User talk:Racconish

Old discussions are archived here.

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Racconish. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Picture keeps getting deleted even though attribution given

@Racconish:, what is the exact reason that https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Highway_of_Tears_Corridor.png gets deleted? It takes effort to attempt to properly attribute this that I have to redo each time without an accurate explanation. The history log at Highway of Tears says that it fails the license review, but this is in error because there are similar images in wiki commons that are allowed to stay. Here is a similar page using a photo derived using the exact same mapping site OpenStreetMap, and the attribution/license that they use is the same one that I used for the image that was deleted in error: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:OpenStreetMap_homepage_2018_en.png

Can you please specifically tell me why you keep deleting this image due to licensing?

NigelFox 00:54, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

@Nfox24: the first version was described as own work ; the second had no link to the Openstreet source page and failed for this reason automatic license review ; finally, the 1st and 2nd versions were graphically different from the current 3rd version which is acceptable. I have undeleted the whole history and license reviewed the last version. I hope this helps. — Racconish ^💬 06:49, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube Copyvio?

Hi Racconish, could you please have a look at this file : [1]. Thanks.--DDupard (talk) 07:37, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DDupard: license reviewed. Is that what you ask ? — Racconish ^💬 08:22, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Racconish for reviewing the licence, I trust then, it's legitimate.--DDupard (talk) 08:40, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Racconish, sorry to bother you again, since things are progressing on the subject, is it possible to extract a single frame of OdC (in addition) out of that upload: [2] and how to proceed if ok, also what text or burble to include. Thanks.--DDupard (talk) 10:26, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Use the template extracted from on the target file and extracted image on the source file. Let me know if you need further help. — Racconish ^💬 10:53, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok Racconish, I proceeded to the upload, (without sharpening image), please double check [3] and [4]. Thanks——DDupard (talk) 16:15, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done — Racconish ^💬 16:47, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Montsoreau

Hello Racconish, an article that I have mainly written has been nominated for Good Article by Suavemarimagno in march 2019. Would you mind to review it? or to give an advice for having it reviewed now as I am much available to working on it? Best, --Philippe49730 (talk) 12:01, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Philippe49730: apologies, I am currently on a wikibreak with limited availabilty for such a review. Best wishes nevertheless. — Racconish ^💬 12:12, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Thank you very much for your answer. Have a good wikibreak. Very best, --Philippe49730 (talk) 12:15, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New Subject Entry

Hello Raccinish. Upon research, I noticed your edits for a past article on Marisol Deluna from several years ago. We studied her during a business school course and in doing so, I obtained verifiable citations for a Wiki entry from our case study assignment. I would like to share my research for an article inclusion.

Can you take a look at the first attempt in my sandbox entry? I realize the citations require formatting and clean up, but an article is taking shape and am navigating my way in learning the Wiki ways through asking for assistance. Thank you in advance. Emma EMETIB MAILLIW (talk) 18:08, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi EMETIB MAILLIW, I suggest you should stick to reliable high circulation press sources, avoiding local news, corporate magazines and blogs. Good luck, — Racconish ^💬 04:54, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for allowing me to lean and the luck! Suggestions taken. I am referencing a mix of citations and keeping the entry simple with the assistance of Treehouse Wiki editors. The subject has been inducted into the San Antonio Women's Hall of Fame and has an educational foundation in Texas since the last entry, so some of the press has a local slant. Getty has over 1K images! Emma EMETIB MAILLIW (talk) 05:34, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Steamboat Bill, Jr.

Good to see you still around. Just wanted to let you know that another movie you uploaded to Wikipedia is nominated at Featured Pictures. Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Steamboat Bill, Jr.

Not sure if I asked you before if you ever thought about nominating some of these to FPC. GamerPro64 04:38, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks GamerPro64, I will keep it in mind. — Racconish ^💬 12:20, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process

Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Portez ce vieux whisky au juge blond qui fume

On 15 August 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Portez ce vieux whisky au juge blond qui fume, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Portez ce vieux whisky au juge blond qui fume is the French version of The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Portez ce vieux whisky au juge blond qui fume. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Portez ce vieux whisky au juge blond qui fume), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft page question

Hello Racconish, you kindly replied to my inquiry last September. I only wanted to ask if my draft page about film illustrator David Russell has been correctly submitted for a review, or if I need to do something to submit it again. I created this draft and requested a review a year ago and I am really concerned that nobody is actually looking at my draft and it will never be reviewed for posting. Please help. Thank you, MashaNjikecat (talk) 05:48, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Njikecat: draft review is a slow process and you have to be patient. In the mean time, you can improve your draft. In particular, for ref 1, give a link ; for ref 2 and 3, give a page ; use The Making of Star Wars: Return of the Jedi (2013) and Star Wars Return of the Jedi, the Illustrated Edition (1983) as references with page number instead of just citing them. You may also consider using some of these sources. — Racconish ^💬 10:25, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again, Racconish. I appreciate your suggestions.

I just received a note that the article was rejected because it doesn't have enough published secondary sources to confirm noteworthiness of David Russell. I am not clear about which sources would be considered secondary and not primary. I will add more citations of newspaper and magazine articles, interviews, articles in books about the art of storyboarding which also mention David Russell, a major TV news special about the master class presented by David Russell in Europe, and online interviews and articles about him. Would any of that be considered secondary and not primary source? I don't understand how that would not be sufficient confirmation that he is noteworthy. He is the only storyboard artist that has received this much international media coverage. Storyboarding is a highly specialised but little publicised artform, which is why the amount of publicity written about Russell is exceptional. If the media think he is worthy of this much coverage, why would Wikipedia think otherwise? So I will add sources as you suggested and resubmit the article.

With sincere thanks, NjikecatNjikecat (talk) 05:46, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Njikecat: see WP:N, WP:PSTS, and try to use the above sources. — Racconish ^💬 07:05, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated advice, Racconish. I will let you know when I complete my edit and resubmit the page. Masha — Preceding unsigned comment added by Njikecat (talk • contribs) 04:13, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, I followed your advice and added many new sources to the draft. I would greatly appreciate it if you would take a quick look and let me know if this resolves the issue of secondary sources, and if the formatting is okay on the sources. Many thanks again Njikecat (talk) 08:01, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you added a lot of sources, but you did not use them as references to verify statements of the article. — Racconish ^💬 12:32, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:45, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request edit assistance for Daphne Guinness article

Hi. I see you’re a member of the Fashion WikiProject - I’ve made some proposals to update the article about Daphne Guinness, posted here Talk:Daphne Guinness#Request Edits for February 2023. Because I have a conflict of interest, I can’t do these edits myself. Could you have time to look at these and consider? Thank you very much.YhSA99b3tTnCnLdr (talk) 19:13, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Restoring old revision of File:PassionofJoanofArc.jpg

Film is now in PD in the US, so i think the original upload should be restored. --Mayimbú (talk) 08:33, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Featured picture scheduled for POTD

Hi Racconish,

This is to let you know that File:The Lost World (1925).webm, a featured picture you uploaded, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for February 2, 2025. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2025-02-02. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 19:05, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Lost World is a

Directed by Harry O. Hoyt

Recently featured:

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:28, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]