User talk:Johnston49er

Welcome!

Hello, Johnston49er, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Mushroom (Talk) 00:14, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/American Solar Direct concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/American Solar Direct, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/American Solar Direct

Hello Johnston49er. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "American Solar Direct".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/American Solar Direct}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 23:10, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Chris Fails

Hello, Johnston49er,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Chris Fails should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Fails .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks,

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:42, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chris Fails Magazine Cover on Local Community News.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 17:59, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Rory McShane on Sky News Screenshot 2.png

Thanks for uploading File:Rory McShane on Sky News Screenshot 2.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 05:00, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Sky News Center Interview with Rory McShane Screenshot.png

Thanks for uploading File:Sky News Center Interview with Rory McShane Screenshot.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 05:00, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Rory McShane giving interview on Sky News London.png

Thanks for uploading File:Rory McShane giving interview on Sky News London.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 05:00, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Potential COI?

Hello. Having seen your strong commitment to recent AfD discussions involving Rory McShane, I'm asking you directly in expectation of an honest answer from an editor acting in good faith: Do you have any sort of connection (that should be noted per WP:Conflict of Interest) to Rory McShane, for example as a friend, family member, or employee? Note that, as the COI guideline says, "conflict of interest is a description of a situation, not a judgement about that person's opinions, integrity, or good faith." Bakazaka (talk) 07:22, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe I have one but I don't even get to defend myself I guess --Johnston49er (talk) 06:54, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rory McShane giving interview on Sky News London.png

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 17:59, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rory McShane on Sky News Screenshot 2.png

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 17:59, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sky News Center Interview with Rory McShane Screenshot.png

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 17:59, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Rory McShane giving interview on Sky News London.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Rory McShane giving interview on Sky News London.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:42, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation notification

You account has been mentioned at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Johnston49er.--SamHolt6 (talk) 22:40, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So I don't even get to defend myself. Johnston49er (talk) 06:54, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Editing with a possible conflict of interest

Hello, Johnston49er. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you.--SamHolt6 (talk) 22:55, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Chris Fails Magazine Cover on Local Community News.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Chris Fails Magazine Cover on Local Community News.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:28, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Johnston49er (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I've been a member of Wikipedia for years and years. There is no proof on the allegations against me.

Decline reason:

The evidence is given at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Johnston49er and you need to address this. Please read WP:GAB to understand how to craft an acceptable unblock request. Yamla (talk) 12:35, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Johnston49er (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

There is no evidence. Just an accusation. Johnston49er (talk) 12:45, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yunshui ^雲 _水 09:57, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Hey User:Boing! said Zebedee, thanks for the fix! Hopefully they don't accuse you of being a "sock puppet". --Johnston49er (talk) 20:48, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Johnston49er (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I read it but I will go by it point by point. I believe the burder of proof is ON YOU to prove that I broke the rules. However I will prove in this that I did not break the rules.

that the block is in fact not necessary to prevent damage or disruption (i.e., that the block violates our blocking policy);

It never was necessary. I never caused disruption to the site. I created a page that ultimately got deleted. I respected the decision of the admins and the page was deleted. I gave a spirited defense of keeping the page open but as far as I know that is legal. I have been accused of sockpuppetry with ZERO evidence. My name is Woodrow Johnston. You can Google me. Andrew Keeler is a completely different person.

or:

that the block is no longer necessary because you understand what you are blocked for, you will not do it again, and you will make productive contributions instead;

I didn't do anything wrong but I will continue to attempt to make productive contributions.

*or:

that your conduct (under any account or IP address) is not connected in any way with the block (this can happen if a block is aimed at resolving a separate situation and you are unintentionally blocked as a result because you use the same IP range).

Again, Google Woodrow Johnston and google Andrew Keeler. Two completely different people. Rory McShane is someone I know but we are different people that work in the same building.

Johnston49er (talk) 21:48, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It's very, very clear that you and User:Rkmcshane engaged in "meatpuppetry", a form of sockpuppetry where two real persons operate as a tag-team (see also WP:COWORKER), for example by both giving your opinions in the same deletion discussion to create a false impression of wider support of your position. It's also very, very clear that the two of you violated the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use regarding undeclared paid editing (see WP:PAID). Given the above denials of wrongdoing in the face of overwhelming evidence, unblocking you would be detrimental to the project. Huon (talk) 23:19, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I want to be very clear, I am not trying to out you here. You indicated we should google you and provided your real name. I see you work for a PR company and I won't get more specific than that, though you are welcome to do so. The information you have provided above all but confirms WP:MEAT but also raises concerns you've been editing articles about your clients, in violation of WP:COI, WP:PAID, and WP:PROMO. These concerns are absolutely catastrophic here; it would be deeply, deeply inappropriate for you to edit articles about any clients, or in any other area for which you have a conflict. And looking at your edit history, it's hard to draw any conclusion other than that you have done exactly this. --Yamla (talk) 22:35, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Prove it.Johnston49er (talk) 05:25, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying that you are waiving any WP:OUTING concerns and are OK with personal information about you being presented here even if you have not previously published all that personal information on Wikipedia yourself? You did tell us to Google you, after all. Huon (talk) 14:11, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It hardly seems appropriate. This sounds like a new accucasation and not what's listed on the ban reason. What am I on trial for here? I've proven to you that I am not Andrew Keeler. So if the accusation was that I am him or Rory McShane it sounds like I have proven that I am not those people. If you want to bring NEW charges, bring new charges. --Johnston49er (talk) 21:32, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I explained above that Wikipedia doesn't care whether there are two (or three) people editing in lockstep or whether there's only one person using multiple accounts. In such cases the onus is on you to consider yourselves a single entity and to behave accordingly (e.g. by disclosing the connection between the accounts, by not double voting and so on). You haven't done that. You have also violated the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use regarding disclosure of paid editing, which is an unrelated issue. Either issue would fully justify a block. If you prefer, I could adapt the block log so that the block reason reflects both those issues, but it would be rather pointless. Huon (talk) 14:55, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So the charges can't even be updated? This seems like a Kangaroo Court to me.Johnston49er (talk) 18:37, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As you wish. Your block message has been updated. --Yamla (talk) 19:03, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I see no updated charges. Johnston49er (talk) 23:22, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See here, which is your block log. --Yamla (talk) 10:52, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]