User talk:E James Bowman

A page you started (Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Auckland) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Auckland.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Nice work, had to reword some of the text to avoid copyright violations. Some of the text was the exact same wording as from: heritage.org.nz/the-list/details/98 Regards

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

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

Hughesdarren (talk) 08:47, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks @Hughesdarren: E James Bowman (talk) 07:32, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Auckland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George Connor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:10, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 24

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Auckland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diocese of Auckland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:51, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 31

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Auckland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Korowai (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:44, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 15

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of Auckland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Grafton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:42, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Copyright problem on History of Auckland

Content you added to the above article appears to have been copied from http://www.auckanglican.org.nz/who-we-are/our-history, which is not released under a compatible license. Copying text directly from a source is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Content you add to Wikipedia should be written in your own words. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:21, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa. As far as I'm aware, the content I added wasn't copied and was rewritten in my own words. I've gone to the article edit history which says you've removed 501 characters, but I can't link through the usual (cur | prev) to review what I wrote. What have you removed? Do you know why (cur | prev) isn't linking? E James Bowman (talk) 08:17, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap. The revisions containing the copyright material were hidden from view under under criterion RD1 of the revision deletion policy, and that's why you can't access them any more. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:36, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa. RD1 states: Best practices for copyrighted text removal can be found at WP:Copyright problems and should take precedence over this criterion. E James Bowman (talk) 08:16, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Āpihai Te Kawau, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 26

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Treaty of Waitangi, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Henry Williams and Samuel Lee.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited William Colenso, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Māori.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Invasion of the Waikato into George Grey. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 04:48, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks DanCherek. E James Bowman (talk) 04:54, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Page / pages parameter

In citation templates, you need to use the page parameter if you want to refer to a single page, or pages if you refer to more than one page. Hence, pages=148 is wrong. Not a biggie; just so you know. Schwede66 23:04, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks bro. I did know that. Slip of the mouse sorry. E James Bowman (talk) 23:11, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Camp Hale Auckland.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Camp Hale Auckland.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused duplicate or lower-quality copy of another file on Wikipedia having the same file format, and all inward links have been updated.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sdrqaz (talk) 16:39, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Takaparawhau & Ōkahu Bay 2022.JPG

The file File:Takaparawhau & Ōkahu Bay 2022.JPG has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I uploaded this image by mistake. Please delete it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or onthe file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Ōhuiarangi / Pigeon Mountain

Hi,

When an editor reverts your bold move, please don't reimplement it; this is actually a form of edit warring. Instead, please open a move request. In addition, it is generally good practice to open a move request for any move that is likely to be controversial even if it isn't reverted; any move involving moving an article from or to a dual name is likely to be controversial.

As such, please revert your repeated move to this target and open a move request. BilledMammal (talk) 23:58, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi BilledMammal, as you know, I moved seven of the 14 Tūpuna Maunga articles over the last day to bring their naming conventions in line with six others, which reflect the Auckland Council's (reserve managers) and Tūpuna Maunga Authority's (administrators) multiple websites, brochures, signage and maps that help the public access the 14 maunga which have been owned by the Tāmaki Collective of 13 iwi and hapū since 2014. Some of the naming conventions reflect gazetted name changes, some have been arrived at over the last eight years. Most are now commonly used on Google Maps, Google and recent sources like mainstream media. (The three maunga with dual Māori names didn't have their name changed officially in 2014, their signs use dual Māori names now, council uses three names, the media tend to use the main Māori name plus the English one. I used the dual Māori names in the title – to help people reading signs – and all three names in the article body).

Unfortunately, you reverted all six moves without discussion. I hadn't noticed you had reverted Ōhuiarangi / Pigeon Mountain as I was busy moving the others at the time. You moved so quickly, I just thought I hadn't done Ōhuiarangi / Pigeon Mountain yet. The other moves you reverted are: Mount Albert (New Zealand), Mount Richmond, Puketāpapa, Mount Smart, Mount Saint John (New Zealand) and North Head, New Zealand. I also planned to move Mount Victoria (Auckland) before I noticed what you were doing.

The articles for the other six Tūpuna Maunga, that have already been moved, merged or created by others are: Matukutūruru, Maungakiekie / One Tree Hill, Maungarei, Maungawhau / Mount Eden, Ōhinerau / Mount Hobson and Te Tātua a Riukiuta. Some of the moves have had move requests, some were just edits.

I'm happy to open move requests for the other eight if they are likely to have support. Turnagra, Schwede66, Gadfium, Murray Langton, Prosperosity, Haminoon, Aircorn and Egroeg5, I see you've supported Tūpuna Maunga moves previously. Are you likely to support eight more? You can see the moves I'm proposing in the article's recent history.

E James Bowman (talk) 03:34, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

I'd likely support, Mr Bowman, but would need to look at the evidence first. Schwede66 03:37, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

It would be worth reading our guideline on article naming; official usage is not useful for establishing what Wikipedia would call an article. In addition, I would advise against pinging editors you consider likely to support such a move; it is called canvassing, and we have a policy that forbids it. The fact you have done so already will cause procedural issues with any related move request that you hold in the immediate future.

For now, I have reverted Pigeon Mountain again myself. BilledMammal (talk) 03:42, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

I tautoko Schwede's comment - I'd also note that BilledMammal has reimplemented their own bold moves in the past (or opposed their reversion), so it seems strange to be calling you out for the same thing here. Turnagra (talk) 05:00, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

BilledMammal has reimplemented their own bold moves - do you have an example? I do not remember doing that. BilledMammal (talk) 05:01, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

BilledMammal, some of the moves I made were away from official names (eg Mt Albert), some were to official names (eg Ōhuiarangi / Pigeon Mountain). As per WP article title criteria, my objectives are recognisability by using the names that are commonly used online and offline, consistency with the other Tūpuna Maunga article names, and precision by moving away from names shared with suburbs and a sports stadium. As established on previous moves, dual names often provide naturalness and concision in New Zealand. Sometimes single names are more appropriate. I used both.

Ngā mihi Schwede66 and Turnagra.

E James Bowman (talk) 05:40, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

My apologies, I thought you had - you've just repeatedly blocked others from carrying out the reversions you're asking for, and done it on multiple occasions with article content instead of titles. Turnagra (talk) 19:32, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

July 2022

Your edit to Tūpuna Maunga has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 01:44, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, I've rewritten the deleted info. E James Bowman (talk) 01:56, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Disputes

Hi James, I just want to talk here because I get the impression this is something that is going to carry on elsewhere if I don’t address it. You continue to refer to Māori names being “regained” or returning in some way. I find this troublesome, as it implies that Māori people or the Māori language stopped existing for some period.

Most recently you changed Auckland Domain to say that the volcano (maunga) “regained” the name Pukekawa. It is my read of the situation that the Māori name has existed all along, but has finally been governmentally recognised as the official English name. The hill clearly hasn’t had an official name before, so I assume you’re not trying to say that. Maybe you can clarify what your intended point of view is here, because I don’t want to have the same conversation at every turn. — HTGS (talk) 03:42, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for this. I’ve rewritten the accounts in both Auckland Domain and Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau, removing ‘regained’ when referring to official names. E James Bowman (talk) 20:49, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. 65.122.255.220 (talk) 11:18, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

The Scandrett Regional Park source you're referring to is a booklet published by Auckland Council, which, as stated in the booklet, was written by historian Graeme Murdoch, with stated sources and acknowledgements. My family and I contributed to later parts of the booklet. You are yet to provide evidence that the booklet spelling is incorrect. If you Google 'Ōmaha and Mahurangi block' you can see various other reliable sources using this spelling, including NZ Parliament's 'Ngāti Manuhiri Claims Settlement Bill, Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Claims Settlement Bill — Procedure, First Readings'. E James Bowman (talk) 20:48, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Hey, excuse me for butting in, but I just had a read through this, and while the IP editor here is way out of line—trying to resolve an apparently unrelated content dispute via accusations of COI, and taking it to COIN without talking to you first—you should probably acknowledge your Cs of I, whether on your user page or the article’s talk page. And, if I’m reading the situation correctly, you should avoid further editing to the family history section directly. — HTGS (talk) 03:28, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion HTGS. I've added a voluntary disclosure to the article's talk page. E James Bowman (talk) 06:19, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Removing edits in their entirety

Hi E James Bowman. Please in future rather than entirely reverting and/or removing the work of other editors that you think there may be an issue with, try and make the necessary changes or adjustments. This is far more constructive and helpful to building a better platform. Helper201 (talk) 07:20, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

The burden is on you to make edits according to Wikipedia:Manual of Style, not other editors. Your recent addition to 2020 New Zealand cannabis referendum still goes against MOS:QUOTE While quotations are an indispensable part of Wikipedia, try not to overuse them. Using too many quotes is incompatible with an encyclopedic writing style and may be a copyright infringement. It is generally recommended that content be written in Wikipedia editors' own words. Consider paraphrasing quotations into plain and concise text when appropriate (while being aware that close paraphrasing can still violate copyright). E James Bowman (talk) 07:33, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Why take on the "burden" of removing it when the same time and energy could be placed into fixing it? And how is one single quote "overuse"? It’s literally one quote that is not even a full sentence. In no way this an example of an overly long quote, misuse or copyright infringement. Helper201 (talk) 07:49, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

It would have taken more time and energy to fix your edit than point out the issues with it. Thanks for going back and fixing them. E James Bowman (talk) 08:15, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Beccaynr (talk) 05:55, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Correct. E James Bowman (talk) 07:07, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

March 2023

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. While most of your additions to the article appear constructive, some of your edits do not appear to have reflected the article sources and article Talk page consensus, and have been adjusted accordingly. Please discuss further on the article Talk page as needed. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 06:04, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

All my edits are constructive. And in the case of this article they reflect the article sources and the article itself. I've detailed this on the article Talk page. E James Bowman (talk) 07:06, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

April 2023

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. e.g. [1], (non-RS was added after this was discussed on the article Talk page) [2] (content unsupported by the source was added), [3] (the content added did not appear to reflect the source). Beccaynr (talk) 05:39, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

All my edits are constructive. You reverting with no discussion is disruptive. I have raised three topics in Talk about your reverting. You have raised none about my edits.

1. This edit was added before I read your misdirected objection to HuffPost. I have since responded on Talk.

2. The content is supported by the photo in the source. I have not objected to you removing that edit.

3. I didn't make that edit.

Please try to be more constructive. E James Bowman (talk) 06:07, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

I added links to examples of fixes I made to some of what appear to be disruptive edits - I have also removed content unsupported by the source it is cited to, other unreliably-sourced content, weasel words, puffery, and what appears to be promotional content. Please review my edit summaries and let me know if you have questions. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 13:34, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

• To clarify, here is a more-detailed review of recent edits to help explain my concerns:

• [4] 23:37, 31 March 2023 text added with the edit summary "Added New Zealand Human Rights Commission perspective." When I reviewed this source, I edited the article to clarify the context and attribution (it is an opinion article) and removed what appears to be unsourced content, but also attempted to preserve the gist of what you had added by including quotes [5] from the source.
• [6] 00:09, 1 April 2023 text added with the edit summary "expanded with relevant info from sources including context and Keen's intentions." When I reviewed this source, it seemed clear that this attempt to add context could be misread as 1) Keen told the BBC that the billboard was in response to the UK asking for views on revisions to the UK Gender Recognition Act, and 2) that the 2004 Gender Recognition Act 'would make it easier for people to legally change their gender'. The source does not appear to support either aspect, so I removed it with an edit summary noting it was unsourced [7].
• [8] 01:17, 1 April 2023 text added with the edit summary "Added "adult human female" info and restructured for flow." When I reviewed this addition, I noticed several issues. One issue was the addition of content from non-RS WP:METRO, so I removed it [9]. I also moved content to the relevant section, attempted to refer to MOS:WEASEL (misspelled) in my edit summary, and 'copyedited' according to the source, to both add information from the source and to remove information that was not supported by the source [10]. Then I realized after reviewing sources that content you had added about 't-shirts' was not supported, so I also removed that [11].
• [12] 01:53, 1 April 2023 text added to the first part of the Biography section with the edit summary "Feminist agreement." I initially edited this to remove the Twitter source and copyedit according to the reference [13] (e.g. the source refers to Shaneel Lal as a "Rainbow community leader", so "Queer activist" appears to be unsupported) and added a quote that seemed more clear than 'not a feminist'; however, this appeared to be WP:UNDUE, especially in the intro section, so I removed it [14].
• [15] 05:02, 1 April 2023 text added with the edit summary "Keen's Gender Recognition Act 2004 views". I removed the content sourced to WP:HUFFPO and referenced the article Talk discussion [16] in my edit summary. Then I removed "youtube/WP:PROMO" [17]. At 06:26, 1 April 2023‎, you restored the disputed content from the "youtube/WP:PROMO," but without an inline source [18]. This content has been discussed at the article Talk page in a discussion you began at 03:18, 1 April 2023 and I responded to, including at 04:35, 1 April 2023 identifying issues with sources and noting one source that currently seemed usable; discussion continues at another article Talk page section that you opened at 05:53, 1 April 2023. I have removed the unsourced content [19] and continued to discuss this at the article Talk [20], but I think what had been discussed at the article Talk about the 2023 NZ Herald source seeming usable had already been clear, but discussion can of course also continue.
• [21] lead text added/changed at 06:31, 1 April 2023 with edit summary "Simplified intro." I removed this as unsupported WP:PUFFERY [22] because sources do not appear to describe Keen as engaged in the scale of activity described in the wikilink and the lead should reflect the article content, which is 'billboards, posters, and stickers, and social media', and not use wikilinks that may inadvertantly communicate more than the available sources.

I am offering this as an overview, because I appreciate the gradual editing process and discussion on article Talk pages, particularly for contentious topics. My hope is that we can continue to collaborate in a constructive way to develop encyclopedic content that is clearly sourced to independent and reliable sources and according to WP:NPOV policy. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 17:02, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

I've appreciated you rewording info I've added from legitimate sources where you've felt the need. I haven't appreciated you deleting info based on your interpretation of Wikipedia policies and guidelines with no discussion on my interpretation. I'd more than happy to respond to your opinions above if you gave them in the article's talk page where other editors have a chance to discuss them also. E James Bowman (talk) 03:48, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

I am trying to collaborate with you and everyone else involved with the article, within the boundaries of the applicable policies and guidelines as I understand them. This is a biography of a living person (which is already a contentious topic area) also within the contentious topic area gender-related disputes and controversies, so taking particular care and caution is warranted (see e.g. WP:BLPRS).

The article is also under a consensus-required restriction ("Changes challenged by reversion may not be reinstated without affirmative consensus on the talk page"), so it is similar to the bold, revert, discuss cycle, but not optional. This article's Talk page is also active with multiple editors participating, so while I have not been able to participate as much as I would otherwise prefer, there are avenues to discuss proposals and generate consensus.

I have recently reverted some of your recent additions based on WP:RSOPINION and restored a reference and content because the link is not dead (a dead link is also not a reason to remove a cite, per WP:SOURCEACCESS and WP:KDL) - this can be discussed further on the article Talk page (but there is no need to ping me, because the page is on my watchlist). Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 05:33, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

As I've just replied in the article Talk, while you have been constructive in editing some improvements I and others have made to this article, you also seem to be WP:STONEWALLING certain content by reverting on procedural grounds. I've experienced this multiple times when adding clarity or notable information on Keen's objections to the Gender Recognition Act 2004 and its proposed reforms, as I've outlined in four topics in the article's Talk section. E James Bowman (talk) 05:50, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Photographs of information signs

Hi there! Something you might not know about is that it's against copyright to upload close-ups of information signs on Wiki Commons. For signs you find in parks and reserves, they count as 2D works, so you'd need to ask the Auckland Council (or DOC if it's a national park) to release the content under a CC-BY license (or public domain or similar). --Prosperosity (talk) 07:54, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I've expanded the Western Springs Reserve gallery and removed that photo. E James Bowman (talk) 07:25, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi Prosperosity, a user has deleted some of the content we discussed in Western Springs Reserve. It seems an odd coincidence that they've done this when we're having a discussion on Auckland Domain. Would you mind having a look at the Western Springs Reserve deletions and see what you think? E James Bowman (talk) 03:20, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

@E James Bowman: Sure thing, I'm a little busy this weekend but I'll take a look. Prosperosity (talk) 00:18, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Ngā mihi e hoa. E James Bowman (talk) 03:40, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

File:Te Wai Ōrea Western Springs Lakeside sign detail.JPG listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Te Wai Ōrea Western Springs Lakeside sign detail.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ✗plicit 03:48, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

File:Pukekawa Auckland Domain Sign.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Pukekawa Auckland Domain Sign.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.

Also:

• File:Te Wai Ōrea Western Springs Lakeside sign.JPG

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Charles III requested move discussion

There is a new requested move discussion in progress for the Charles III article. Since you participated in the previous discussion, I thought you might like to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 06:39, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. E James Bowman (talk) 23:08, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Invitation to an in-person meetup in Mohua / Golden Bay

Golden Bay Air are holding some seats for us until 21 November

Thinking about your summer break? Think about joining other Wikipedians and Wikimedians in Golden Bay / Mohua! Details are on the meetup page. There's heaps of interesting stuff to work on e.g. the oldest extant waka or New Zealand's oldest ongoing legal case. Or you may spend your time taking photos and then upload them.

Golden Bay is hard to get to and the airline flying into Tākaka uses small planes, so we are holding some seats from and to Wellington and we are offering attendees a $200 travel subsidy to help with costs.

Be in touch with Schwede66 if this event interests you and you'd like to discuss logistics. Schwede66 09:14, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Enjoy. E James Bowman (talk) 22:24, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Ōwairaka

Hi there, the source I used on the Mount Albert suburb page lists suburbs or neighbourhoods and if they have an established reo Maaori name, uses that as well (e.g. Grafton has nothing, but Parnell has Panēra). I'm happy to add more sources that specifically call Mount Albert suburb the suburb Ōwairaka, if you want. It's exceedingly frustrating that there's a suburb with the same name next to it. --Prosperosity (talk) 23:31, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I see what you mean. I think it'd be good to add another source that's a bit more explicit for people like me not familiar with that website. Ngā mihi. E James Bowman (talk) 04:55, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

What do you think about this? I've added an additional note to the page. --Prosperosity (talk) 00:10, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

I think that works well, although I can't read the Te Ao Māori News article in te reo Māori, so I don't know if it refers to the suburb or not. It seems to be a story about the maunga. Perhaps a Māori language source isn't appropriate for an English WP page? Ngā mihi. E James Bowman (talk) 06:31, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

A Māori language source is perfect for showing usage in Māori! The article is about the tree felling controversy, and describes the Mount Albert (suburb)-based protestors from Honour the Maunga protestors as te hunga noho kāinga ki Ōwairaka. --Prosperosity (talk) 21:19, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks. And Meri Kirihimete. E James Bowman (talk) 21:22, 23 December 2023 (UTC)