by DreamWorks, the animation studio which produced this Netflix streaming show.
  • 2. Use of this image will not hinder the commercial success of the series, as the series was recently renewed for a second season, showing that DreamWorks believes there is increased interest in the show.
  • 3. This image will be used to display purposes, in order to highlight a show which had/has LGBTQ characters.
  • 4. This image has been previously published across the internet, with ten results found through tineye for the image, including links to the official DreamWorks Twitter account, which has often tweeted about the show (if you search using the Twitter Advanced Search, you'll see what I am saying, and others writing reviews of the show.
  • 5. The use of this content meets existing Wikipedia standards and is encyclopedic because it adds to the article as a whole, further reasoning will explained in response to justification 8 ("Contextual Significance").
  • 6. The use of this media meets Wikipedia's media-specific policy, as it is a form of cover art per
  • 7. This content has been used in an infobox for the Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts before, so this meets the one-article minimum requirement.
  • 8. This content has extremely strong contextual significance and its presence would increased readers' understanding of the article topic, with its omission detrimental to that understanding. Here are is the section of the article that the image would have accompanied:

In Western animation, representation became more pronounced than before. Gay characters appeared in three shows in 2020: Taka in Castlevania,[85] Indy and Ty in DuckTales, slated as recurring characters in the show,[86] and Benson in Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts.[87] In the latter case, Benson said outright he was gay,[88] which is the reason he only liked the series protagonist, Kipo, in a platonic way, and attended a party with "cute boys" after being lulled into a fantasy world in the episode "Mulholland," and developed a crush on one of the boys who lives in the burrows in the show's 10th episode.[89] One critic, Petrana Radulovic, described Benson's coming out scene as setting a precedent for future programming for all ages:

"Despite the fact that LGBTQ representation in all-ages programming is better than ever, no one has actually uttered the words 'I’m gay' in an all-ages animation series. While some shows feature characters in more prominent and explicitly queer relationships than others (Mr. Ratburn’s Gay Rat Wedding in Arthur, for instance, as well as Bow’s dads on She-Ra and the Princesses of Power), up until now, no character has actually come out to another...The highlights noted by GLAAD over the years emphasize worlds and settings where being in a gay relationship is not challenged or seen as something different...there’s a different effect to a character proclaiming 'I’m gay,' let alone a lead character...Benson’s coming out scene isn’t a big, tearful affair, but a quiet moment between two people who are close. The LGBTQ+ community knows you don’t just come out once, but over and over, to co-workers, to new friends, to prospective love interests. Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts gets that right."[90]

This cites five sources, which are as follows:

  • Duffy, Nick (January 16, 2020). "Netflix's new animated series Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts features a beautiful coming out moment". PinkNews. PinkNews Group. Archived from the original on January 27, 2020. Retrieved April 22, 2020.
  • "Ratland". Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts. Episode 6. January 14, 2020. Netflix.
  • "Beyond the Valley of the Dog". Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts. Episode 10. January 14, 2020. Netflix.
  • Radulovic, Petrana (January 19, 2020). "Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts treats coming out like just another part of life". Polygon. Vox Media. Archived from the original on April 4, 2020. Retrieved January 15, 2020. [where the quote comes from]
  • 9. This NFCC content is used in an article, which is not a disambiguation page, article namespace, or something else.
  • 10. The image description page does identify the source of the copyrighted material, with the poster reprinted in by a reviewer in Animation Magazine.

For "[File:Poemy ad.jpg|thumb|right|180px|alt=ADV ad for Puni Puni Poemi.|Puni Puni Poemy was advertised in North America as a successor to Excel Saga.]" on the History of LGBTQ characters in animated series: 2000s page,

  • 1. There is no free equivalent of this image, as this ad was produced by ADV films
  • 2. The use of this image will not hinder the commercial success of the series, as the series has since ended.
  • 3. The use of this image is used for display purposes, in order to highlight a show which lampooned those with yuri themes
  • 4. This content has been published and displayed outside of Wikipedia, including on an archived page, according to tineye, and searching for the series comes up with over 41,000 results on Google.
  • 5. The use of this content follows existing Wikipedia standards and is encyclopedia, adding to the page as a whole.
  • 6. The use of this content meets the media-specific policy of Wikipedia, specifically its image use policy. While the image could be considered a form of cover art per, it falls into the category of other promotional material, which includes "posters, programs, billboards, ads" with this as an ad. Additionally, the use of this image is solely for critical commentary.
  • 7. This image previously appeared in the Puni Puni Poemy, ensuring its use is following the one-article minimum rule.
  • 8. The image specifically mentions Puni Puni Poemy as an example of an anime which lampooned yuri anime at the time:

The following year, apart from the Puni Puni Poemy, with an "over-the-top magical girl premise"[13] which lampooned yuri anime. At the same time, Yashima Sanae, a lesbian character in Hanaukyo Maid Team[14] and two gay characters (Subaru Sumeragi and Seishirō Sakurazuka) who originally appeared in Tokyo Babylon.[15]

In the later 2000s, from 2002 to 2004, brought influential anime series to Japanese television such as well-regarded .hack//sign,[16] especially for its technical aspects,[17] although controversial, had two lesbian characters: An Shoj/Tsukasa and Mariko Misono/Subaru. Two other shows, Godannar[18] and Bleach,[19] both had lesbian characters. They were Shadow Dunaway and Luna in Godannar and Chizuru Honshō in Bleach. In an interesting coincidence, Shinichi Watanabe who directed the Puni Puni Poemy series, also directed episodes of Godannar and Bleach, later going on to direct episodes of Baka and Test and No-Rin. Those two series also had their share of LGBTQ characters.

As such, the lack of its presence would decrease the understanding of readers of the article topic, with its omission detrimental to its understanding. If I could find a better image, I would, but it seems to serve the purpose of the importance of the show as a whole, relating to the article itself.

  • 9. This image would be used on a Wikipedia article, not a disambiguation page or article namespace.
  • 10. The image has the appropriate source of the copyrighted material and information as is available.

For "[File:queerduck.png|thumb|left|180px|alt=Opening screen for episodes.|Opening splash screen for Queer Duck episodes.]" on the History of LGBTQ characters in animated series: 2000s page,

  • 1. There is no free equivalent of this image and cannot be created, as it is a show which has been long off the air, which was released by Showtime (TV network), with a screenshot taken from the website that show originally aired on,
  • 2. The use of this image is not meant in any way, shape, or form, to replace the original market role of the copyrighted material.
  • 3. The use of this image is used for display purposes, highlighting a series with gay characters, which was rare at the time.
  • 4. This image has been used on over 26 sites according to Tineye, and as such, it has been previously published at the beginning of episodes.
  • 5. The use of this content meets existing Wikipedia content standards and is encyclopedic, improving the page as a whole
  • 6. The use of this content meets the media-specific policy of Wikipedia and its image use policy, as this per, video screenshots which are used for "critical commentary and discussion of the work in question (i.e., films, television programs, and music videos)."
  • 7. This image was previously added to the infobox on the Queer Duck page.
  • 8. The removal of this image would significantly decrease the understanding of the topic, with its omission making readers less informed about the topic. The article itself specifically mentions Queer Duck:

The 2000s brought with it Queer Duck, the first animated TV series on U.S. television which featured homosexuality as a major theme...One show stood apart from this checkered representation: Queer Duck. It was the first U.S. animated TV series to have homosexuality as a major theme[1] and was produced by Mike Reiss, a producer of Simpsons and The Critic.[47] The show became relatively influential after premiering on, later shown on Showtime beginning in 2000. It was received positively by some in the LGBTQ community since it had lesbian, gay, and bisexual characters.

The two sources are:

  • Meisler, Andy (April 7, 2002). "Television/Radio; 'Queer Duck,' a Web-Footed Survivor, Migrates to TV". New York Times. The New York Times Company. Archived from the original on March 25, 2020. Retrieved April 25, 2020.
  • "Mike Reiss". Harry Walker Agency. March 25, 2020. Archived from the original on March 25, 2020. Retrieved April 25, 2020.

If I could have used another image, I would have, but this is one of the only images of the show on Wikipedia, so I thought it would be a good way to make the article more interactive and increase interest in a show which moved forward LGBTQ representation in animation.

  • 9. This image would be used in an article, not a disambiguation page or article namespace.
  • 10. The image description page lists the source of the original copyrighted material, while giving information about the copyright holder and the year of copyright. As such, it is possible to determine the potential market value of the material, which is likely low due to the fact the show ended in 2004.

I think that's about it. This while form of justification seems extremely unnecessary, but be that as it may, I hope this helps you reconsider your decision to remove the content, allowing me to bring it back. I thought this was at least worth a shot, even though I expect it is unlikely you will change your mind.Historyday01 (talk) 20:32, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Jeez, you removed the other five NFCC images I had too. I spent a long time on those justifications but it doesn't matter to anyone like you. Don't you have a life except when removing NFCC images, which is a good portion of your contributions? That's basically all your bot does. I mean, seriously. I could write justifications for those too, but I'm not sure its even worth it because you'll just take them down again.--Historyday01 (talk) 23:17, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Just in case you don’t have the article in question on your watch list, Historyday01 left a personal attack against you in an edit summary. – 2.O.Boxing 23:32, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

O, sure, I did, but it doesn't even matter now. Calling it homophobic is probably going too far, but I can't go back and revise what I said, unfortunately. It would be more accurate to say that I am pissed that these images were removed.Historyday01 (talk) 00:36, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
O, as I noted in my recent edit, calling their actions homophobic was wrong, although I still disagree with them.--Historyday01 (talk) 01:52, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

You win this round

JJMC89, after getting some comments from the media copyright forum, I'm just going to give up. Feel free to delete those images, I literally don't care anymore. Its not worth my time to fight what you are doing. I'll just lose anyway, so whatever. Just know that people like you are the reason I am terrified to add any NFCC images to any of the articles I edit ever again, afraid you will tag them as "violations."Historyday01 (talk) 13:04, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Bot keeps deleting non-free images

I'm trying to work on the page Mount & Blade in my sandbox, but the cover art for the game is not free, meaning that the bot continually deletes the images and I have to re-add them in. Can you stop the bot from deleting non-free images in sandboxes and user pages? Thank you, Aven13 17:41, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi Aven13. Non-free content can only be used in the article namespace per WP:NFCC#9 so that’s why the bot keeps removing it. Please don’t continue to add any non-free files to any pages in your user namespace as explained in WP:UP#Non-free files. It’s OK if you weren’t aware of this, but you’re likely going to end up being blocked if you continue to try and do such a thing. — Marchjuly (talk) 22:31, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you and apology for bot edit

Thank you for fixing bot template on Analogue Bubblebath; sorry for being careless and causing you to repeat yourself.Cambial Yellowing 14:06, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

No worries, it happens. — JJMC89 22:18, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Where (re "Misplaced")

Please tell me where to place this request, which you said is a "misplaced" item? Thanks in advance. Pi314m (talk) 08:11, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

You shouldn't edit WP:CFD. You should follow the directions there to open a discusioon. — JJMC89 22:18, 10 May 2020 (UTC)


After deleting parts of random pages, please fix the formatting of the page. It looks horrible when you delete certain pieces and leave the rest intact without accounting for the deleted parts. Nicholemacgregor (talk) 00:03, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

You need to be more specific if you want me to look into what you're talking about. — JJMC89 22:18, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Guild of British Camera Technicians


Can you please advise on why you felt the Guild of British Camera Technicians page was about an organisation that was not notable? It was my first submission and I thought I'd done a decent job to take have it deleted is a little deflating but I can take it! Some feedback from an experienced Wiki user such as yourself would be massively appreciated.

Is it possible to have it reinstated in some form that I can improve it? I used the GBFTE page as a guide to the sort of content that a) Wiki and b) the sector would be interested in and having read the various pages around Notability I think I can probably prove that the GBCT is a notable organistation.

Thanks in advance.

HMCLSPLYL2020 (talk) 10:02, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Please see the message on your talk page. It wasn't deleted for lack of notability. It was deleted because the article did not credibly indicate why the subject is important or significant. It looks like you've already recreated it in your sandbox. The Wikipedia:Teahouse is a good place to go for advice on editing. — JJMC89 22:33, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

File:The World of Harry Potter 4 Pack.jpg

Can you please disable your bot from requesting reduction for File:The World of Harry Potter 4 Pack.jpg. The file only reduces by 5KB and makes the text in the image difficult to read. --Osh33m (talk) 01:36, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

I've seen posts about this on at least three different pages. Please keep it to one per WP:MULTI. To answer your question, I can but I won't. — JJMC89 22:18, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
@JJMC89: I wasn't sure where the right place was to ask which is why I asked in all places. Why won't you stop it? --Osh33m (talk) 22:44, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
The bot is functioning as intended. See WP:IMAGERES for guidance on this topic. — JJMC89 23:59, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
I reviewed WP:IMAGERES and had this conversation with @Jonteemil: and believe the image qualifies for {{Non-free no reduce}}. --Osh33m (talk) 01:32, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Academica (charter school)

Hi JJMC89, made very significant changes to a page you tagged as advertorial in the past. Would appreciate if you could take a look and approve. Best, Pratat (talk) 13:19, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

@Pratat: KH-1 is the editor that added {{advert}}. — JJMC89 22:21, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
@JJMC89:, I stand corrected. Pratat (talk) 07:07, 11 May 2020 (UTC)


I am curious as to why you are saying I did not provide any evidence in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MarnetteD#Suspected sockpuppets when I gave you all of the diffs from the start which include the named user not reverting but editing the article using the exact same wording that is in dispute and a discussion going on through the talk page? Thank you. Galendalia CVU Member \ Chat Me Up 08:12, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

The diffs did not support your conclusion that MarnetteD was editing logged out as that IP. It was so baseless that a CheckUser deleted the report after I closed it. — JJMC89 03:38, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Icons of Filth artwork from the album Onward Christian Soldiers.jpg not cleanly deleted

It looks like something didn't work when you deleted File:Icons of Filth artwork from the album Onward Christian Soldiers.jpg per the FfD. I don't see the image but I do see "(223 × 223 pixels, file size: 18 KB, MIME type: image/jpeg)" and the file history table. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:28, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

That's a new one. I tried to delete it again and got an error saying that it was already deleted. Afterwards I don't see that part of the file history there. — JJMC89 07:19, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Railway stations in China

Hi JJMC89, could you and your bot move Category:Railway stations in China by opening year to Category:Railway stations in China by year of opening as was done for the other subcategories of Category:Railway stations by year of opening relating to Canada, Russia and the United States please. Hugo999 (talk) 09:15, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

@Hugo999: If you think that category should have been moved per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 April 13#Railway stations by opening/closing, then please discuss with bibliomaniac15, who closed the discussion. Otherwise, please start a new discussion at WP:CFD or use WP:CFDS as applicable. (FYI BrownHairedGirl) My bot just carries out closes as listed at WP:CFDW by an admin. — JJMC89 22:27, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
@Hugo999: I suggest you create a new discussion about it at WP:CFD. In the above discussion you added it in rather late, three days after the typical seven day discussion period, so I didn't move that one. bibliomaniac15 22:38, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
I agree that this isn't JJMC89's call. JJMC89 is just the bot operator, and the bot just follows instructions by the closer.
I also agree with Bibliomaniac15's close; the addition was too late.
But this is speediable by both WP:C2E and WP:C2C. @Hugo999, I suggest you list it at WP:CFDS. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:21, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

I have just listed[3] the category at WP:CFDS, for renaming as originally proposed by User:Hugo999 in the discussion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:26, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, BrownHairedGirl — JJMC89 06:02, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Contesting Laal Singh Chaddha

Hello, I do not believe it was the right decision to decline the histmerge of Laal Singh Chaddha and I have good reasons for disagreeing with your choice. First, my draft version of this article was created on September 16, 2019, over a month before the separate mainspace article was created on October 31, 2019. Second, User:CAP202, the creator of the mainspace article, clearly copy and pasted the information from my draft into his separate mainspace article. This user is also a band sockpuppet of User:PankhilSen. I find it very distressing that a clear act of vandalism, brought on by a known sock puppet, is not being dealt with or fixed in any meaningful way. I highly suggest in some action against this matter, as I started this article first. Cardei012597 (talk) 04:27, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

1) You need to stop forum shopping. Your history merge request has been delcined muliple times by multiple admins due to parallel histories. 2) CAP202 didn't copy your work. When CAP202 created the article your draft looked like this. Nothing is the same between those. The article was then edited by others and ended up like this before you edited it to integrate content from your draft. 3) You need to educate yourself on what valdalism is and is not. As a rollbacker, you should know that what you have described is not vandalism. 4) It doesn't matter who started the page or gets credit for starting the page. Also, to be clear, you started a draft, which was never an article. — JJMC89 06:00, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
Ok, I won't bother you anymore. I'll stop trying to histmerge. I'll drop it. Take care. Cardei012597 (talk) 06:05, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Unfair removal of image

You removed an image I added to the page John Prentice (cartoonist), yet you have let it stand on the Young Romance page, even though I sourced the same file they did. Please explain. Packer1028 (talk) 21:04, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Packer1028. There's was nothing unfair about the removal of the file; the bot just did what its was supposed to do: removing files lacking non-free content use rationales from articles in accordance with WP:NFCCE. Each use of a non-free file is required to have a separate, specific non-free use rationale as explained in WP:NFCC#10c and WP:NFC#Implementation and those which don't for a specific use can be removed at any time. You add the file to the article, but didn't add a non-free use rationale for its use to the file's page; so, it was removed. If you want to stop the bot from removing the file, you're going to need to provide the missing rationale. Before you do so, however, you should take a look at WP:JUSTONE, WP:OTHERIMAGE, WP:NFC#cite_note-3, item 6 of WP:NFC#UUI and WP:NFC#CS. Copyrighted cover art is often allowed to be uploaded per item 1 of WP:NFCI, but generally only when the cover art is being used for primary identification purposes at the top of or in the main infobox of a stand-alone article about the work in question. Other types of non-free use are much harder to justify and generally require that the cover art (the actual cover art itself, not the artist who created it) be the subject of sourced critical commentary that is not WP:UNDUE or considered sufficient as text alone per WP:FREER. So, a book cover might be OK to use for primary identification purposes in an article entirely about the book itself, but would generally not be considered OK in an article about the author, the publishing company, the graphic artist, etc. without some pretty strong justification for it's non-free use in such an article. So, those are some things to keep in mind if you're going to try and justify the file's non-free use in the article about Prentice. Perhaps instead of adding this file to the article, you might have better luck trying to find a photo of Prentice to add instead. Wikipedia does allow non-free images of deceased individuals to be uploaded and used for primary identification purposes per item 10 of WP:NFCI as long as there are no freely licensed equivalent which can be created or found. So, perhaps there's an image of Prentice that you can find that could be used instead. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:00, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Use of official logo for Salem Kolleg Comment

Hallo JJMC87, if you look at the official website you will see that the logo is correct. Could you please explain why you deleted it? Thanks, --Baekemm (talk) 13:53, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi Baekemm. JJMC89 (not JJMC87) didn't delete the image. It was only removed from the article by JJMC89 bot because its use in the article didn't comply with Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. The bot left an edit summary that contained a link to WP:NFC#Implementation. Did you take a look at that page? All non-free files are required to have two things: (1) a file copyright tag and (2) a separate and specific non-free use rationale for each use of the file. This particular file does have a copyright tag, but it only has a non-free use rationale for the the use in Schule Schloss Salem; so, that's why the bot removed the file from Salem Kolleg and it will keep removing the file from that article as long as there's no non-free use rationale for that particular use. A simple fix would be too simply add the missing rationale to the file's page; however, as explained in WP:JUSTONE, things aren't always so simple and adding a missing rationale doesn't automatically make a non-free use policy compliant. In this case, there might be an issue with item 17 of WP:NFC#UUI. Wikipedia's non-free content use policy generally allows copyright logos to be uploaded and used for primary identification purposes at the top of or in the main infobox of articles, but that is generally limited to articles about parent organizations. A university, for example, may have many departments or campuses, etc. (i.e. things considered to be "child entities"), but the main logo is generally only considered acceptable for use in the main article about the university. For the other articles, it's generally considered better to use logos specific to the individual departments or campuses (if such logos exist) or even no logo at all. This is because Wikipedia policy encourages us to try and minimize non-free use as much as we can. Since the first time a non-free file is used is already considered to be rather exceptional with respect to WP:COPY#Guidelines for images and other media files, any additional uses are considered to be even more exceptional and require even stronger justifications for non-free use. I'm not saying it's totally impossible to add the file to the Kolleg article, but you're going to have to provide a non-free use rationale that clarifies how this additional use satisfies relevant policy. Providing such a rationale is no guarantee and another editor who disagrees with your assessment may still challenge the rationale and start a discussion about it or tag it has being disputed; it should, however, stop bots from removing the file from the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:43, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
@Marchjuly: Thank you very much for taking the time to explain this matter in detail! I will give the issues further consideration before taking any action. --Baekemm (talk) 22:24, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
@Baekemm:. If you have any more questions about this, you can also ask for assistance at WP:MCQ or WT:NFCC.
Please try and be careful not to remove comments (even unintentionally) made by others when you respond to posts or add new comments per WP:TPO. Your last edit accidentally removed my reply to the thread immediately below this one. I’m assuming this was just a mistake, but doing such a thing can lead to serious problems with others if you’re not careful and you don’t clearly give a very good policy or guideline reason for doing so. — Marchjuly (talk) 23:09, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
@Marchjuly: Yes, sorry, that was certainly an accident. In fact I can't understand how it happened as the history doesn't seem to show a deletion, but I will be more alert now.--Baekemm (talk) 22:12, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

IP talk page abuse

Hey JJMC89, hope you are well and safe. Would it be possible to revoke talk page access for 2600:1700:F660:4430:0:0:0:0/64 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · block user · block log)? Theyhave been vandalizing their talk page after their block. Thank you! -- LuK3 (Talk) 02:03, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Hey, LuK3.   Done — JJMC89 02:07, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Discussion of renaming 'Media companies' category to 'Mass media companies'?

@JJMC89: - Hello! I saw that your "JJMC89 bot III" has gone through pages moving them from the category "Media companies" to "Mass media companies". I see that request on Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Speedy, but I am curious - was there any discussion of this change anywhere? I'm just curious to learn more about the rationale. Any pointers to discussion would be appreciated. Thanks. - Dyork (talk) 15:22, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

That move is listed at Special:PermaLink/956557371#Current requests (last group in the section), and there wasn't any discisson there. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 April 18#Media by location is the discussion that preceded the various speedy requests that have been processed since. — JJMC89 02:21, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Why was "Science Fiction by Women" category deleted?

Hi there, @JJMC89. I'm curious as to why the subcategory I created was deleted? There is a subcategory for "Literature by women," so gender-based subcategories for types of literature have precedent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmstevens5947 (talkcontribs) 14:10, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 January 16#Category:Science fiction by women. — JJMC89 19:02, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Checking deleted article

Hi, I was reviewing Draft:Stjepan Glavač and I noticed you deleted the mainspace article, Stjepan Glavač, under G5. Would you mind checking if the draft has the same content as the deleted article? He looks notable but I don't want to accept a sock draft. Thanks, SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 12:46, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

@SpicyMilkBoy: The draft is nearly identical to the deleted article. — JJMC89 19:00, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, will note that on the draft page. SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 19:09, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Deletion review for Comparison of Nikon DSLR cameras

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Comparison of Nikon DSLR cameras. 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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Runnerphil712 (talkcontribs) 18:58, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

SPI archive notice?

I'm curious about this edit of yours. I had made it a redirect because that's what Callanecc suggested I do. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:36, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure why Callanecc told you to redirect it. WP:SPI/PROC#Advanced clerking says to use {{SPI archive notice}} when moving/merging cases. — JJMC89 05:53, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Rymax23 and Atomic Meltdown

Hi there! Just wondering, but if these two users are the same person, should Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Atomic Meltdown/Archive be merged into the other one? BOZ (talk) 02:51, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

They aren't the same person. If they were, then yes. — JJMC89 05:57, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ghoyt98

Hi JJMC89. Since you’re an SPI clerk as well as an admin, perhaps you could take a look at this. The suspected sock is still soft-blocked and the suspected master hasn’t edit in about a week. Moreover, the local file that was being deleted has been deleted per F7 and Commons’ version is currently being discussed at a Commons DR. So, if you feel that there‘s really no need for any admin action here (except perhaps for just a warning if anything), I’m fine with having the SPI closed as such. — Marchjuly (talk) 03:25, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

I reblocked the sock for socking. — JJMC89 05:58, 19 May 2020 (UTC)


Some of the {{wikinews}} variants have been merged into the main template. I wasn't sure what you wanted to do with User:JJMC89 bot/Wikinews importer so I thought I'd let you know about the changes so you could update it appropriately. Primefac (talk) 00:40, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I've cleaned up the page to remove mentions of that template. — JJMC89 05:59, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Change the page to Xǔ (state)

Please delete the Xǔ (state) redirect page and change or move the Xu (Henan) to Xǔ (state) no redirect and only one page. Thank you! K.b.cheng (talk) 10:17, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

It has already been moved back. — JJMC89 06:01, 19 May 2020 (UTC)


HI, last week I sent a request to rejoin the ACC team after being denied for not having enough edits, This has since been fixed. I have head from some other tool admins that it was received, but nothing else. Is there a problem, or does it just take some time, Is there a backlog? I am not trying to be impatient, just curious. Thanks,{{u|wylie39}} {Talk} 18:59, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

We do have a backlog of requests and appeals to join the team. I sent an email to the rest of the tool admins to follow-up on our outstanding requests/appeals. — JJMC89 06:03, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
JJMC89, Thanks. {{u|wylie39}} {Talk} 17:00, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry of Peteski132 - new account emet77

Please block emet77 and add this account to latest sockpuppet account of peteski32

On May 18, he continues to advocate for mercilessly attacking the biography of Pat Day on the Pat Day talk page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:6C3:4081:A10:9D29:1D47:575C:D9BD (talk) 03:22, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Ian Foote

I want to create a page about this referee but it see it has extended-confirmed-protected and can be edited only by extended confirmed users. Can you fix it? -- (talk) 12:07, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

You should ask kingboyk, who deleted and protected Draft:Ian Foote · ( talk | logs | links | watch | mfd ) · [revisions]. — JJMC89 22:17, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Gouri G Kishan

I moved the page without moving the history and am sorry. Kindly merge the history of the page. Thank you. --TamilMirchi —Preceding undated comment added 19:54, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

There are parallel histories so the pages cannot be history merged. — JJMC89 22:33, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

List of Pakistani Peace Laureates

Being a moderator, you always checked my page List of Pakistani Peace Laureates and fixed the errors every time for which I was always thankful to you for your support and cooperation but today I just checked my page and have found some other moderator removing the descriptions and ruining my entire page. All my efforts and struggle have been ruined. Nawab Afridi (talk) 17:09, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

I never edited the page; my bot only removed some images from it. Diannaa removed the copyright violations and has discussed the issue on your talk page. — JJMC89 23:37, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Category:Deaths from the 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Indiana

Why was this category not moved to Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Indiana? Only this category was missing. --Francisco (talk) 18:15, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

It looks like Fayenatic london missed it when processing. — JJMC89 22:41, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for tracing that; I apologise for causing the extra work. This is now being processed. – Fayenatic London 07:14, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Quick note on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PKHilliam

Thanks for your edits to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PKHilliam.

Now I am confused. Do you want me to supply more diffs or what? Basically, PKHilliam would unilaterally change links from to I wanted to act fast before this case becomes stale, but I can provide more evidence if needed. :) Aasim 05:42, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

For example, if I could explain, here is a diff with the edit summary "POV pushing", and here is a diff by one of the (now blocked) socks saying "Please stop pushing your unauthorized fork". This diff uses Twinkle, this diff also uses Twinkle. Not to mention, these diffs unilaterally and without consensus change the "official site" from .co to .ca. This is no longer a problem because the page is XCON protected now and I got consensus on the talk page to include both forks on the Uncyclopedia article. Oh, and these diffs are functionally identical, I just realized taking a second look. These all seem like red flags. Should I open another report or is this enough behavioral evidence to suggest sockpuppetry or meatpuppetry? Aasim 06:00, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
The diffs that you included in the SPI report are both from Romartus Imperator, therefore they don't connect that account to any other. That aside, Romartus Imperator was already reported in the SPI case; see the archives. On looking into it, the 08 May 2020 report was closed without a behavioral investigation for some reason. I've reopened your report quoting the evidence provided here. — JJMC89 06:31, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
JJMC89, thank you. Have a nice day. :) Aasim 06:36, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Category:Hospitals in Paraná

In addition, please move Category:Hospitals in Paraná to Category:Hospitals in Paraná (state), like other subcategories in Category:Paraná (state). Thanks. --Francisco (talk) 17:24, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

You need to follow the process outlined at WP:CFD. — JJMC89 04:18, 30 May 2020 (UTC)


This bot is repeatedly removing an image from the page VanossGaming even after it was resized to match the Wikipedia guidelines. The image being removed is File:EvanFong.png. Delta fiver (talk) (UTC) 07:15, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

It was automatically removed because it does not have a non-free use ratinale. Even if it did have one, a free photo could be taken, so it is replaceable. — JJMC89 08:13, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Interlanguage image linking

Hi JJMC89, I want to know how to add an image hosted on non-English Wikipedia to English Wikipedia articles. Thank you TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 08:02, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi TheBirdsShedTears. Only files uploaded to Wikimedia Commons (these are called global files) or files uploaded to English Wikipedia (these are called called local files) can be added to English Wikipedia articles; files uploaded locally to other language Wikipedias cannot not be added to English Wikipedia articles and be displayed. They might be able to be add as an WP:EL or a Template:interlanguage link, but they will not be displayed. — Marchjuly (talk) 09:15, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
@Marchjuly: Thank you TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 10:18, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "JJMC89/Archives/2020/May".