User talk:Justlettersandnumbers/2022

  User page     Talk page     Older talk     Sandbox     Toolbox     References     Articles created     CSD log  

---

Note: This talk-page archive covers all of 2022. Older archives are:

• all of 2021
• all of 2020
• all of 2019
• all of 2018
• most of 2016 and 2017
• about July 2014 until mid-January 2016
• from when I first started editing until about July 2014.

But I often delete stuff from my talk, so none of these pages is complete.

---

Frieze Art Fair

Hello! I am puzzled by your recent reversion of my edits to this page. Why do you think that the sourced dates, numbers of exhibitors, and price charged at the art fairs are promotional and non encyclopedic content? They seem simple sourced factual information to me, which should be in an encylopedia. If you prefer, please answer on the article talk page. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frieze_Art_Fair&type=revision&diff=1067477472&oldid=1067476512 ♥ L'Origine du monde ♥ ^{♥ Talk ♥} 22:45, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

User:Justlettersandnumbers please explain your editing here Talk:Frieze_Art_Fair#Updating_the_Article thank you! ♥ L'Origine du monde ♥ ^{♥ Talk ♥} 12:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Creation of 2020 PFF National Challenge Cup

Hi! On 19 December 2020 at 19:05, you deleted the page "2020 PFF National Challenge Cup". According to the notice, the reason was "Mass deletion of pages added by MrBakar, G5: Created by a banned or blocked user (SheryOfficial) in violation of ban or block". I want to recreate this page now, and was wondering if I could do so without changing the content of the original deleted page. Toofllab (talk) 21:09, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Center Italian Modern Art

Hi! I noticed you deleted my addition to CIMA's exhibits, and said an "independent reliable source" was needed. I believe FORBES is a reliable source. Can you elaborate on the removal? Thank you! Askkaty2write (talk) 05:44, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Askkaty2write, the reason I gave in my edit summary was "Please see WP:CRYSTAL; if this actually happens and is mentioned in independent reliable sources it can be added here". Isn't that clear? Wikipedia reports verifiable facts, not intentions. Are you paid to edit that page? If so you are required to make an appropriate paid-editor disclosure. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:09, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

thanks for letting me know, and 100% not paid at all. I loved the gallery and the woman who runs it. I saw the update in a newsletter and then checked for a reliable source as I know their newsletter wasn't enough. thank you for setting me straight and I will try again once the exhibit launches. thanks!Askkaty2write (talk) 18:42, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi again. I am unclear why you keep changing this to being promotional. You can google my name, I have ZERO to do with this gallery. It doesn't seem at all promotional compared to other pages devoted to similar places. Can you suggest what might be more acceptable? Askkaty2write (talk) 00:29, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Golden Retriever

JLAN, Happy New Year. Many thanks for your copy editing of the Golden Retriever article yesterday, if you have not seen it was just promoted to GA status today. Kind regards, Cavalryman (talk) 21:40, 13 January 2022 (UTC).

Cavalryman, I saw – congrats! I doubt if my edits made much difference; do please feel free to revert any or all of them if you think it best. I'd be prepared to spend a modest amount of time on improving the page further if you'd like to – it'd have to be a collaborative effort as I don't have access to the sources. But perhaps you're ready to move on to something new? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:13, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

That would be most welcomed, thanks. Cavalryman (talk) 00:51, 14 January 2022 (UTC).

Peter Wyse Jackson

Hello. I take issue with your edit summary classifying some of my edits as "large-scale copyvio" on the article of Peter Wyse Jackson. Even if my phrasing was a little too close to the source, it was by no means large-scale ... I mean, for example, "appointed" is a better word than "became" and the source doesn't own a copyright on that. Cheers, --SVTCobra 17:37, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Yes, SVTCobra, I'm afraid I had slightly misread the history there – the large-scale copyvio was added (several times) by SelHun98, but was completely removed, but I'd not seen the third removal until I went to hide the affected revisions. It looks as if you may inadvertently have added back a couple of tiny fragments of it, which I removed because I (wrongly) thought they were left over from it. I wasn't talking about you, I'm sorry if you thought I was, please don't take any offence. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:48, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I have been trying to fix the article ever since it came up on COIN here. Cheers, --SVTCobra 17:57, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

I saw. You seem to be doing a great job; I've done a little more. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:00, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

User:Rajvitthalpura

Hi,

You deleted User:Raj vitthalpura as U2 which is correct, but the reason the user page was there is due to an error on my part in trying to move the page which had been moved to the Wikipedia name space by the user in question. Could you restore the deleted material back to the proper location User:Rajvitthalpura? Also, you tagged File:Raj vitthalpura.jpeg as a non-free image having no non-free usage rationale, but the image was uploaded with a free license. Thanks. -- Whpq (talk) 00:45, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Whpq! I deleted it as U2 because it didn't seem quite right to delete it as U5 when the user doesn't exist; with hindsight, perhaps I should have moved it first and then deleted under that criterion. This is just someone trying to promote himself in our encyclopaedia, I don't see any need or reason to restore it; do you? For the image please see here. Our image deletion processes are such an arcane muddle compared with Commons, where that would have been speedied as "out of scope". Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:47, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

It was self-promotion, so no I don't think it necessary to restore it. Thanks, -- Whpq (talk) 13:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Addendum: Google reverse image search works in strange and mysterious ways. I had a look at the image when it was uploaded and reverse image search turned up nothing. Now when I reverse search, it has lots of results. -- Whpq (talk) 14:04, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Revised edits - Soil Association

Hi there. I was hoping you could explain what was wrong with the edits I have made to the Soil Association page. After a month of waiting for edits to considered I decided to publish. Happy to remove them if the changes I have made have errors, but I would welcome an explanation as to what they are. Thanks DanMor0806 (talk) 13:51, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

DanMor0806, please discuss at Talk:Soil Association, where you've already received advice about this. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Himachal Pradesh revdel

Hi! As a follow up to User_talk:Justlettersandnumbers/old7#Revdel on Himachal Pradesh I've started a deletion review: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2022 January 18#Himachal Pradesh WP:AN#Revdel on Himachal Pradesh. – Uanfala (talk) 14:57, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

• Eeeek, this was not a one-off. Here you've erased almost the entire 14-year-old history of an article containing 150 revisions and attribution of 4.k kB of text, all because of a 1.2-kB copyvio. – Uanfala (talk) 13:20, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Well, no, Uanfala, indeed it wasn't. This is something that I do frequently – according to {{adminstats}}, which I have on this user page, I've done about 1550 revdeletions. The majority of those were of copyvios, some of them of only a few revisions, some of many hundreds – you can see which by searching this page and its predecessors for "RD1" (warning: large pages, 5000 revisions each). The copyvio at New Hampshire chicken was over 60% of the page text when it was added and about 50% when I removed it. This is our normal routine standard practice as I understand it. Before I had the tools to do these myself I made (literally) hundreds of revdeletion requests; as far as I can recall (which may not be far enough, of course), one was declined and one was queried (correctly, I'd got the revision number wrong). Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:21, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

@Uanfala To be clear, I do not know a single admin who would not do that revdel, or decline an RD request for those revisions. Revdels much larger over an even longer period of time are not uncommon either. As you say at AN, there may be a discrepancy between actual practice and policy, but the current practice for RD1s has been done for years and years and years. I sympathize with the irritation with not being able to access deleted content, but it's a bit unfair to just now accuse Justlettersandnumbers of wrongdoing for doing something that has been practice for so long and is sensible enough. Like I say at AN, an extensive RfC and probably input from WMF legal will be needed to align policy and current practice. Moneytrees🏝️^{Talk/CCI guide} 17:55, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

The revdel on Himachal Pradesh is being endorsed at AN, but it's clear that most participants aren't completely happy with this situation and at least two have described it as an edge case. My thinking was that if deleting 60 edits was an edge case, then deleting 150 would be somewhat more clearly unacceptable. Anyway, I don't want to single anyone out – Justlettersandnumbers, I'm here simply because you made the revision deletion on a page I was watching; I may be irked at the deletions, but I remember only having positive interactions with you. Anyway, I agree that something needs to be done about the contradiction between policy and practice, and getting advice from the legal team is a really good first step. Any chance anyone may have done that already? – Uanfala (talk) 23:34, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

@Uanfala I was going to ask User:WMF Legal, but it looks like that account has been now decrepitated. Instead, I've sent an email to WMF legal asking if my reading of "any contributor's attribution" is correct, which I think is the principal issue here; I've posted the text of that email to the AN discussion. Moneytrees🏝️^{Talk/CCI guide} 05:29, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Justlettersandnumbers. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 15:57, 19 January 2022 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

SN54129 15:57, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Justlettersandnumbers. I would like to deepen the story of the page of Franzi because it is a very important brand of the Italian luxury history. The text which appears now is incomplete and very brief. How could we proceed to make it better together? thank you Valentina Remold (talk) 10:04, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Account concerns: SPA, realname, sharing

Hi Justlettersandnumbers. I wanted to get an uninvolved admin's opinion on the user Colin Larkin, who is also the subject of the BLP Colin Larkin.

This user's edit history began as largely that of a WP:SPA. He edited the Colin Larken article directly until warned by Kleuske in October 2018. To my knowledge, he has never submitted verification that he is the article subject, per WP:REALNAME.

He's also been named in two postings at WP:COIN, over concerns about other accounts editing in coordination with him:

• Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 182#Muso805
• Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#The Music Guides Playlists / Colin Larkin

During the first discussion, he admitted sharing his account with another user, Muso805. He claims that he changed the password, and no action was taken.

Given that, is there enough cause to block him for WP:REALNAME and/or WP:NOSHARING? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:33, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Drm310! Oddly enough, I had some considerable concerns about The Music Guides Playlists earlier this month after seeing this edit to the first page I created here. I don't see any reason to doubt CL's claim to be Larkin or to worry about impersonation. The account should arguably be blocked as compromised, but that horse rather seems to have flown. It seems to me that, denials notwithstanding, this might benefit from an WP:SPI. Do you feel like getting that moving? If not I'll try to do so later (busy now). Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:59, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Sure, I can get it started and I'll post the link back here. Thanks! --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:03, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Link is here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Colin Larkin --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:24, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Well after all the activity at WP:COIN and the Wikiproject Music talk page, I can see that you have been reverting some of the problem edits of Muso805 and Southwold54. Thanks! Seeing as there are so many, is there a way I can help that would avoid us duplicating efforts? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:41, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi again, Drm310! I'm afraid I only did the easiest bit of all – mass rollback of all edits that were still the latest revision. For the last few days I've been concentrating mostly on trying to improve an article or two; I hadn't planned to go through the remaining sock edits one by one. We really need some better way than manual editing page by page to deal with reversions in cases like this (or perhaps we have one, but I just don't know about it?). Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:05, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Reference to HAL Chetak

Please explain why the reference to HAL Chetak was taken out of the page for the horse. The naming of the helicopter is a direct tribute to the horse, as shown in several references. If need, this topic can be sent out to a panel to provide a final decision — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayonpradhan (talk • contribs) 18:44, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Certainly, Ayonpradhan: stuff about the helicopter belongs in the page about it, stuff about the horse in our page on that. The naming of the helicopter is not about the horse, so has no place in that page. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:46, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

I disagree. Please have it reviewed and voted on by a panel of editors before arbitrarily removing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayonpradhan (talk • contribs) 22:41, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Rankin Wiki

Hi,

To discuss then Rankins page which seems to be attracting some interest from Wiki users.

It appears the issue is quantity and possibly quality of the lists of work on his page as only 'notable' items should be listed and possibly then citations for them,although looking at the citation wiki page it shouldn't be required that every item listed on a page has to have a citatation, for instance referencing David Bailieys page (among others) there is a long list of books and exhibitons many of which are not cited, this is beacuse they are a matter of record as are Rankins....if its about quality then who decides which are 'noteable' yes, presently this is a complete list of works & I understand the Wiki is not IMDb or designed to be a definitive resourse for any individual, so what would be the way to move forward as now all the sections covering his work have been removed wholesale, I didn't create this section...just added to.

For instance, 'citation needed' is by his birthday, the birthday is correct, I know that for a fact but doubt hes ever mentioned the specific date in an interview or at leats not one I can fine...its mentioned on 'celebrity birthdays' but imagine they get their info from Wiki. M — Preceding unsigned comment added by Contrafibularity (talk • contribs) 13:02, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Contrafibularity, the place to discuss this is here. Please be sure to disclose the nature of any conflict of interest when you do so. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:49, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

ok, will do....not sure why you're flagging conflict of interest, I'm not Rankin in case you thought I was. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Contrafibularity (talk • contribs) 13:52, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Cinema of the Gambia

I was thinking of sending it to CP, but I went through 8 different sources, all of which were copy-pasted into the article (although I could only list 3).Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:34, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for tagging it, Onel5969. Did you find anything wrong with the lead paragraph? I didn't, but if you did I'll need to rethink – it was in any case a close call whether to speedily delete it or not. I think one advantage of listing at WP:CP is that more editors are likely to look at the editor's contribs. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:42, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

I honestly can't remember, but I don't think I looked that far. The first 8 were all copy/pastes of things in the body of the article, but it amounted to over 75%. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:49, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Then I think WP:CP was a reasonable (but not the only) choice. I'm sort of assuming that this is a topic that we should have a page on. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:51, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Olivier IV de Clisson

Hi. Could you take a look at this. The earwig report shows an 83% match, but I'm not sure the source isn't a mirror. Thanks. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:13, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Just glanced quickly at it, Onel5969. It looks as if the source you identified is indeed a mirror (it's never been archived, for example) and the apparent copyvio consists of content copied without attribution from Jeanne de Clisson. The phrase "French choice" was added there with this edit in 2014, no idea what the source of that content was. I'm out of time now; if you feel like leaving the editor an attribution-needed note, please do; otherwise I'll do so later. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:17, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

When pigs fly

Hi. I'm not familiar with the referencing format you used on the Kagoshima Berkshire page but the error message at the bottom of the page is, uh, a bit crass and somewhat distracting from the rest of the page. Could you please update it? I'm not trying to go back and forth with conflicting edits and you've clearly put a lot of work into this page that I don't want to mess with. Thanks! Kazamzam (talk) 00:45, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Gordon Klein article-- Is there really a copyright problem, source problem, etc.?

Hello. In the article Gordon Klein, you deleted the Career section and took out most of the intro paragraph at the top of the article, saying it wasn't adequately sourced, and you said on my talk page that there was a problem with copyright violation.

A version of the article with the deleted material can be found at:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gordon_Klein&diff=1063760438&oldid=1052885454

You're an Admin, and more knowledgeable and experienced than me, but I wonder what you were thinking. As far as I can see, there is no copyright problem with the source, https://www.anderson.ucla.edu/faculty-and-research/accounting/faculty/klein , since I just selected facts from there and didn't quote its language. Is it a problem that this is his university webpage, and so not independent enough for the statement that he is a frequent television commentor, for example? How about just the years of his employment? I would think that university faculty pages, or even personal vitaes, are commonly used for noncontroversial information like that.

I'd put in mention of various lawsuits he'd been involved with as an expert witness, and those were deleted too, though. They are independent sources, though, and I chose them by doing a search and selecting opinions in which the court said he was involved. Should there be cites to the page numbers of the opinions where he is mentioned?

Notability is something harder to judge. He's not a scholar, but he is someone important in the teaching of accounting and an expert in valuation. Of course, the main reason I wrote the article was because he became famous in a controversy and when I looked him up there was no Wikipedia article on him, but he has quite a professional reputation. editeur24 (talk) 22:45, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Editeur24, yes, there was definitely a copyright problem, as you must know, as it was you who copy-pasted the entire About section of that page verbatim into the first version of the article; even your edit summary is a copyvio (I'll redact that after you've had a chance to check). As for unsourced content, please read our policy and guidance on sourcing. I don't share your view on notability, but the place to discuss all this is Talk:Gordon Klein. Please don't copy non-free content into Wikipedia again. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:51, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Ah-- I think I see what happened. When I started the article, I did paste in that material when it was in my private namespace, just as a reference I could boil down some facts I could paraphrase. I didn't think it mattered there, since the article wasn't published to Wikipedia yet, and I didn't realize that the "prehistory" would still exist in the history of the published article. I'm sorry. I won't do that again.

In the latest version, though, the copyrighted material was long gone, so why did you delete the Career section? editeur24 (talk) 16:58, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Realogy

A disambiguation page for the term would be appropriate should this reversion stays reverted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Speaking (talk • contribs) 13:08, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Not a copyvio

That single sentence was fair use and attributed to the source, although the quotation marks were misplaced around the wikilinked bull and terrier instead of the start & end of the sentence - my bad. I was under a lot of undue pressure from a sock and an BSL advocate at the time. Regardless, in all likelihood, the cited source mirrored a WP entry that was published nearly a decade earlier: 2009-02-08 Bull Terrier article. That sentence didn't really add anything to the article, so it's good that you removed it. Yay, teamwork! I just wanted to clarify the circumstances. Atsme 💬 📧 23:07, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Mason's World Encyclopedia

Hi Justlettersandnumbers! Regarding this old request of yours: I have a hard copy of the encyclopedia, so let me know if you need any other pages; it'll be a breeze. DanCherek (talk) 22:16, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

That is really amazingly good news, DanCherek! I'd have bought a copy myself long ago if the cost had been reasonable, but where I live the list price is (apparently) €756.52, or €803.40 for the Kindle edition (how does that make any sense?). I'm afraid you'll probably wish you'd never mentioned this; if I may, I'll put together a short list of pages that I've recently failed to access, and ask – but only on condition that if it's not convenient you'll just say no. Many thanks!! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:35, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Sure, it's no problem at all. Don't worry, I'll only charge €700 :) On a serious note, please ask for as much as you'd like and I'll send it by email. DanCherek (talk) 22:41, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Hi. Can you revdel two vulgar personal attacks? The first is at User talk:117.18.231.177, the second at this AfD. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onel5969 (talk • contribs) 12:51, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Any time, Onel5969! I'm afraid I've only just seen your request, but now done. Sorry you had to be subjected to that unpleasantness. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:22, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

No worries, I'm a big boy. Just didn't want it hanging out there. Thanks for taking care of it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:39, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Assembly of French Citizens Abroad

Hi,

What is the rationale behind removing country flags and unlinking country names in the table? you pointed to MOS:FLAGCRUFT inappropriate use which reads "Do not emphasize nationality without good reason [...]". I do not believe it applies here. The flags do not refer to nationalities but to countries (country that is part of the electoral constituency). Under "appropriate use" of the manual of style/Icons it says "In lists or tables, flag icons may be relevant when such representation of different subjects is pertinent to the purpose of the list or table itself." I believe in this case the use of flags next to country names is appropriate as it helps with the readability of the table.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Viepubliquefrance (talk • contribs) 18:57, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Viepubliquefrance, I disagree – see our guidance MOS:WORDPRECEDENCE and MOS:OVERLINK. The silly little coloured flags actively interfere with reading the text. Anyway, the place to discuss this is Talk:Assembly of French Citizens Abroad. That article has many more serious problems than this. Do you have some connection to the thing, by the way? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:11, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Elvis Chummar

Hello please advise why the page was deleted Ooshiscribbles (talk) 12:21, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Two reasons, Ooshiscribbles: WP:G11, unambiguous promotion; and WP:G12, unambiguous copyright violation (of this). Neither of those things is permitted here. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:25, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

It would appear that a new account has already popped up and recreated the draft article. Best, GPL93 (talk) 17:39, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Revision of Imply Data

Hi!

I'm a bit surprised by the removal of 4,842 bytes from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imply_Data for copyright violation.

One paragraph (under the "Uses" section) was, indeed, copied from Imply documentation. This would seem to meet all 10 points of the Policy for non-free content. If administrators feel otherwise, these 270 bytes could be rewritten.

The section "Deployment Options" is also copied from Imply documentation. Upon consideration, it is not a critical part of the article and should be removed.

Are there other copyright issues elsewhere in the page that should be addressed? Briskmad (talk) 22:31, 8 February 2022 (UTC) — 

Evaluation

Hi, JLAN - I'm getting a high probability of copyvio for material added back in Jan 2006 in Bull and terrier#Dog fighting that matches this website. It's not indexed in WayBack, and I don't see any dates anywhere, but it looks like it could be a mirror of our article. Can you please corroborate? Atsme 💬 📧 23:06, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) That site contains the phrase The breed was officially recognized as the American Pit Bull Terrier, in 1898 and later its close kin the American Staffordshire Terrier in 1936. This text was not part of the original article but only added added in 2013 first as The breed was officially recognized as the American Staffordshire Terrier in 1936 and it's close, infamous relative, the American Pit Bull Terrier, in 1898. The next edit corrrected multiple typos and lead to the phrase The breed was officially recognized as the American Pit Bull Terrier, in 1898 and later its close kin the American Staffordshire Terrier in 1936.

Also the first version of the article had in wikitext purpose of [[dog fighting]] and [[Bait (dogs)|baiting]]. Note how on the website it says purpose of hunting, dog fighting and Bait (dogs). The word hunting was only added to the Wikipedia article in 2008.

Unless there has been copying in both directions, it looks to me like the site is a mirror. – NJD-DE (talk) 23:44, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Atsme, at a brief glance I don't think there's much room for doubt that it's a mirror (Earwig comparison), copied from us some time after "a quarter to 1/8th" (added here) was changed with this edit to "a quarter to an eighth", and almost certainly after 22 May 2015, when europetnet still did not have a 'resources' tab. I don't have time to check now, but my guess is that all the breed descriptions listed here will turn out to have been copied from us. However, as Njd-de says, there's always the possibility of copying in both directions. This would be a good case for a {{backwardscopy}} on the talk-page, btw. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:13, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Revision of Imply Data

Please explain why the reference to HAL Chetak was taken out from the commemoration section, when the helicopter was added to honour the horse. If you don't agree with this addition, please put it in front of a panel to make the final decision. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayonpradhan (talk • contribs) 22:15, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft Page: Andrea Unger

Hello Justlettersandnumbers, I'm trying to improve this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Andrea_Unger... and you put these 3 rows (Advert, Autobiography and COI). Why? I followed the suggestion of DGG and I inserted many books of the author... why it should be an error? Can you help me to understant and how to improve the page? Thank you for your time. Angio92 (talk) 10:52, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Angio92, the edit summary I left was "Added {{Advert}}, {{Autobiography}}, and {{COI}} tags: not clear whether this page is written by the subject or by someone close to him; it reads like an advertisement" – isn't that clear enough? Whatever your connection to this person, you should declare it on your user-page; if you have ever received or ever expect to receive any financial compensation from Unger, disclosure is obligatory. Please be aware that Wikipedia does not tolerate promotion of any kind. Thank you, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:03, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Is not clear because it’s from August I ask suggestion to other users in Wikipedia.. and you are the first (after 2 revisions) user to suppose that. I’m not connected in any way to him… I’m just a reader Angio92 (talk) 12:36, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Btw.. Can you help me to understand how to improve the page? Thanks in advance Angio92 (talk) 12:37, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Nidhi Tiwari

Hi, I am Itcouldbepossible. Recently you moved Nidhi Tiwari to draftspace, which had been tagged for CSD. What are the steps that you performed? I saw that you first deleted the draft. Then you moved the page to draftspace, along with the talk page. Then you restored Draft:Nidhi Tiwari saying (34 revisions) ‎(merge histories). Then you did this. So what are the things that you wanted to do? I love to know all these administrative processes, and the way they do it. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 11:36, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes, Itcouldbepossible, by doing that I merged the history of the mainspace page with that of the draft. You can read about this at WP:HISTMERGE; it's a very complex area, and I only do it in the simplest cases (such as this one). Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:43, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers Ok, got it. Can everyone do histmerge. If yes then how can I do it? Itcouldbepossible^Talk 11:51, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm afraid not, Itcouldbepossible – it needs admin tools. If ever you think that a history merge is needed you can request it here, but do please first make sure that the page histories don't overlap. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:56, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Got it thanks. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 12:32, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

WP:AFC Helper News

Hello! I wanted to drop a quick note for all of our AFC participants; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest.

• AFCH will now show live previews of the comment to be left on a decline.
• The template {{db-afc-move}} has been created - this template is similar to {{db-move}} when there is a redirect in the way of an acceptance, but specifically tells the patrolling admin to let you (the draft reviewer) take care of the actual move.

Short and sweet, but there's always more to discuss at WT:AFC. Stop on by, maybe review a draft on the way? Whether you're one of our top reviewers, or haven't reviewed in a while, I want to thank you for helping out in the past and in the future. Cheers, Primefac, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

A couple of moves

Hi! I come to you directly because you had several comments at WikiProject Dogs. I wonder if you'd consider these moves per general naming at Category:Individual dogs, I think admin powers are needed.

• Rename Bamse (St. Bernard) to Bamse (dog).
• Move Blue (Don Cherry's dog) to Blue (dog), and move Blue (dog) to Blue (fictional dog). There's at least 2 dogs in that list. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:11, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång, I could do those but – if you're sure they're uncontentious – you can simply list them as technical requests. Or, for the first at least, just tag the existing redirect with {{db-move}} (it might be courteous to check with the creator of the page first).

If you think they might run into opposition then I suggest, as a minimum, starting an informal discussion on the talk-page (along the lines of "unless anyone disagrees, I plan to move this ..."). If definite opposition develops then a move request will be needed.

Sorry if this all stuff you already know; if you run into any difficulty I'm happy to help. I'm shocked to find that "Don Cherry's dog" doesn't belong to Don Cherry at all, but to someone else with the same name. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:39, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

No, I don't move a lot of articles. I'll speak to the snowman. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:48, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: no issues from me. GiantSnowman 19:43, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:51, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Where was the RM to move Don Cherry pages?

Howdy. I see you've changed Don Cherry's article title, without going the RM route. I've mentioned this unilateral move, at the talkpage of WP:HOCKEY. GoodDay (talk) 09:29, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Article deletion

Bro I'm not violating any rules so what is wrong with you Veeram123 (talk) 12:09, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Robert F. Kennon

why have you deleted this page & are you or someone else planning on writing another for the subject? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:7080:123F:ED8D:2D09:D05C:2072:3506 (talk) 17:43, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

IP, for the reason for deletion please see Robert F. Kennon and/or Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20110727 – one of the largest copyright cleanups in the history of this project. I've no intention of writing another article on this topic, but will provide or restore the skeleton of the former article (i.e., without the running text) if anyone wants me to – just ask! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:46, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Banda Street

Please see Talk:Banda Street. My contestation of speedy deletion was in error. Phil Bridger (talk) 11:29, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Phil Bridger, I missed that (obviously!). Now gone. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:34, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Check-a-link

JLAN - please see if this link allows you to read pages 25-39. Thanks in advance...Atsme 💬 📧 01:47, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

No, Atsme, I've never had any luck trying to access that book on Gbooks; it isn't on archive.org either. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:30, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

Interesting, indeed Justlettersandnumbers. When I copy-paste the link it works in both Firefox and Chrome allowing most of the pages in the book to download. In Safari, same thing. Sometimes I have to scroll to find the pages because it lands on pages that are purposely blanked. Try edit mode and copy the full link. And here's another option that may also work which provides page numbers: I copied the url in Citer, and it returned this link to page 29. Try it and see what happens. Atsme 💬 📧 15:50, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

Atsme, I can't access that book. Gbooks thinks it has three editions of it, all of them without any kind of preview. And in case you're wondering, I do know how to use that website – see my instructions at User:Justlettersandnumbers/references#Linking to page number in Gbooks. Had you thought of asking at WP:RX? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:57, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

I can access the book, I was just wondering if you could because I was hoping you would read a specific few pages that I provided in the link. I'll just add the information in my own words, cite the book and pages, and go from there. Sorry for the bother. Atsme 💬 📧 02:39, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Weathervane Playhouse

Hello, Weathervane Playhouse is creating a Wikipedia page. The page is getting deleted for copyright infringement for reposting information from our own site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mycp (talk • contribs) 03:10, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Mycp, I've answered on your talk-page. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:35, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Abdul Razak Ahmad

Hello I noticed a lot of editions were wiped. I can rewrite the whole middle section, but the entire section on his election contests is definitely in the public domain - in Malaysia's election commission website ... the SPR links I gave - which I hope you haven't discarded cos it was quite a hassle to look them up individually. I have a copy of my draft text but not of the reference links. Thanks Malaysian leftist (talk) 18:09, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Malaysian leftist, the first of several copyvios you added was from here. I didn't (and don't) see any reason to believe that that is in the public domain, so reverted the page to before that addition. I'll add the references to the draft for you. Please make sure that everything you write is entirely in your own words. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:25, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Reference to HAL Chetak

Please note that reference to HAL Chetak is valid in the commemoration section in the page about a horse, since the helicopter was named after the horse. If there is an objection, please have an editorial panel decide on it and provide consensus — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayonpradhan (talk • contribs) 06:11, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Ayonpradhan, please discuss this at Talk:Chetak#Helicopter, not here. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:56, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

question about undoing Chokha page move

Hello,

I was wondering why you undid the chokha move. When i requested a move on technical support page i provided sources to prove that the title isnt appropriate to describe the clothing attire. i gave an explanation as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cherkezy (talk • contribs) 18:50, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Cherkezy, that move is clearly neither technical nor uncontentious, and should not have been requested as such. If you think the page should be moved please start a move discussion on the talk-page. You'd need to provide evidence that your preferred title is the WP:PRIMARY TOPIC, of course. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:12, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I did provide evidence. I don't agree on it not being uncontentious. It is a fact that only one ethnic groups calls it that. I even provided sources. Anyone who'd studied the region would know that cherkeska is the default name of the clothing. And it was a technical issue because it had a redirect page.

I will check the link. Thank you Cherkezy (talk) 10:35, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Cherkezy, the move discussion is at Talk:Chokha#Requested move 12 March 2022. There's no point in discussing it here too. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:54, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes I have seen it and it looks like the sources I provided are there as well. Do I have to make another reply there with different sources? I'm asking you because I don't know how to progress and continue the discussion or who to discuss it with there. Cherkezy (talk) 11:51, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Margaret Ann Ireland

I wrote and submitted a new article on her as requested.Joan arden murray (talk) 04:30, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Chokha discussion page

Hello,

Since you started the discussion page I would expect you to contribute as well. Cherkezy (talk) 10:22, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Internet Archive Scholar vs. JSTOR

Hello, I see on your user page that you use JSTOR and I'd like to know more about your experience. By my calculations, a good 70 % of the main JSTOR content is now available for everyone at Internet Archive Scholar, with full text search provided e.g. at https://scholar.archive.org/ . The service is still in beta, but I've used it for some source-finding and it seems quite usable to me; I wonder whether that's just my experience. If you have a chance, the next time you'd be looking for a source on Google Scholar or JSTOR or similar, to perform the same search on IA scholar instead, I'd be curious to hear how it ends up. Thanks, Nemo 19:06, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Nemo_bis, I'm a long-time supporter of the Internet Archive, but didn't know about this. I'll give it a try. Had you thought of leaving a note about it at WT:The Wikipedia Library? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:41, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Le Droit Humain

Hi there. Wikipedia says you've reverted the page to before all the copyright errors, but I believed I had rectified them all in the revision immediately before yours. Was I wrong, or should I now edit your current revision with the correctly sourced and attributed stuff? Thanks in advance :) PolHistChecker (talk) 14:58, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

PolHistChecker, I'm afraid that after your later edits there was still an undue amount of taking from here. In general, the preferred way to get rid of copyvio is simply to remove it, and then rewrite new content entirely in your own words. Trying to eliminate it by copy-editing is not recommended, as it may give rise to a derivative work. You are free to edit the page – basing your content there, as everywhere in this project, on independent reliable sources, of course. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:46, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, I'll give a proper rewrite a go :) PolHistChecker (talk) 19:16, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm sure we have other seasonings

I'm sure you worked out that I wanted the editor to know that we know. 😈😇 It often solves the problem. Or not. As the case may be. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:59, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

New administrator activity requirement

The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.

Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:

1. Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
2. Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period

Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.

22:52, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Record Labels and credible claims

Hi Justlettersandnumbers! Sorry to bother you with a procedural note. I was cleaning up List of record labels: I–Q to remove redlinks, and ran across Major Records. As this is an area of some expertise for me, I wanted to let you know that, for a record label, claiming that a number of notable artists artists signed or released by the label is a credible claim of notability. In the old days, if there were three artists the article was likely to be kept, sigcov or no sigcov. Anyway, I don't think the article should survive as is, probably a PROD would go uncontested. Pinging Toddst1 as nominator. I hope I'm clear that I don't think it should be restored, this is just a procedural opinion. Happy editing, and thank you to both you and Toddst1 for the many fantastic contributions you make here! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 00:10, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

I have a different perspective: WP:NOTINHERITED applies. Because a firm did business with someone or many people that are notable, does not make the firm WP:NOTABLE - any firm - record label, car wash, what have you. The firm must be notable by its own merits. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 02:09, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Well, a record label becomes notable by the material it releases. I did not say the label was notable, just that it is a credible claim of notability. Happy editing! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:33, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

78.26, I agree, I should have declined the nomination for that reason – even if it would have been eligible as soon as the unsourced content was removed. I appreciate the feedback, thanks for taking the time to leave it. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:37, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Balen Shah

Hello, Justlettersandnumbers,

You said "Sorry" for not deleting this page but you actually did what I hoped would be done which was moving this article back to Draft space and protecting the main space title. But using Twinkle, there is no way to leave a longer explanation than selecting a CSD criteria. I closed the AFD that concerned this article with the closure of "Draftify" but I wanted a different admin to deal with the article this time. Thank you for handling this page appropriately. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:41, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Liz, I thought that was probably the case, the "sorry" was just in case I'd guessed wrong. By the way, Twinkle actually does give us the possibility of creating a custom rationale (first item in the General criteria section); I often use that to expand on the tagging rationale when deleting. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:46, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

I flat-out missed it

The curation tool had me focused on copyvio & spam, so I did the copyvio check, looked at Refs and simply overlooked Sources – my bad. Thanks for catching it. Atsme 💬 📧 15:22, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Atsme, it's among the easiest things to miss (along with OTRS permission on the talk-page) – unfortunately we are all too used to seeing copy-paste copyvios. In case it's of any help, I try to remember to look at the number of edits of the creator of the page: if it's in two or three figures then copyvio is the most likely explanation and there may be little need to look further; if (as here) it's over 15000, then either we have a very large-scale problem or the page is probably OK, it just remains to understand how/why. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:44, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

David Gerstein

I take your point that Draft:David Gerstein may not have been a G12, but I'm unclear why you restored it when, as you said yourself, it's a copy of David Gerstein (Israeli artist). I may have missed something here, but why do we need a draft of an existing full article, and if it is accepted, what can it become other than a redirect to the existing article?

Hi, Jimfbleak! My apologies, I had intended to drop you a note about that, but forgot to do so. I happened have that page open and was going to remove the G12 tag when I was called away, so I undeleted it when I returned. Another time I think I'll leave you the note first ...

I've no idea why anyone would do this, though I think some editors like to edit in a sandbox. In mainspace it would be an instant A10, but A-criteria don't apply in draft space and I don't see any other applicable criterion (am I wrong?). That said, if you want to de-restore it, do please go ahead and do so. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:10, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. We used to have a "duplicates existing article" criterion, but that seems to have gone. It's a bit of a fan page, and the editor says that it has Gerstein's approval, so not exactly neutral editing either, but I don't know if it meets G11. I won't lose sleep over the draft or the substantive article though. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:21, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Like hundreds (thousands?) of our artist articles it's almost certainly written by his gallery or agent. I think it'd need someone who reads Hebrew to clean it up, though. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

JSTOR

Hi, I am Itcouldbepossible. I saw that you have stated on your user page that you have access to JSTOR. Could you help me with some resources? It is for off-wiki reasons though. I have always been trying to get hand on the resources but in vain. Also, though you haven't stated it, but still I am asking, do you have access to research gate? Thought you might have, since you have access to JSTOR. Regards, Itcouldbepossible ^Talk 14:28, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Itcouldbepossible! I started writing an answer to this, but now see that I never finished or sent it – I'm so sorry! I have two accesses to JSTOR, one as an alumnus perk from a university I attended in the Stone Age, the other through the Wikipedia Library. I'm always happy to help fellow Wikipedians get hold of stuff for use here, but I don't think either of them really allows downloading on behalf of third parties. If you only need a small amount of stuff I may be able to help – how many documents might we be talking about? Why don't you give me one title to look for, and I'll see what I think? By the way, you seem to have over 15000 edits, so you could probably apply for access to the Wikipedia Library yourself; it gives access to a whole load of resources. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:14, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply! Well, I know that you all are busy and it isn't possible for you to answer all at once. but I don't think either of them really allows downloading on behalf of third parties. Is there some kind of declaration that needs to be given before downloading, like "this is for your own purpose, and not for third party use"? I didn't quite get what you said. If you only need a small amount of stuff I may be able to help – how many documents might we be talking about? I am talking about just 2 documents. If you say, then I will just ask for 1. Why don't you give me one title to look for, and I'll see what I think? It isn't about that. I have found something myself, but just cannot access it. If you want to find out resources for me, then I am actually trying to find out about the women during the Holocaust, how they lead their lives in the concentration camp, sexual violence against the women by the SS, and about pregnancies and how they were managed. Now this might seem a bit weird, but I need it. I don't know about this Wikipedia library, but 2 months ago, I received a notification from "The Wikipedia Library" that I am eligible for the Library. I signed up using my Wikipedia account, and it is till there. I don't know what to do next, or how to access resources. Can JSTOR be accessed through that? Then it would be really helpful to me, since I would also be able to read many other things, that have JSTOR as a citation on Wikipedia. I would be able to read the full text and verify if the content that is being supported is actually mentioned there or not, since editors have a tendency to use wrong JSTOR references (intentionally) since they know very few people would be able to verify them, and chances are that, the references get accepted as a citation for what they are trying to support. If this really works, then a big big thanks to you for telling me about it. Can I access ResearchGate with it too? Itcouldbepossible ^Talk 08:04, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Itcouldbepossible, if it's just two papers you need, I'll be happy to help, just give me the details. I'm probably not the right person to ask about the Wikipedia Library, I'm just a user of it; I suggest you take your questions here. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:55, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

I would like to email them to you, if you won't mind. Itcouldbepossible ^Talk 04:41, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

That's fine, {u|Itcouldbepossible}}! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 07:23, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Sent Itcouldbepossible ^Talk 07:32, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your help. I cannot imagine an administrator like you who is so busy, helping me out, that too just for my personal research. There are no words by which I can thank you. Just it is, that there is a small reply to your email. Please check it out. Regards, Itcouldbepossible ^Talk 15:20, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Please don't give it a thought, Itcouldbepossible, it took me only a few moments to download them and attach to an email. I wish you luck with your Wikipedia Library application – that would give you access not just to JSTOR but to a load of other valuable resources too. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:42, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your great help sir. Itcouldbepossible ^Talk 02:01, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Gordon Klein AfD

Hello. You added the "notability" tag to the article on Gordon Klein a while back, so I thought you might wish to be aware that I have nominated it for deletion. The discussion page is here. PianoDan (talk) 14:33, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Reverting the edits

In the page Hare Krishna Konar the information given by the User User:Victory comrade is correct though it was a sockpuppet account but after, I analyses the information i got that the information are correct, so please can you help to improve the page of Hare Krishna Konar, and please don't thing I am also a sockpuppet account. Mjidgkkof (talk) 11:29, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Memgraph

Can you please take another look at Memgraph? It is wrong. First, it appears that you may not have removed the copyvio notice after dealing with the copyvio. (If you meant to leave it on so that another admin will check the copyvio status, then that is all right.) Second, it was questionably nominated for deletion, but was then moved out of process from draft space into article space, all the while with no article text displaying. Can you please take another look at it? Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:56, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Robert! I've moved it back to draft and salted the mainspace title for now. I added the copyvio template to the draft after I'd redirected and then deleted the first mainspace version – the one you'd blanked and listed. Thanks for doing what you did! Just by the by: in my opinion the best thing to do with a copy-paste move is to immediately revert it, i.e., turn it into a redirect to the source page; if the source was a draft then the redirect can be nominated for deletion as R2. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:58, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Interesting. So does that mean I can neuter or spay a copy of a draft into article space? If so, I will have two tools for use against copying a draft into article space, redirect and R2, or send the article to AFD. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:02, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

If the originator instead moves the draft into article space, then the choices are between moving it back, which should be done only once, and sending it to AFD. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:02, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I believe that, as long as there aren't substantial edits by other users, redirecting a copy-paste move back to the source is not just a possible way of dealing with it, but the best way available; if you get there too late and there've already been significant edits by other users then I don't think it's an option. Just my opinion: our AfD process is already overloaded, so adding to it with stuff that anyway has no realistic chance of survival is not perhaps our best choice. Regards, and thanks again, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:47, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes. Okay. However, often the thing that has no realistic chance of survival is being move-warred between draft space and article space, and then there is no plausible alternative to AFD. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:45, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Okay. I did a redirect and tag for R2 as per your advice. It was List of Greek football transfers summer 2022. There is an inconsistency between the title and the lede sentence, so that I had to decline the draft to be corrected. It is easier to send the inconsistent copy-pasted article to a bit bucket than to fix the combination of the inconsistency and the history. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:12, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Preventive and Social Medicine

Hi Justlettersandnumbers. Hope you are keeping well. I see that you moved Preventive and Social medicine to preventive healthcare. The redirection is wrong. I had earlier discussed this with other editor and got it corrected. Preventive and Social medicine is branch of medicine but not healthcare. Kindly guide. Gardenkur (talk) 13:28, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Margherita Hack

Hi, as you requested I opened a discussion thread at Talk:Margherita Hack#Photograph, however I'm seeing no interaction. What is the course of action here? What's the threshold for consensus if everyone stays silent? BouncyCactus (talk) 10:59, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Date-changing vandal from Mexico

• Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1100#Date-changing_vandal_from_Mexico

Relative to the above case, a new /64 range has popped up: Special:Contributions/2806:106E:23:C3D3:0:0:0:0/64

Thanks in advance! Binksternet (talk) 14:51, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Binksternet, thanks for letting me know! I've widened the block to cover the /48, which apparently includes both /64s; let's see if by some miracle that works. By the way, just in case it sounds as if I know what I'm talking about here, please be assured that I don't – I just plugged the two numbers into a tool and acted on the result. As before, if you spot any more of this nonsense do please let me know. Thanks, regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:31, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Why did you delete my page

Jordon Hall is a professional footballer, why are you deleting his page? Looking at the initial reason why he was deleted was just not true at all and made no sense. He's a celebrity and should have a page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nzs9 (talk • contribs) 12:05, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Nzs9, the reason for my deletion of that page was clearly explained on your talk-page – until you removed it. It was originally deleted following this discussion. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:12, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Restore the following articles

Hi @Justlettersandnumbers. Please restore the following articles that you deleted as copyright violation. The text has been released under a compatible license per Ticket:2022052510001544.

Underground cave "Akmechet", Appak Ishan Architectural Complex, Domalak Ana Mausoleum, Mausoleum of Baidibek Bi and Ismail Ata Mausoleum. Please ping me once you do it and I'll update the pages with VRTS permissions. Thanks. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 21:28, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Done, TheAafi, restored and then draftified as inadequately sourced. Thanks for handling that ticket, regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:17, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers Thanks dear friend. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 12:21, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Francis Bacon

Good spot of a rather sneaky masquerade. I removed the claim as that was obviously where it came from.[1]. The fact is true, but the source dodgy as hell. Were you working off a blacklist? Ceoil (talk) 00:35, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Ceoil! No, I just happened to have come across (and removed) that website before – which perhaps explains my slightly sharp edit summary, which please excuse. It would very good to have a list of obviously non-reliable sources for art and artist pages (perhaps similar to this), but as far as I know, we don't. I'd participate if there was consensus to start one. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:14, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I usually use books, but was caught here. Sound out for spotting almost immediately; sharp edit comment or not, apparently you are eagle eyed and very good at this stuff. Ceoil (talk) 09:21, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

EarthKosher

Why are you removing a key person, mention of Israel, removing Senior from Kashrus Administrator title or calling them a "company" instead of what they are "Kosher Certification Agency"?

Look at their website or any Kosher Certificate published on the web Srtz18 (talk) 09:24, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Srtz18, please read Help:Referencing for beginners. Please also disclose your connection to the company, specifically whether or not you are or have ever been paid by it; this is a requirement under our WP:Terms of Use. The place to discuss changes to that article is the talk-page. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:31, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Did you look at their website? Srtz18 (talk) 09:54, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Brandon Lorenzo

Regarding your message on my Talk page. Noted. Thank you for this feedback it's much appreciated. I will revisit my citation sources and should there be notable factual sources change them. Thanks again! Regards WikiHuman2021 WikiHuman2021 (talk) 14:58, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Bolognese dog

Hi @Justlettersandnumbers, I just reverted your move on Bolognese dog subject to a request at the RMT. You cited a 2014 RM in your edit summary however the article was moved to Bolognese dog title according to 2017 successful RM. The diff Special:Diff/614208516, that you linked is from 24 June 2014. Hope this clarifies everything. Thanks ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 15:35, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Question about a speedy deletion

Hi there. Yesterday you deleted Evangelical Presbyterian Church in Southern Africa as an A10 speedy deletion, describing it as "Recently created article that duplicates an existing topic, Evangelical Presbyterian Church in South Africa". The Internet Archive shows the deleted article existed as early as 2013 so it is certainly not recently created. Also I am curious why you deleted the article rather than just redirecting it to the other article? htonl (talk) 22:47, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this up, Htonl. That was certainly a mistake on my part – I spent a good deal of time checking that they were both in fact about the same topic, and must have failed to look at the history. I've undeleted it and redirected it as you suggest. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:47, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! - htonl (talk) 19:14, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Eight years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:13, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Gerda – how time does fly! Want a music listening recommendation? Pierre Hantaï playing the Goldberg Variations (available on YouTube as well as on CD), an eye-opener. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:04, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, will check it out! - see my talk for my latest Bach revelation (with pic of the conductor happy, and the review has a pic of him with some boys). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:07, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Listening now! Reminding of how Erhard Egidi played them for his 70th birthday, instead of all talks. I am just working on Barbara Koerppen, who was our concertmaster for all the great Bach works (one year St John Passion, the other year St Matthew Passion, then St John again ...). Small world. For the birthday, I had a child with me who fell asleep, and he said just was just perfect. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:20, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt Gerda remembers everyone but has forgotten Aafi..... ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 17:40, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Copyright clerk

Hi, @Justlettersandnumbers. Thanks for everything that you do on this encyclopedia. The recent ticket that I handled on the VRTS makes me think that I should also help on the copyright's area on this Wikipedia. Being a global permissions VRT agent is a plus point and I can be helpful for the community. What is your advise on this? Thanks. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 17:38, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

TheAafi, thank you for offering! We could certainly do with more clerks, and VRT access is, as you say, often helpful in this area. Apart from the recent Turkmenistan thing, have you spent much time identifying or dealing with copyright problems? (I'd rather just ask you this than start looking through your 33 000 edits!). If not, there are several ways to accumulate a bit of extra experience (and help with copyright clean-up at the same time); Wikipedia:CopyPatrol is just one of them. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:20, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers, well, tbh, I've not spent much time on this. However, I've helped in cleaning up some articles including Rafiuddin Deobandi, and others I don't remember. I'll appreciate any advises on this and would definitely like to gain more experience before moving on to become a clerk. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 10:12, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

"landrace"

Thank you for correcting my violations of MOS:BOLDLINK. But the issue that aroused my concern in the first place is still unresolved. As used in the names of these breeds, races, lineages, or whatever we call them, "Landrace" is almost totally opaque. When I first saw it, capitalized as it was, I assumed it to be the name of some person or place that had been involved with the breed's history. We owe it to our readers to explain that the word is not an arbitrary part of the name, but a common noun (in the grammatical sense) that has a specific meaning and is applied to many lineages of animals and plants. How do you suggest doing this?

Thnidu (talk) 02:06, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Thnidu! My take: in those articles that word is simply part of the breed name, and there's no reason to link it. They have that name because they derive from the Danish Landrace, a pig that was selectively bred in the late nineteenth century; it was never a "landrace" in the sense of that article (Denmark did have some traditional pig breeds, but this was not one of them). As for it being a word with a specific meaning, I can't agree (as far as animal breeds are concerned, at least) – it's just another word for a traditional breed. This article is unfortunately mostly WP:OR. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:53, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Revdel request

Hi, I saw you are a currently active admin using this tool. I think the edits I reverted here could do with revdel. Thanks, ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 08:59, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Done, Apaugasma, thank you for catching that. Oh, and any time! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:11, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Santa Gertrudis

It's not a particularly big deal, but why the reversal on my edit that included Philippines as an export destination for Santa Gertrudis? It's pretty well documented that Dean Conant Worcester as a US colonial administrator and entrepreneur was in the 1920s an early adopter of Santa Gertrudis at his Diklum Ranch in Bukidnon, Philippines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Innapoy (talk • contribs) 16:45, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Innapoy! I reverted your addition because it was not supported by the existing references in the article, and you did not add any new source to support it. Please see this helpful page. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:53, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Page Mover question

Very kindly you granted me this right. Today I came across an issue I though PM would solve by itself. I tried to move Avon Public Schools to draft. In the way was the redirect Draft:Avon Public Schools, something I thought PM would overcome technically. Instead I had to create Draft:Avon Public Schools 2 and ask that Draft:Avon Public Schools be G6 deleted.

Was my assumption that PM would handle it in error, or is there a technical reason why not? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:51, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Timtrent, how are you? As I understand it, the extra abilities of page mover don't include deleting a redirect (or any other page) with more than one revision in the history, so are no different from those of the standard move right in this respect. They should, however, make it more straightforward to carry out round-robin moves. My experience of those was that they were mostly rather more trouble than they were worth, and asking for admin help usually saved time overall. I've moved the draft. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:08, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm having a lovely time. We have summer at last! How about you?

Thank you for the clarification. All falls into place now. Not sure I have the skill yet to do a round robin move!

Thank you for deletion and move. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:14, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Here too we have summer, but too much of it – unseasonably intense heat and prolonged drought. Oh well, only a few months ago we were complaining of cold and rain. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:55, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Thomas Ashcraft notability tag

Thank you for contributing to the review of to the Thomas Ashcraft page. It's true Ashcraft's h-index isn't high-- I wasn't looking at the NPROF guidelines for notability (just the regular WP:Notability page). Regarding notability by secondary sources, Ashcraft's work documenting atmospheric "sprites" (aka transient luminous events) is unusual, and as such has been the subject of independent articles in the New York Times <https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/30/science/on-the-hunt-for-a-sprite-on-a-midsummers-night.html>, WIRED <https://www.wired.com/2013/07/transient-luminous-events/>, and the Santa Fe New Mexican, which is the paper of record for Santa Fe NM <https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/citizen-scientist-driven-by-the-need-to-discover/article_ef9e2a1c-07eb-11eb-895e-532df1d8b495.html> (among other sources). Are you able to access these pieces? They are behind paywalls if you've already accessed a certain number of free articles in the month, but perhaps we could connect online somehow and I could copy-paste and send you the text if you need.

Ashcraft is not a traditional academic scientist-- he's a citizen scientist contributor to NASA <https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/people/488/thomas-ashcraft/> (this is an interview so might count as a primary source) and his images have been featured on NASA's "Astronomy Picture of the Day" blog <https://apod.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/apod/apod_search>.

Thank you for deleting the portion of the bio that was not properly sources. I won't add it back until I've dug up the source for the dates of his schooling, etc. JendoCalryssian (talk) 15:38, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello-- no need to respond until you return. When you do, would you consider removing the notability tag from the Thomas Ashcraft page after you've had a chance to check out the independent sources on the talk page and in the previous comment? The notability tag on his bio links to WP:BIO, and I believe Ashcraft exceeds the criteria as he has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources (New York Times, WIRED, NASA blogs, &c).

I've also located a published date of birth and added that citation to the first sentence. (Here is the source: https://www.louiscomforttiffanyfoundation.org/2005/thomas-ashcraft) Thank you. JendoCalryssian (talk) 21:39, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

^{( Buttinsky)} Hi, JendoCalryssian, while JLAN is away, I didn't want the work to pile up so now that the sourcing issue has improved, I went ahead and fixed the orphan issue, did a bit of copy editing, and cleaned up some minor citation issues. Atsme 💬 📧 12:15, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Atsme! JendoCalryssian (talk) 15:35, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Karina Lombard

What evidence do you have that the file has been deleted? 48Pills (talk) 07:52, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

The red link? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:51, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Away

Just in case anyone's looking for me: I'll be mostly or completely away from the project for at least ten days from now, back at the end of the month. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:53, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Draft:NAVSARI AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY

Hello Justlettersandnumbers. I am just letting you know that I deleted Draft:NAVSARI AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which didn't fit the page in question. Thank you. GedUK  10:33, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Draft:Gary Williams (broadcaster)

Hello Justlettersandnumbers. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Gary Williams (broadcaster), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: that's not spammy at all, especially for a draft. Thank you. GedUK  10:49, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Vandalism in Antonio Rotta

thanks for repairing the vandalism in Antonio Rotta; just fyi: the same type of edits were made in de:Antonio Rotta (Maler) and es:Antonio Rotta, (and a bit even in it:Antonio Rotta) and also in the wikidata object. It turns out that some of the prizes can be supported by a quotation (from the Dizionario Biografico). I mention this to you here in case these incidents should be collected/reported. --Qcomp (talk) 20:56, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, Qcomp, this long-term nuisance rampages unchecked over dozens of Wikimedia projects, many of them in languages that he surely doesn't understand. It's about all we can do to keep him under control here and on Commons. Nothing, repeat nothing, that he says should be believed – he's apparently quite unable to distinguish fact from fantasy. Thanks for your help at that page! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:06, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

thanks for the explanation; what a nuisance! I'll see how far my language skills allow to make corrections. best, --Qcomp (talk) 21:30, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Bans on accounts Kangapoo and Ronald McDickhead

Hi Justlettersandnumbers. I first wanted to thank you for banning Kangapoo and Ronald McDickhead accounts. I believe these are sockpuppets along the original account Footybloke. I would request that this user be banned as they appear to be a involved in this sockpuppet scheme and is clearly WP:NOTHERE. I also want to let you know that I have opened a sockpuppet investigation on these accounts (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Footybloke). Thanks! Wikipedialuva (talk) 09:50, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Just an FYI/Update: looks like @Alexf has gotten to the ban of Footybloke so that's already been taken care of. Wikipedialuva (talk) 09:57, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Wikipedialuva. I've added Brisbanelionsforever to that investigation, looks like the same person to me. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:16, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Cattle (Bos taurus)

Hi Justlettersandnumbers,

About the reversal of my edit. I am adding to several articles links to their respective genomic data from the most important biological databases (Ensembl, UCSC Genome Browser, NCBI). I just thought adding these external links to the Cattle article would be a good idea and enrich a little the article on this topic. The changes specific to the two lines for "Commons categories" and "Wikispecies" were a mistake I forgot to undo in my edit. If you perhaps know of a more appropriate article to add these external links, please let me know. Perhaps on Bovine genome? Aarón Mayo (talk) 08:52, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Aarón Mayo! I'll be honest, I'm not really a fan of external links – if they say something useful then it's probably better to use them as references, and if they don't ... well, we don't need them, do we? That said, I agree that bovine genome would be a better place for those you added at cattle. As you know, if you're in doubt as to whether they're wanted there you can always ask on the talk-page. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:07, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

I see your point, thank you for the feedback. Regards, Aarón Mayo (talk) 13:25, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

St. Francis College

Hello,

I noticed u blocked a user for their edits to St. Francis College for failing to disclose payment. Want me to revert their edits tomorrow? I've added a template on the article + talk saying it may have been edited for payment Stephanie921 (talk) 22:49, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Stephanie921! Those edits were made in violation of our Terms of Use. Unlike for some other TOU violations, we don't (as far as I'm aware) have any policy that says that they must be reverted/removed, but it's certainly a reasonable thing to do, particularly if it does something to improve that page, which is ... well, not one of our best. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:25, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Hiroyasu Sasaki

This article has been on Wikipedia for fifteen years. Indeed at some point within the last few years, without prior warning and for an unknown reason, it was truncated down to a single sentence but now even that was not considered acceptable and you have decided it is to be removed entirely. I completely fail to understand the reasoning behind these decisions. If the article was so violating of Wikipedia's standards then why was it it allowed to remain on the site at all for more than a decade?

The gentleman in question has been an artist for more than 45 years, has toured the world as a performer, has made a television programme and was even head of Japan's mime studio and yet that somehow does not warrant sufficient "significance" here. A brief glance at Wikipedia's front page today shows that articles that have been considered of enough significance include those about sailing siblings who came 22nd in the Olympics, a Canadian opera singer and a stuffed toy. With this taken into account I am at a loss as to how and why such decisions are made here. I look forward to your explanation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MagikGimp (talk • contribs) 20:58, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, MagikGimp! As you can see by looking at it, I deleted Hiroyasu Sasaki with the rationale "A7: Article about a real person, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject". The article text was "Hiroyasu Sasaki (佐々木博康) is a Japanese mime artist". It was (quite rightly) nominated for speedy deletion by Premeditated Chaos, one of our best admins; and yes, you're right that some text was removed (in 2018) – that was done (quite rightly) because it was completely unsourced. You can read our policy on referencing for articles about living people here.

I wasn't around fifteen years ago, but I understand that in the distant past a good deal less attention was paid to our verifiability policy than it is now, and has been ever since I started editing in 2011. You've had fifteen years in which to add references, but appear never to have found the time to do so. If you'd now like to do that I'll willingly restore the article for you to work on. Let me know, OK? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:34, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

The original reference was an advert from a local arts centre which I doubt could have been accepted. The reference I provided in my message is what I was able to find now and should cover all the original points made. My attention was only drawn to my article because of a message from Wikipedia. 15 years may be a long time but if I am not told of problems I cannot be expected to baby sit it. I had no messages from Wikipedia before yours. Please restore the article. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MagikGimp (talk • contribs) 22:46, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately if the only references available are a short advert from a local arts center and the mime studio's own website, Sasaki likely does not meet the general notability guideline, and the article should remain deleted. In comparison, the articles you mention from the front page all have sufficient references to pass this standard - even the stuffed toy. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:44, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

MagikGimp, as PMC says,if those are the only references you can find then there's really no point in restoring the page – if I restore it as a draft it will have essentially no chance of being accepted, and if I restore it in mainspace it will inevitably be deleted. Nevertheless, if you still want me to I will do so. I imagine that there'll be coverage of this person in the Japanese-language sources, but that's not a language I speak. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 07:53, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Apologies for my delay. The advert was the only source I used back in 2007 but is the link from the Internet Archive I provided not suitable now?

As far as I am aware the gentleman's name is 佐々木博康 but I cannot find that anywhere in the Japanese Wikipedia.

I can improve the article by only including information from Japan Mime Studio's archived website if that is acceptable. MagikGimp (talk) 19:36, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Angela Bidoia

I think that you and I have filed duplicate SPIs concerning this account which is another account creating poorly sourced articles about Ottoman princesses. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:32, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Aargh! Robert McClenon, I duplicated the report filed by Sira Aspera – Twinkle doesn't give any warning that the report you're making already exists. I'm going to take another look at that account now – I think it's probably obvious enough that we don't need to wait for a CU result. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:28, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Ping fail, Robert McClenon. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:28, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Okay. I saw that something was odd, because Sira Aspera was showing for a little while as a blocked account, and the history shows that there was an incorrect sock block which has been lifted. I think that Twinkle doesn't warn about duplicate SPIs because they would rather allow SPI clerks to decide what is really a duplicate report and to do the merging of the reports. An automated system of sensing duplicate reports might occasionally flag as duplicates reports that are different enough so that a human should view them, such as where one user reports that B and C are socks of A, and another user reports that B and D are socks of A. I knew that it looked like another article about Ottoman princesses. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:58, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

COIN thread

I noticed that your recently blocked Jsxmarketingteam. Just as a heads up for if you have not seen this already, there's currently a COIN thread involving them and one other user that appear to have a similar COI. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 15:38, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Red-tailed hawk, I did actually see that. I saw you once, too, circling high over Rocky Mountain National Park in about 1981 – an unforgettable day, in an unforgettable place. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:43, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Draft CSD query

Hello Justlettersandnumbers, this article has since been created at Glen Logan and in fairness, is now fairly substantial. Are you honestly suggesting that an editor could still work on this in draftspace? Please look at the mainspace article and explain why the draft should remain cluttering up draftspace for another 3 months when there is actually no chance or need for further development? Your CSD decline rationale is somewhat baffling. Thanks. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:48, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Bungle, I don't see any valid reason to delete it – "article exists in mainspace" is not among our speedy criteria for drafts, where WP:A10 does not apply – but I've restored the tag for someone else to review. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:00, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, that's fine. If someone else concludes that it should not or does not need to be deleted through non-controversial maintenance (or any other valid criterion) then so be it. Makes no difference to me either way, but it seems a bit daft to keep the draft when it very clearly won't be worked on now (if the mainspace article was weak or questionable, there could be an outside chance of draft development, but not in this case). Thanks for the reply. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:11, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers is absolutely correct - G6 is not a valid criteria for the draft. In the future, please either redirect drafts like this to the related article or do nothing and let WP:G13 take it after 6 months. Primefac (talk) 12:12, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

@Primefac: Thanks for the response. As said, it really makes no difference to me if it stays or goes (I am not involved with either article or draft) but I am slightly bemused by the bureaucracy (excuse the pun joke on your account!) of not having what seems to be an avenue to clear it out when redundant. None the less, I don't want to ping Justlettersandnumbers with this anymore so a redirect will have to do! Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:21, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Regarding Sukh Ram Chaudhary

You deleted this page in 2019, i saw it was deleted but didn't understood the matter of deletion. Sukh Ram and Sukh Ram Chaudhary are different. You can check references in Chaudhary's article. Thanks ——— Poliiii (talk) 13:52, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Regarding Hard Jewelry

You deleted this page under the pretense that the company did not hold importance or significance. The company has 600k followers over their combined social medias. I was wondering if there were any recommendations on how to reinstate the article and keep it up. Thanks, Bendun20 (talk) 22:34, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

apostrophe "s"s for inanimate entities

Where did you come up with the rule that they're not permitted? (Not that I'm bothered by your edit.) I've been an editor for decades and never heard that. It sounds perfectly correct to say, "New York City's five boroughs" or "the restaurant's prices" -- I could go on and on. I'm not sure that London is inanimate anyway. :) If you stand by that rule, then you ought to change (not undo) my most recent edit to Titian. To me it makes no difference. Maurice Magnus (talk) 20:18, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Maurice Magnus! Inanimate may have been a poor choice of word – the distinction is really between personal and impersonal. Much of my mis-spent youth was spent teaching English as a second language. We were careful to teach people the different possessive constructions – John's leg, the leg of the table; Jane's head, the head of the river/table/company, etc. It's possible to find a few counter-examples – Heaven's sake, World's End (a pub in the King's Road, Chelsea), etc. – but in general it holds for correct idiomatic English English (which of course does not include modern BBC-style journalese). I edited, and did not undo, your edit to Titian. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:03, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch

Hello Justlettersandnumbers,

Thanks a bunch for your input on the page for Andre Soelistyo . Also appreciate you bringing it back to draft as an opportunity to correct my mistakes in there.

Will work on the errors in there. Cheers Vishwasthakkar (talk) 10:34, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Board of Trustees election

Thank you for supporting the NPP initiative to improve WMF support of the Page Curation tools. Another way you can help is by voting in the Board of Trustees election. The next Board composition might be giving attention to software development. The election closes on 6 September at 23:59 UTC. View candidate statement videos and Vote Here. MB 03:48, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Copyright ?

Hello !

May I please know what copyright violation lead to the deleting of the draft ? Can the page be restored to be perfected ? (Would take any advice into account)

Thanks ! Philippe Martin Art (talk) 18:16, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

ISBN

From ISBN Users' Manual https://www.isbn-international.org/content/isbn-users-manual/29:

The ISBN is divided into five elements, three of them of variable length; the first and last elements are of fixed length. The elements should each be separated clearly by hyphens or spaces when displayed in human readable form:

ISBN 978-92-95055-12-4 or ISBN 978 92 95055 12 4

Note: The use of hyphens or spaces has no lexical significance and is purely to enhance readability. Grimes2 (talk) 09:38, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Grimes2! Maybe so, but (a) it doesn't enhance readability but reduce it (I mean, is "rea-da-bi-li-ty" re-al-ly ea-si-er for you to read? or even "read da bi li ty"?) and (b) it seems that no-one does it (LoC, BL, NLA, NZ, India, WorldCat). Unless there's some project-wide consensus that this should be done, may I suggest that an editor with your very considerable capabilities could perhaps find something more productive to do? And that if there is such project-wide consensus, then it's a task that would be much better done by a bot so that our watchlists are not cluttered up with thousands of trivial edits? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:14, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

The 5 elements:

• GS1 element: 978 or 979
• Registration group element: country, 3 (Germany) List of ISBN registration groups
• Registrant element: publisher List of group-0 ISBN publisher codes
• Publication element: specific edition of a publication
• Check digit

Grimes2 (talk) 10:31, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Fahim Akhter

You wrote, declining the A7: decline WP:A7, article contains a claim of significance (the Civic Award from London Borough of Merton in 2011 for community contribution); NB this is a much lower bar than notability. I know. That claim wasn't in the article when I tagged it. Things are like that. Robert McClenon (talk) 12:05, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Robert! Well, I must admit I didn't check the history, but in this case it wouldn't have made any difference if I had. Yes, so it goes. Just my opinion: for a new page like that moving to draft is probably our best first option. Regards, thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:15, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Delete account

Hi would there be a way for me to delete my wikipedia account because I am not going to use it anymore and I don't want to have an account anymore I am leaving permanently Ldmfown (talk) 23:44, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Ldmfown! No, accounts are not deleted, but you can just abandon yours if you wish. You're free to clear your talk-page of anything that's been posted there. If you are sure you won't want to return, you can change your password to some string of random gibberish that you won't remember. Be well! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:05, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Ok thanks Ldmfown (talk) 08:15, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Schloss Fuschl

Why did you delete all my edits to the page on the Schloss Fuschl hotel? I sourced them all.Jamesluckard (talk) 01:49, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Jamesluckard! The sources you added were two press-releases (1, 2 and a dead link – that's why I described your edits as "ill-sourced". This being an encyclopaedia, we report facts that are verifiable by reference to reliable sources, and not events that may or may not happen in the future – please see WP:CRYSTAL. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:15, 13 September 2022 (UTC) (PS I've found an archived version of the Fuschlseeregion site, and will a little to the article based on it)

Rosewood Hotels has assumed management of the hotel, that's why I also added the link to their own website. There is no question of this happening in the future, it has happened now. The hotel closed two weeks ago and will be renovated before it reopens as a Rosewood property next year. I've used press releases for changes of ownership and management of hotels before. They're no less reliable than any other source, if they're from large, legitimate companies. There's an entire page here about how to cite a press release as a source. Template:Cite press release I'll find some additional travel news websites with the news about the closure and renovations. I'll also find more detailed links for the conversion to a hotel in the 1950s. I already found some German news articles giving the name of the man who oversaw much of the conversion, Carl Adolf Vogel. There's a German-language page for him here at Wikipedia.Jamesluckard (talk) 10:36, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you

I cannot thank you enough for the clean-up. I'm not sure how that image got past VRT at Commons. I had all the images aligned to the right because that is how I have always done it, but it was suggested by a peer reviewer to not do that, so I went ahead and staggered them. I guess it depends on individual reviewers but I am of the mind that sandwiching text between images is unacceptable, and you just helped validate my belief. The citation section had me baffled. When I tried removing it to allow for a much a neater reflist 30em, it added letters instead of citations. WTF? I'm also not familiar with any PAGs that state we cannot give weight to a more advanced study if it is a newer much wider study that contradicts older, smaller studies that were not scientifically based. Where is that policy or guideline? And the properly cited quotes that keep being reverted - what guideline says DONTLIKEIT is a valid reason for reverting them? Atsme 💬 📧 15:15, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

I don't think VRT ever saw it, Atsme; like probably all other uploads by the same user, it was lifted off the internet and uploaded to Commons, and no-one ever noticed until it ended up in the infobox of a highly visible article. The image positioning thing is a no-win – people with big screens are happy to have images on both sides, those like me with a high-resolution small screen and decades-old eyes want the text to be large enough to read and to not be confined to a narrow zig-zag strip down the middle of the screen. Reflist is the same – 30em, the default, gives me two narrow pillars of refs, NOT easy on the eyes; I've found 45em a compromise that doesn't upset too many people. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:07, 15 September 2022 (UTC) PS That page needs a lot of copy-editing; I'd do some of that if I was sure I wouldn't be treading on any toes.

Be my guest. As long as it doesn't change the context I welcome copy editing. Atsme 💬 📧 20:15, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	For all of your work in fixing the copyright problems associated with 2021 in Vatican City, thank you! Johnson524 (Talk!) 19:49, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Advocatus Sancti Sepulchri (Advocate of the Holy Sepulchre) ‎

Why have you deleted my article Advocatus Sancti Sepulchri (Advocate of the Holy Sepulchre) ? Dr. Grampinator (talk) 20:28, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Dr. Grampinator, I haven't deleted anything. Your page is at Draft:Advocatus Sancti Sepulchri (Advocate of the Holy Sepulchre); you copy-pasted content from there into this redirect, which was then nominated for speedy deletion; I simply reverted your cut-and-paste move, and then re-targeted the redirect. I suggest that you obtain some sort of consensus that the long text you have written is actually needed, and suggest Talk:Godfrey of Bouillon as a possible venue for that discussion. Just a thought: you might consider whether the use of so many long quotations is really justified. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:51, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Please respond to my query. Dr. Grampinator (talk) 20:37, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes, if you'll allow me enough time write an answer, I'll reply. Please be aware that you are not the only pebble on the beach. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:51, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Andrei Babushkin

Hi, Justlettersandnumbers. I see you have removed the article I have written, Andrei Babushkin, for unambiguous copyright infringement taken from a page which I cannot add due to it appearing on a Wikipedia blacklist. I would like to make it clear that no copyright infringement has been committed on my end. It seems as though this is a case of the opposite happening, where the third-party website instead copied the article I wrote, rather than myself copying from there. The webpage appears to be a Wikipedia mirror in multiple circumstances, so I will add it to the list of mirrors and forks. I hope you agree and are able to reinstate the page, as I believe it positively adds to this encyclopedia. Thanks! - Jmanlucas (talk) 02:47, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Agreed and done, Jmanlucas. I should have looked more carefully at the supposed source, my apologies for that. (BTW, you can mention a black-listed url in discussion by leaving off the initial https://). Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:51, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

No worries! Thanks for taking care of that promptly and thank you for the tip. Best wishes, Jmanlucas (talk) 04:42, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for merger of Template:Uw-copying-nosource

Template:Uw-copying-nosource has been nominated for merging with Template:Uw-copying. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Mathglot (talk) 01:34, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Deleted article Josi Neumann

From a sources point of view everything was fine with the article. It's not my fault if you can't comprehend the German language, could you reinstate the article? If there is a redirect issue could you fix this? Da Vinci Nanjing (talk) 20:04, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Da Vinci Nanjing: Currently, the state of the draft does not provide evidence that this individual passes WP:ATHLETE. Please provide more reliable sources (language doesn't matter as long as the source is proven reliable) and build up the article before submitting through the Submission Wizard. Jalen Folf (talk) 23:47, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Da Vinci Nanjing, Josi Neumann wasn't deleted, but moved to draft (and not by me). It is here. May I suggest that you submit it for review by an experienced AfC reviewer once you think it is ready? Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:11, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Big Al's Super Values

Hi there, could you please restore Big Al's Super Values? I'd like to work on the article and contest its speedy deletion.-- User:Namiba 13:09, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Namiba! I've restored it as you asked. If I may make a suggestion, I'd either add a good number of strong sources fairly quickly, or move it draft space – it clearly doesn't meet WP:NCORP as it stands. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:17, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for doing so. My plan is to move it into draft space.--User:Namiba 13:35, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Wishing Justlettersandnumbers a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 07:15, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Reverted on Valdostana

Please be sure to leave a note on the editors talk page whenever you revert them. WP:REVEXP. Is your thinking that it should be in both the goat breeds and the rare goat breeds category? I was under the impression that it should only be in the most drilled down category. Regards,ShaveKongo (talk) 23:56, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, ShaveKongo! I'm sorry to have been slow to reply here. I'd never seen that essay; I usually rely on my edit summary to explain why I made an edit. I've expanded that page a bit now.

As for the categories, I've now given that some thought, and honestly I think the best thing to do is just to empty Category:Rare goat breeds, which only has about four breeds in it anyway. 'Rare' in this context is a word with a wide range of meanings, not a clear criterion for inclusion (as, say, 'extinct' would be). From memory, of the 71 breeds listed here, all but a tiny handful are endangered to some extent; the same is true for the goats of many other European countries. So, unless you have any objection, (?) I'm going to go ahead and do that. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:44, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

That sounds good! I agree with that logic. Thanks for getting back to me. Regards, ShaveKongo (talk) 14:59, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Kris Kuksi

Should Kris Kuksi be nominated for deletion? I'm on the fence. Wes sideman (talk) 14:03, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Wes sideman! Can I answer that in two parts? Should it be deleted? – definitely, in my opinion, though I admit I haven't done a careful WP:BEFORE search. Would it be deleted? – I'm not so sure. That probably isn't much help to you, I'm afraid. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:53, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Well, of course if I nominate, I realize it might not be deleted. But given that you agree it should be deleted, I think I'm off the fence and will do some searching. The current sourcing is really weak. If I don't find better sources, I'll nominate it. Thanks for replying. Wes sideman (talk) 15:11, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi

Hi JLAN! Greetings from Venice, where I am staying a few days for work, and then off to Florence and Rome for fun. Hope you are doing well. DanCherek (talk) 11:29, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

That sounds good, DanCherek, you've chosen a very good time of year (my absolute favourite month). I hope you are not too late for the second-season moeche (soft-shelled crabs), another of my favourite things, to-die-for good – if that's your sort of thing. I'm quite envious, I haven't been there since before the lockdown. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:10, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll keep an eye out for it! DanCherek (talk) 19:17, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Neapolitan Mastiff

You just reverted my edit (writing as subject "The idea is that you discuss on talk first"). You clearly missed my thread on the talk page. The currently pictured dogs do not represent the breed standard for Neapolitan Mastiffs. I'm not interested in edit warring, so please restore it yourself. Thanks. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 17:55, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Draft:Aspark Systems

Hello Justlettersandnumbers. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Aspark Systems, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: G11 already declined. Thank you. Salvio 08:56, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Need help on Andre Soelistyo's page

I have added some more content to make it sound more neutral + added relevant citations based on your comments: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Andre_Soelistyo

I had resubmitted the page but was declined by @maxnacarta. However, when I asked her for input on her talk page; she claimed that the page was NOT declined by her.

So, should I undo and resubmit the page? Can you please help. Just trying to learn how things work out here.

Vishwasthakkar (talk) 07:20, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Vishwasthakkar, I can't help you with this. If I'd thought it was ready for mainspace I wouldn't have moved it to draft. Do you have some conflict of interest in relation to this person or his company? If so you should disclose it. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:27, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

TPA

Hello there. Back in June you blocked the user Graphicsdesignexperts for username violation and promotion, including on their talk page. Since your block, they have chosen to spam their talk page again. I'll leave it up to you as to whether talk page access should be revoked. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:09, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Drm310! Thanks for reverting that, and for letting me know about it (I sometimes miss stuff on my watchlist); and, while I'm at it, thank you for all the other good stuff you do here! I've done as you suggested – fortunately, some decisions are quite easy! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:23, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

On Consciousness

The mass content removed was for categorization. A number of tabs had philosophical tabs when they should’ve been categorized in philosophy of mind tab. Instead philosophical definitions and subjects were included throughout the article, including in the main and scientific tabs. If you care about the quality of this article, revert it back to my revision. You mentioned that the original information contained more sources, but the sources themselves should be categorized in the philosophical tabs. TheFactMinister (talk) 07:41, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

TheFactMinister, is there some part of "please discuss on talk which parts of it (if any) should actually be implemented" that is hard to understand? The talk-page of the article is the place to discuss this, not here. No idea what you mean by "tabs", by the way. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:52, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Oh, and please read about edit-warring and the BRD cycle. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:58, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

deletion from EMRS

You deleted from emergency medical retrieval service text which had references. Why? Imaginarium Monkey (talk) 22:06, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Question about edits you made to an article

Hello! I noticed a $ edit to a page that I had created and disclosed that I was a paid editor. Can you let me know whether my disclosure on my user page is not sufficient? Amphitwrite (talk) 17:24, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Yes, Amphitwrite, it is indeed insufficient. In my edit summary I referred to this edit, but the current version is still inadequate. Paid editors are required to "disclose their employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any paid contribution to Wikipedia", but you don't seem to have done that in full. Normal expectation is that you would also clearly specify which article or page each disclosure relates to. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:34, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing this out and clarifying for me. I updated my disclosure. Hopefully it is now adequate for expected disclosure? Amphitwrite (talk) 18:51, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, following up on this to make sure that my disclosure is now sufficient. Please let me know so I can correct it and have the $ edit removed, if possible. Thanks!! Amphitwrite (talk) 13:23, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Question

How do I gain consensus around a change? I noticed you reverted several edits I made, and wanted to know how to go about this process. Heh0002 (talk) 15:41, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for asking, Heh0002! Some of those edits were in areas where there seems to be quite a lack of international academic agreement – the systematic nomenclature of the horse, for example (please note that I'm not a taxonomist, so I may be quite wrong in saying that).

In the normal way of things, the way to seek consensus is to initiate a discussion on the talk-page of the article in question. But for these acutely thorny questions I'd suggest starting that discussion on the talk-page of the most relevant Wikiproject, with a note that you've started it to other projects that might be interested. So for the horse or donkey questions, probably WT:Equine with a note on WT:Mammals and WT:Farm. If after a month or so you haven't received much input, you could consider formulating your proposal(s) as a request for comment, which is a more formal consensus-seeking process. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:27, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks for letting me know. Heh0002 (talk) 19:29, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Seraglio

That was not a copy-paste nor a simple page move, but a very complex merger. That's why I had moved the page to a disambiguated title and then redirected it to the appropriate section of the merged page; it was unorthodox/unconventional, but necessary. The Wikidata items had been mixed up; this morning I spent hours on Wikidata to fix the problem at the root. When you undid my edits, you just deleted whole sections and disconnected the page from Wikidata. I restored the content and references you deleted from the page and connected it again now, but please be more careful and less prejudiced. Thanks, Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 18:02, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Est. 2021, that was a WP:cut-and-paste move – you moved Seraglio to Saray (harem), then cut the content from it with this edit and pasted it (or an edited version of it) into the redirect you'd just created at Seraglio‎ with this edit. That kind of move messes up the history and breaks the chain of attribution, required under the terms of our Creative Commons licence – the Seraglio page was showing as created by you, today, when in fact it has a long history to which many have contributed, me among them. Please don't do it again. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:28, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

I did not paste it. I merged the content of the other page into it. But I get your preoccupation about attribution. That's fine. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 01:14, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Your Sandbox

Your sandbox was submitted for AFC review, but did not and does not contain an article draft. It appears to contain templates. I think that the editor who submitted it for AFC review was playing around, and has been warned. I have reverted your sandbox to its state before the user messed with it.

You might consider semi-protecting your sandbox. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:53, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Robert! That sort of thing happens from time to time; he was probably trying to submit his own sandbox. The level of disruption doesn't seem high enough to need protection – it's not part of the encyclopaedia, and is fairly closely watched. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:31, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Castiglioni brothers

Good morning, I noticed that you have worked on the articles about Achille and Pier Giacomo Castiglioni. Please see comments on the talk page of both, as well as my recent submission of an article about the third brother Livio (rudimentary as it may be—I'm pretty new to this). Thank you, Cl3phact0 (talk) 10:45, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Cl3phact0, please excuse me for taking so long to reply to this – I looked at it but then forgot to actually do anything. As you've seen, I've accepted your draft, a sadly rare pleasure to be able to accept one so well sourced and well written – my thanks and compliments!

I've listed it on this page in your name; if it's of interest to you, you could also nominate it to appear on the main page through this process (I could give some help with that if you want to try it).

Unfortunately my involvement in the pages on the Castiglioni brothers and many related topics has been almost entirely to deal with problems caused by a very troublesome editor (see the section immediately below this). I'm afraid that at least some of the images you have used in good faith are uploads to Commons by various accounts of this editor, and some may end up being deleted. An example: the cool photo of Livio is claimed to have been published before 1927, but he's obviously a lot older than sixteen in it! If it's deleted it may be possible to upload it here under our fair-use criteria.

Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:32, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Time is elastic, no need for apologies! I'm grateful for your help. With regards to the various points you raise (in reverse order):

The Commons piece of the puzzle seems like a minefield (there are German stamps pasted all over Wikipedia, alas). I have no idea who user:Armanda892 is or if the source and author are legitimate. The claimed date of the photo is 1970, which makes sense (L.C. d. 1979). It would be discouraging if one result of writing the article is the deletion of the (yes, I agree, very cool) portrait of Castiglioni and its subsequent removal from the other Wikis where it is used. I would find that very disheartening, in that my intent was to help underscore the significance of the third Castiglioni brother's contribution, not erase him. Don't think I'm ready to wander back into the Commons rabble just yet (being neither an IP lawyer nor a masochist, and rather enjoying this side of the Wikiverse to boot), so I guess I'll (probably) just sit back and see how this plays out.

The Smithson/Lierna case seems curious indeed, but also a bit out of my depth. I'll watch with interest from the shallows though. (The Castiglioni brothers were bloody cool. I'm sorry that your involvement has been more on a technical level, but hope you enjoy what they did–as I obviously do.)

As for nominations, listings and whatnot: thank you for the latter; regarding the former, perhaps best to wait until the article is a bit more refined and we're sure that the portrait (which, at this point, is about 50% of the interest and 100% of "cool" factor of the article) doesn't vanish in a cloud of punctilious electrons. (I will very likely hit you up for that help at some point though, if the offer stands.)

Thanks again, Cl3phact0 (talk) 21:36, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

All good – yes, I'll be sorry if that image is deleted on Commons, but I can't see why it shouldn't be uploaded here as fair use in that case (see e.g., Ida Kar or R.B. Kitaj for examples). My knowledge of Italian copyright law is very slim, but I think there's a kind of short copyright (25 years?) for routine photos without artistic merit, so this might well be kept even if it's quite possible that the (unidentified) photographer is still alive. About the DYK thing: the one thing you can't do is sit back – you have a week from the creation of the article (i.e., today) to get your nomination in. And yes, happy to help, but your call of course – I did it for a while and then lost the urge. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:05, 5 December 2022 (UTC) PS I will, with pleasure, take a look at what you've done for the other two brothers as well.

Heads-up and Double trouble: A second photograph just got the nominated for "speedy deletion"! This time it's the family portrait of the mother and father with the very young Castiglioni brothers (and an unidentified sister) taken over a century ago. What are they smoking over there in the Commons? Signed, Disheartened (to quote a song)

PS: Noted re: nomination. Will sleep on it.

PPS: I didn't do much with Achille and Pier Giorgio [sic] articles. Room for improvement. They did an awful lot in their lives (and beyond) though. Cl3phact0 (talk) 22:23, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Correction: I actually added a fair bit to Achille Castiglioni article. (Not too much on Pier Giacomo though.) Cheers Cl3phact0 (talk) 22:33, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Slept on the nomination question and would like to pursue this if it's possible to reinstate the photograph that's been delinked/deleted and somehow ensure that the "cool" portrait stays. To this end, I will read the link you shared and follow-up. In the meantime, any advice or insider's wisdom you are willing to share would be appreciated. Cheers Cl3phact0 (talk) 21:58, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

PS: There is another photo which appears to be from the same sitting as the deleted family portrait, though I am loathe to substitute it for fear the same outcome. (Also, still pretty miffed that I may have wasted my time writing the article if only for dei Castiglioni to get caught-up in the Matter of the Lierna Sock—with which they clearly had nothing to do.)

Well, yes, Cl3phact0, that is the problem with all kinds of long-term abuse in this project – it can seriously mess up the efforts of good-faith editors to improve the encyclopaedia. In my opinion, that doesn't mean that we should let it run amok and unchecked; in fact the more we do to stop it, the lower the probability of it happening again. Perhaps I should have warned you about the troubled history when your first edits showed up on my watchlist, rather than just checking that you weren't him and then letting you get on with it; if so, I apologise.

About the DYK thing: the place to create the nomination is here – it's mostly straightforward. You don't (?) need to do a review, you should be exempt from that as a new participant. The tricky bit is writing a 'hook' that says something interesting about the article and also attracts reader attention. It might be something like " ... that the Boalum light designed by Livio Castiglioni was still in production fifty years after it was first produced"; you'll have your own (better) ideas (one of the reasons I stopped doing these nominations was that I wasn't very good at finding a good 'hook'). The most important thing is that the facts in the hook are solidly sourced. I'm happy to comment or advise on anything you put forward, ping me if that would be helpful. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:50, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

I've been in contact with the Commons editor who removed the tainted photo, and I sincerely hope that they may be willing to help. Please let me know if there is anything else I might do to resolve the matter in a way that is satisfactory to anyone else who may be concerned by the Smithson/Lierna problem. It just seems pointless to proceed with a DYK nomination now, as the article has an association with a problematic editor—inadvertent (and unfortunate) as it is. Again, thanks for your help. Cheers Cl3phact0 (talk) 23:40, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

About the DYK thing, a few possible hooks might be:

"...that in 2014 the city of Milan in Italy named a street after the designer Livio Castiglioni and his brothers Achille and Pier Giacomo (Via Fratelli Castiglioni)."

or a permutation of your suggestion;

"... that the Boalum light designed by Livio Castiglioni gets its unusual name from the combination of Boa constrictor and lume, an Italian word for light."

or (though maybe not as good);

"...that the Italian designer Livio Castiglioni was the elder brother of Achille and Pier Giacomo Castiglioni, and that all three were sons of sculptor Giannino Castiglioni."

Worth a go or a false start right off the blocks? (Still concerned that the photograph kerfuffle and the resulting peppering of the Talk page with file deletion nomination messages, etc. are not going to win this article much favour out there in the Wiki-verse. )

Cheers Cl3phact0 (talk) 17:08, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Nice way to start the day: the portrait has been restored! Thanks, Cl3phact0 (talk) 05:27, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Cl3phact0, once again I've been slow to reply, my apologies. I've been busy in RL and have had little time for WP – and that includes today, which is the last in which you can start a DYK nomination. My advice on the hooks: start with one, then add any others you want as 'alt'. Your suggestions all seem good, and you can expect advice on them during the review process. It's a strict condition of the process that the hook be directly supported by a citation. I'm sorry, but I'm out of time now. Good luck! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:40, 12 December 2022 (UTC) PS It doesn't affect our page, but the it.wp article on Livio was created by the same long-term nuisance editor; I've checked it for copyright violations (another problem with this editor) and found nothing of concern.

Thanks, and noted re: it:wp. Be in touch. Cheers Cl3phact0 (talk) 11:14, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello Justlettersandnumbers, I've added a photograph to Commons of a (rather nice) marble Via Fratelli Castiglioni plaque on said Milanese street. I also wanted to put this on the DYK nomination page itself, but couldn't figure out the correct protocol (the seemingly obvious place to add it is above the "Please do not edit above this line..." statement—thus it would appear out of my purview in this case). Any guidance you're able to give would be, as always, much appreciated. Thanks for your time, Cl3phact0 (talk) 07:29, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Done that, Cl3phact0, and also fixed the syntax for the 'cool' portrait (it just needed to be the filename rather than the url); I don't know if it's "OK" to propose a choice of two images, but I'm sure we'll soon be told if it isn't. And yes, do please go ahead and remove the expand-Italian template from the article – I used to think those were a good idea, but they seem mostly to act as an invitation to translate masses of unsourced content and I no longer place them unless the source page is really good – and anyway, you've already done that job, and very nicely too! I thought about reviewing your DYK, but since I accepted the draft I prefer to wait for someone else to do that. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:01, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

LTA?

Hi Justlettersandnumbers, is 31.190.195.83 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) Alec Smithson? DanCherek (talk) 20:46, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Dan! Curious you should ask – the post right above yours is about one of his pet topics (but not from him). I'm usually immediately sure when I see one of his socks (most recently 87.4.152.92 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), but here I'm not. The geolocation is right, the manic obsession with Lierna is entirely characteristic, but the language doesn't quite ring right.

OK, strike that, I've just looked at this, not a shadow of a doubt. Good catch! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:14, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Great, thanks! I hadn't even thought to check global contributions. DanCherek (talk) 21:44, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

He's all over everywhere, like flies on ... sheep. It's particularly concerning for the smaller and more vulnerable projects, but even Italian wp has pretty much given up on trying to stop him, I think. I've blocked but not requested a glock, going to get some sleep. Regards (and, yes, thanks for all you do!), Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:50, 24 November 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) 01:12, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Lars Taylor G13 deletion

I requested deletion of draft Draft:Lars Taylor because the actual content has not been editted in more than 6 months., but you declined it. The only edits to it after April 2022 are admin related such as UPE tag added and another request from me to delete for G7. These should not count towards an actual edit. Please delete the draft.Starpunk22 (talk) 19:10, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

No, Starpunk22, our policy is clear: any human edit, however trivial (other than the addition of a speedy deletion tag), restarts the six-month clock. The details are here. Sorry, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:29, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Abierto de Polo

Links could be removed manually so I fixed some synthax errors. Fma12 (talk) 18:04, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Well, Fma12, why then did you bother to re-add them after I'd removed them? Anyway, glad to hear you're going to fix them now. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:07, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

When you erased the links, you also undid other changes I had made (like the synthax on the table, as I told you above), all in the same edit. By the way, does MOS:OL apply to sports tables? So there is a common practise to repeat wikilinks on them. Fma12 (talk) 18:13, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, Fma12, the MOS applies in its entirety everywhere, in article space at least. And yes, MOS:OL is much ignored in sporting articles. That page had just been cleared of the excessive links by a helpful editor, and now you've (twice) added some of them back. Would you kindly fix your mistake? Thank you.

Oh, and by the way: another bit of policy that applies throughout the project is the requirement that content be verifiable by reference to published reliable sources. Most of the content in that page is unsourced, and is liable to be removed at any time. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:05, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

I don't have any problem to remove the duplicate links, I'll fix it. Regarding the unsourced content, the article has been edited by several users and to be sincere, I don't care too much about that issue. In fact I use to cite sources every time I edit an article. Fma12 (talk) 21:41, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done (link) Fma12 (talk) 21:44, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

TPA

Hi there. Could you please revoke talk page access for an account you blocked, Terrabyt01? They've now spammed their talk page twice since the block. Thanks. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:47, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

I've done that, Drm310, thanks for drawing my attention to it – and indeed for all the good stuff you do. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:39, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

User talk:Asher Heimermann

Your undeletion of that page accidentally reversed a prior deletion from 2007 in addition to your own deletion. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:05, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Pppery! Will go and fix that – as if I wasn't already feeling dumb enough for having deleted it for an inapplicable reason. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:57, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

To everyone and anyone who watches or visits this page

Giovanni di Paolo, close-up detail of the cloak of the principal figure in La Pala di Staggia ("the Staggia altarpiece"), painted in about 1470 and formerly in the church of San Silvestro in Staggia Senese, now in the Pinacoteca Nazionale di Siena

To all fellow-editors, page-watchers, friends and colleagues: I wish you every kind of peace and happiness during the coming holiday season and in the year to come – dare we hope for a year with fewer wars and less global warming? For family reasons I'm likely to be on Wikipedia only infrequently, if at all, for the next week or so. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:39, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Bless you! Thank you, and I also wish you and yours a happy holiday and a wonderful new year. Fewer wars and less global warming would definitely be good - along with less conflict on WP. Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:19, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

	Merry Christmas, Justlettersandnumbers
	Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. May this Holiday Season bring you and yours nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 TT me 20:07, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Gabriel Clement

Please i believe removing That page was not fair please help us review and correct us by telling us what went wrong with it 102.89.23.181 (talk) 09:25, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

You can see the reason for deletion here – there was nothing to indicate how this person is significant enough to have an article in Wikipedia. What do you mean by "us"? – how many of you are there? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:16, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

Whatever you celebrate at this time of year, whether it's Christmas or some other festival, I hope you and those close to you have a happy, restful time! Have fun, Donner60 (talk) 00:16, 23 December 2022 (UTC)}}

Donner60 (talk) 23:27, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Ethical Perspectives

Hi. This sort of thing always bugs me, but not sure how to deal with it. The "Abstracting and indexing" section is simply cut and paste from the source, without attribution. However, not sure how it could be paraphrased. Should I remove it as a copyvio or tag it as needing a citation? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:14, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Onel5969, it bugs me too – it isn't even accurately (re-)formatted. But it's just a list of names and acronyms, with no creative content that I can see, so there's no copyright concern and no particular need for attribution (nor is there any harm in adding an extra citation, of course). I've no idea why we need to list the databases that index a journal – we don't list the libraries that hold, or the bibliographies that list, a particular book, do we? The page has no independent sources, and with such a low impact factor the journal may perhaps not be notable, I wouldn't know. Overall, I think academic journals deserve our coverage a lot more than many of topics on which we have extensive articles. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:19, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Southern Yellow cattle

Hello, Justlettersandnumbers,

Please leave a redirect when you move a long-standing article so that our bots can correct all of the redirects to point to the new page title. Or, alternatively, check "What links here" and correct all of the redirects to the old page title after you complete the page move. This page move left 10 broken redirects so I've created a temporary redirect from the old page title to the new one until the bots can correct all of the double redirects. Thanks! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:45, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Liz! Do you mean that the bot can't fix the redirects if there isn't a page at the former title? That seems to be a glitch; it's certainly unusual, but there can be reason to not leave a redirect when moving a page – as for example in this case, where there is no trace whatsoever of the former title ever being used anywhere but in Wikipedia or its mirrors. I did of course check the 'what links here' page after the move, and fix the one non-redirect link. Happy New Year! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:13, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

== Lierna (again) ==

Hello Justlettersandnumbers, hope you are well. Came across some instances of Lierna being referenced in unexpected places. (See Wikidata for Livio, Achille, and Pier Giacomo Castiglioni – the poor follows ought be left in peace, alas.) Not sure if this data is collected by some automated process or manually entered, but some of it seems dubious. Though this might be aligned with your interests. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 07:22, 16 April 2023 (UTC) (Sorry, left message here by mistake.-- Cl3phact0 (talk) 07:28, 16 April 2023 (UTC))