User talk:Justlettersandnumbers/old3

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

Joel Selanikio Edits

Hi, I saw that you removed significant portions of the article on Joel Selanikio due to some citation and user edit issues. The current article, however, references him primarily as a physician, but the original outlined his role as a technology company CEO, as related to the awards still listed on the page. I was wondering your thoughts on why those references were removed as it changes the meaning of the page in its current form. Thanks!  Chatfielda (talk)  18:20, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

BIS Hanoi redirected link? Huyennguyen243

Hello, I hope this message finds you well. I have created an article for British International School Hanoi since August however my article has been continuously redirected to British Vietnamese International School Hanoi at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Vietnamese_International_School_Hanoi. A volunteer on Wikipedia suggested me to talk to you about this. I'd like to explain that the two schools are separate and have differentiation in curriculum & student body although we are owned by the same company and locate in Hanoi. Could you please help to undo the redirect the BIS Hanoi article to BVIS Hanoi's one? Any further information please let me know. Thank you.

Article missing? Antonino da Patti

Greetings, FYI at Talk:Antonino da Patti Revision history - the article tab is red linked. Unable to find the article. If article was deleted, should talk go as well? I'm just reporting here as I don't know how to correct. Regards,  JoeHebda (talk)  16:11, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, JoeHebda, and thanks for picking that up. I'd gone and moved the talk page instead of the article itself, not the first time by any means that I've made that particular dumb mistake (I really wish there was a pop-up warning when you try to do that). It's fixed now. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:23, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Il Primo Libro delle Canzoni

AWB applies automatic formatting fixes to an article independently of the specific edit that a user is making — so if it made bad formatting changes of its own while I was in the process of applying the {{uncategorized}} tag, that's a software bug that needs to be addressed by AWB's programmers, and not a personal error on my part. And the "uncategorized" tag has to be there if the article doesn't have any categories on it, so you don't get to dismiss that as a "useless" edit that nobody should have been making at all — there were almost 1,500 articles on the uncategorized articles list yesterday, of which I didn't even manage to get through half so there are still over 800, so one software bug on one article does not require me to forego AWB and manually tag them all as uncategorized one by one. And further, if you're not familiar with how AWB works, there's no way for me to have "seen I screwed up", as you so angrily put it; it does not show you the "after" view of a page after you've applied an edit, but rather moves on to the next page in the batch. So I'm sorry it happened, but none of it represents me screwing up or acting irresponsibly. If there's a bug in AWB's "automated cleanup" programming, that's for AWB's programmers to fix. Bearcat (talk) 16:29, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Polli

Hello Justlettersandnumbers, thanks for your kind message. :-) That user has been blocked on it.wiki as well and we worked on his page too. Thanks for remembering me so kindly the policies about pages' chronology, I know them, since I am sysop on it.wiki since 2006. :-)) But this is a different case. I will try to explain it with my English. At the beginning, I published that text in Polli Corporation, but after a while I discovered that Polli Corporation was a different company (even if not notable and a vandalism), so I copied my text in Polli (company), a new page. Please note that it was a new and rewritten page, created from scratch. :) The page Polli Corporation should be deleted, while the other one is totally new, therefore - in this case - it is not correct to keep the chronology of a vandalism, and I am actually the first user who wrote that text. Hope it helps. Cheers. :) --Lucas (talk) 03:11, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Guy ropes

Heyo Justlettersandnumbers and thank you for your comments. I have been away from the process and I am not sure about what happens next. I was wondering if your queries were resolved, could you restore the tick per Ashorocetus' review for its promotion? I saw something similar at Template:Did you know nominations/Jochen Rindt and thought I should message you. Regards, Yash! 04:53, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Diana

Separated at birth?

Hi Jlan. I am back from yoga class and ready to start working in Diana, Princess of Wales. If you could tell me which diffs you have cleared that would be perfect. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:18, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Diannaa, I did the last seven on my list (# 104–110), and have already removed them from there. The diffs from 111 on shouldn't need checking because that's where I optimistically rolled it back to when I first identified the problem. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:27, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I am going to work on it for a couple hours, so stay off for now. Thanks so much for your help. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:28, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

I am stopping for now. I have completed to and including #85 on your list. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:33, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Wow! That's heroic – and the end is in sight. I'll try to do some more tomorrow, working on the other large project in my sandbox at the moment. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:38, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

I have finished the rest of the diffs and will be revision-deleting back to the diff about the coat of arms that we talked about. Thanks again for your help with clean-up of this article. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:25, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

JMO

I smell a sockpuppet: [1]. Just my opinion. Montanabw^(talk) 00:38, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

On ethnicity of Giovanni Battista Pittoni

I did revert back to Italian. See talk page for artist. No one denies the truth of your assertion, but the consensus has been to call such persons "Italian", and I think there are good reasons for that. Sydney Joseph Freedberg in his volume, titled "Painting in Italy, 1500-1600", discusses painters from Milan to Venice to Naples. The same is true for Rudolf Wittkower in his Pelican History of Art, "Art and Architecture Italy, 1600-1750". GB Pittoni is mentioned in page 91. Both these are major works in the topic by major scholars. They see a role for using the term "Italian" to describe painters from these regions in these eras. If this is still very contentious, the prior debate would have to be re-opened.Rococo1700 (talk) 19:11, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

New sock of "Alec Smithson"

Will you report "Max"? I'm off PC, and just with tablet this goes badly..--Yopie (talk) 21:03, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, just doing it now. It couldn't be much more obvious, could it? We should mention this to Lucas too, as he's made a similar account on Italian wp, Utente:Max Araldi. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:08, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

@Yopie: Thanks, is there any ip check (check user, I mean) to see? Thanks! --Lucas (talk) 02:12, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Lucas, Max was blocked on behavioural similarity. Yopie filed an SPI but didn't request checkuser. Regards (to both), Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:32, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

@Yopie: Ok, it was too old to check (I thought there could be multiple ips), so it's a duck. Thank you both. --Lucas (talk) 09:34, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Lucas, checkusers won't link IPs to registered accounts – at least, not publicly. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:42, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

I am not used to ask for a check directly here on en.wiki and I do know that the policy (at least should) apply interwiki, but as you can see "sometimes" it happens. ;) In any case, a checkuser may say "yes, there is a postive link with 3 ips that are trying to avoid the block". --Lucas (talk) 17:14, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

AFIK as former CsArbComm member, this is possible for a checkuser, but you must explicitly demand it. But they dont like it and usualy they prefer behaviour check. With "Alec" we not need it, because his poor English and obsession with Natoli.--Yopie (talk) 00:57, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

David W. Allan

I see you were the one to strip the David_W._Allan page. David is my father. We spent a lot of time creating that page, with references, etc. I can't fathom why you stripped it. He is a world-leading scientist. What are you? IEEE is doing a feature issue on his Allan Variance soon. http://www.ieee-uffc.org/publications/tr/special-issue-variance-50th.asp

I see that older versions of that page here are unavailable to restore to. Why?

It's this kind of nonsense that spurred me 12 years ago to start http://PESWiki.com, the best exotic free energy website in the world. I can't stand the kind of idiocy that occurs here at Wikipedia, personified by what you just did to the article about my dad. A lot of people worked on that page, then you stripped it, for no good reason.

You should be banned from Wikipedia, but you're probably one of its key administrators.

How do we restore that page? How do we banish you?

-- Sterlingda (talk) 00:46, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

@Sterlingda: The page will not be restored. The content was removed and old revisions deleted due to copyright violations. (See the log.) — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:55, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Terreña

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Parnall

Thanks for deleting all of the copyvio stuff on Parnall. I am amazed it could have been undetected for over 13 years. Is it OK to remove some of the empty sub heads etc or should I wait until an admin has done the deletion request? — Rod ^talk 16:35, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Rodw, and thank you so much for noticing that copyvio and listing it – kudos! You should feel free to edit the remaining skeleton of the page in any way you like (apart from, obviously, sticking back any of the copyvio!), there's no need to wait. As for the age, this has set a new record for me – version 169,000-odd of Wikipedia! It might also have been the oldest text without any significant references in Wikipedia, but who knows? I wish you luck with it. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:11, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Over my head

If you can pop over to Međimurje horse and help Tsaag Valren, she's got a project going where she's trying to get the horse articles consistent on wikidata, and apparently we have two articles on the same horse breed -- I think. The language issues are over my head, and Tsaag is very active on French wiki, but she values help with her English, so I thought that you might be able to be of more help to her on this project than I am. Montanabw^(talk)|GO THUNDER! 04:52, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Johannes Engel

— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 12:02, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Thank you for your continued investigations into textual copyright violations such as at Anu Malhotra. I'm sure you know, but I'll chip in, that it is very much appreciated. BethNaught (talk) 21:50, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, BethNaught, for your kind words! For a variety of reasons I've been able to do very little recently. The backlog is completely out of hand, but I'm hoping to chip away at it a bit more often from now on. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:05, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Bruce Silverstein Gallery

Justlettersandnumbers, Can you please clarify your ongoing issue with the updates being made to the Bruce Silverstein Gallery page? Your comments from the previous edits: "Not an improvement; this page is about the gallery, not a person; copyright violations, too." If you look at other gallery wiki pages (i.e. Pace MacGill) the same format is being used and you do not take issue with this? The gallery owner of any gallery is a large part of the historical and contemporary program of the gallery. Might you suggest ways for the BSG page to be built in a more appropriate manner?

207.38.161.165 (talk) 03:55, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi! By far the best way forward for that page is for editors with a close personal or professional connection with the gallery to keep strictly away from the article and refrain entirely from editing it, but instead propose any desired change on the talk page, Talk:Bruce Silverstein Gallery. There are instructions on that page on how to do that. Please note that, if the WSJ says the gallery was "in a 500-square-foot studio on the first floor of a townhouse on West 22nd Street in New York", you cannot simply copy that into Wikipedia; that is copyright violation, and is not tolerated here (it's also against the law). I agree that our article on Peter MacGill needs attention. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:29, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Wondering about

a warning your placed on User talk:SNAAAAKE!! about content that had been in Kaufering concentration camp. I know that particular editor is blocked and could not find his name in the article's editing history (was thinking it could have been one of his socks?) Just curious about how the warning ended up on that user talk page. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 16:17, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Shearonink! The copyvio at Kaufering concentration camp was added by user HanzoHattori in 2007. User talk:HanzoHattori redirects to User talk:SNAAAAKE!!, so that's where I left the notice. I haven't looked at the sock history, though someone will need to if there turns out to be any pattern of copyright violation here. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:25, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

I figured it was something like that - what a tangled socking web. Thanks for answering my query, I'm always curious about how Wikipedia works. Cheers, Shearonink (talk) 16:44, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For your work at Bobby Lockwood following the copyright violations - thanks. :-) Ches (talk) 13:28, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Just letting you know I removed the circumflex accent from the word "role" - there shouldn't be one on that word. Best, --Ches (talk) 17:31, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Er, are you quite sure about that, Chesnaught555? Here are about 10 000 results on Google Scholar which seem not to be aware of it. Perhaps you'd like to undo that edit? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:51, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Ah, my apologies. I will undo that. I didn't think the English language had circumflex accents. Still, my apologies, I'll revert it. --Ches (talk) 17:54, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Well, TIL. clpo13_(talk) 18:01, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Il Primo Libro delle Canzoni

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Just edited addition to the FIT article

Following your very good suggestions, I have sourced my post and placed it where it may more appropriately fit with other dates and foundational information about the college.Andesite39 (talk) 16:21, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Green-legged Partridge

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:01, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Copyright?

Does this edit constitute a copyright violation? Hawaan12 (talk) 04:35, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Sorry to have been slow to reply, Hawaan12. I see why you ask, but I don't see any real copyvio problem there. However, as an aside, I don't think the Beckett and Phenomenology source is an appropriate one – it's discussing Beckett's language, not the definition of infantilisation. That should come from a text on that subject. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:04, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Minnie J. Grinstead

Thanks for your note on my talk page. I did a small re-write a few days ago of the sections that had been highlighted. There's only so many ways to re-word a sentence, so I'm not sure how to approach it. Any suggestions would be appreciated, as it's certainly a notable biography. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:15, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

I saw that, Magnolia677, but I didn't feel that it had resolved the problem. Rather than re-wording of a sentence or two, what the page needs is to be rewritten in completely new words – your own words. The meaning of the source can freely be reproduced, but not in the same language that the source uses. It often helps if you avoid following the structure of the source too, and drawing from more than one source as you write can also help. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:17, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Alec Smithson

Well, my last ounce of good faith concerning the current IP at Carlo Biotti has completely disappeared. At first I thought he might have been a family member, but I'm now quite convinced that it's Alec Smithson. Newbie attorney makes edits like this? Uh huh. Do you think we should apply for page protection or just keep reverting him? The trouble is, as an IP they'll never block him for more than a couple of days . Voceditenore (talk) 18:27, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi! It's him for sure – I've been dealing with the same rubbish for months; Yopie has dealt with a good deal of it too. However, your family-member suggestion is not a dumb one. It took me a moment or two to realise that the two possibilities were not incompatible. The most likely reason for the lunatic obsession with people called Natoli and Polli is that they are relatives, Biotti may be another (see for example this mis-named file).

What to do? I've no idea – he changes IP all the time, and the level of disruption at any one article is not usually enough to justify protection. I think the only thing to do is to revert on sight without paying any attention at all to whatever he may be trying to say or engaging with him in any way. This is of course where we need those "more robust tools" against long-term abuse that we've asked the WMF for. I've nearly finished cleaning up and attributing his articles here (see the list here); those on it.wp and fr.wp are still mostly a total pig's breakfast, but I'm not planning to work on them. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:59, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

I wonder if a CBAN on Alec Smithson would be ideal here. It's clear that he's WP:NOTHERE, not to mention an incompetent sockmaster whose only intent is to cause havoc. Best, --Ches (talk) 19:08, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Well, he's already indeffed here and globally locked. I don't really see that a ban would give us any advantage in dealing with the IP-hopping, do you? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Fair enough sir. Perhaps range blocking the IPs would be within the community's best interest, if that has yet to be done? --Ches (talk) 19:27, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Well, well, well. A bit of googling this morning turns up lots of people with the double name of Natoli Biotti, Polli Natoli, and people related to both groups e.g. here. It would certainly account for the... er... fervor of his outrage at "mistakes" in the articles. A range block would be difficult. He seems to use Telecom Italia IPs geolocated to the area around Milan with a range between (at least) 95... and 79... I'm sure they'd tell us it would affect way too many users. Anyhow, from now on, I'll just revert him without comment. Justlettersandnumbers, are there any other pages you'd like me to watch? Voceditenore (talk) 08:21, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

I think that's pretty much all we can do, and it's completely dependent on constant watching of the pages. So yes, please do add some to your watchlist if you have room. The most obsessive topics are Natoli, Polli, Lierna and Sperlinga, but take your pick from my list. Thanks for your help! Just in case you've any lingering good faith about the IP: definitive confirmation. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

I've added all the (existing) pages he's created to my watchlist. Interesting pattern. Apart from stuff obviously related to the Natoli/Polli/Biotti clan, I suspect many of the artist biographies were for works which they own, followed by biographies of art historians to validate the material about the artists. Ditto the "historians of nobility". What an incredible time-sink this person has been, not to mention abusing my assumption of good faith by socking away at the same time he was claiming to be the "legal advisor" to Carlo Biotti's family. UGH! Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:15, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Excellent, thank you! Time-sink? You can say that again! Good thought about the artworks, that would explain the interest in obscure second- and third-rate artists (some of the fourth-rate ones got deleted). Your good faith was misplaced but does you credit. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:53, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Yours, all yours

Well-intentioned overeager newbie: [2]. Old edits read like a copy-and-paste; I suspect the images are all copyvio too. Article was blanked as unreffed (probably copyvio) and redirected to Boer pony, which could use some work anyway. I have other fish to fry. Have at it if you choose to, but perhaps the issue of whether we need revdel at Boerperd history is also something up your alley. Anyway, it's all yours. Montanabw^(talk) 00:18, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

You saw what I've done. I didn't see any evidence of copyvio in either the English or the Afrikaans content added by the new editor; did you see anything specific? (I'll look again if you did) I added attribution for the part that was translated. I've nominated most of the images for deletion on Commons, but don't have the language skills to do the same on af.wp (that's a pretty impenetrable language!). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:58, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Forgot I had this watchlisted due to ancient dramahz. I took a look at Boerperd, and the stand-out thing was that the images are all credited to other individuals (in the captions in the article, as if this is a newspaper), but the author of the page uploaded them as self-owned, so that's a red flag. Dunno about the text; if it was translated from something in Afrikaans, it might be originally from elsewhere. Hope the image catch is helpful.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  07:09, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Yep, that's why I nominated most of them for deletion – those that had a photographer or studio credited in the text, on the image itself, or in the EXIF data. A few of them didn't have any of those, and G-image searching didn't immediately throw up any evidence of copyvio; I imagine that the Commons admin who looks at the deletion requests will also look at other uploads, and be much smarter than I am at this kind of thing. I did use Earwig's tool to check for copyvio in the Afrikaans version of the page (which would have made ours a translational copyvio), but found no cause for anxiety. Unless you guys can see anything else to worry about here I really think we're in the clear (as far as text goes, anyway). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:29, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

The breathless "my magic pony is a unicorn" tone in the article kind of jumped out at me, which is probably why I was fretting ... best you handle this new editor. Actually, if they can be calmed down, sometimes the over-enthusiastic can become really good contributors; it really does depend on how much they are able to learn how things work on en.wiki. But on this one, glad to see you reach out to that editor and on this one, it is better you handle it, JLAN; I've got two mentees right now and both are going great guns, keeping me pretty busy (along with all the usual wiki-drahmahz elsewhere...). Montanabw^(talk) 23:00, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

List of writers on horsemanship

Please see my comment on the talk page. A list of written works is not suitable evidence of notability because it is not an independent source. IronGargoyle (talk) 23:43, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

JLAN, FYI: [3]. Montanabw^(talk) 02:54, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

File:David Muse Studio Theatre Washington DC Artistic Director.jpg

Hi Jlan. Could you do me a favour and see if you can find a permission email for this photo in the OTRS queue? It's been tagged as OTRS pending for a long time, and the email has been recently re-sent. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 18:27, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Found it, but the permission wasn't entirely sufficient – I've had to ask for clarification. Fifteen months, eh? – but it looks as if it was them who dropped the ball. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:57, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for checking. — Diannaa (talk) 19:42, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Good Evening Jlan - a correction, at my request a different individual, the new (this year) Digital Marketing Manager for Studio Theater, sent a new email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org at 10:31am EDT 14 March 2016. This email included the following:

"I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported and GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts)."

If necessary I can forward you the entire email, a copy of the email that she bcc'ed me

ed

Ecragg (talk) 02:44, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes, Ecragg, that is the ticket I found, read and added to the page with this edit. However, the permission was not entirely sufficient, so I asked for further clarification. I've not heard back. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:18, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Possible copyright infringement?

Hello. I see that you detected copyright infringement in the Baltimore and Ohio article. I am suspecting that the article Building the Virginian Railway might count: If I were to look up some phases or excerpts from the latter article in quotations in Google Books, I usually get a result of the H. Reid book The Virginian Railway. The searched excerpts includes the book result even if it doesn't mention the railroad. I can't copy any excerpt to my message in case it's copyrighted material. I don't have the book, but checking the contents of the book and verify any matched text will prove if there's an infringement or not (I'm not assuming you have the book). TheGGoose (talk) 03:18, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Simon of Athens

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Heh

Just so you know, I do run across articles you've worked on from multiple other sources: [4]. BTW, thanks for doing Simon and congrats on the DYK. Montanabw^(talk) 03:00, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Louise Blouin and Louise Blouin Media pages

Dear Justlettersandnumbers, Let me introduce myself, I’m working for Louise Blouin Media and I’ve tried to add some information on both Louise Blouin Media and Louise Blouin pages for more than one year! All information I added were certified information concerning our group, our brands, our developments or our Chairman. I noticed that you removed or restored 75 times contents on our pages! I do not understand why all our posts were suppressed,as contents and sources were relevant and perfectly neutrally sourced. It seems that you have a personal issue with those pages and that you deliberately are trying to harm our reputation, which is not acceptable. Best, Lbm usuer2015 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lbm user2015 (talk • contribs) 17:14, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Please read WP:COI, especially the section on conflict of interest editing. clpo13_(talk) 17:27, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Need Help

I wrote an article named OC Osilliation a well known musician in Zambia and Southern Africa and is currently in America working with well known musicians like Akon. My article has been tagged that my article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for music so I need you to help me correct this please you can do your search and you will see that he meets the notability of Wikipedia. Please review my work. Icem4k (talk) 17:12, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Icem4k! It looks to me as if that article needs more and better reliable sources to establish notability beyond reasonable doubt; I searched Google news and gbooks under both his names, and didn't find any. At the moment, I'm not sure that the page would survive if someone were to nominate it for deletion. Please take great care not to copy content from other websites into Wikipedia. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:35, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers Thanks for your advice I will work on that. Icem4k (talk) 17:41, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Minnie J. Grinstead

I'd like to bring the Minnie J. Grinstead article back to life. Can you help me out on next steps? Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 12:54, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

I just noticed another note above. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 12:55, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Magnolia677! You are welcome to start on a rewrite of that article. Please follow this link to be taken to the right place for that. You may copy the structural elements of the article (the infobox, references, categories and so on) directly to the new page, but please take great care not to copy any copyright-violating body text, as that will make the rewrite useless. If you prefer, I can stub the article, which you can then expand as you see fit. Your choice! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:53, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Could you please stub the article? Also, do you know which source triggered the copyright violation bot? Thanks again. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:29, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Ah yes...this one. There's barely any biographical info on her. I'll give it another go. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:31, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Done, Magnolia677. Good luck with it! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:21, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion Flag for Young Rail Professionals (YRP) page

Hi there, You have left a speedy deletion note on the wikipedia page. May I ask for a reason for this? I have received notifications from other administrators for deletions in the past. I have since updated the article and improved it to reflect a third party view. Would be much appreciated if you could provide feedback regarding the same. Thanks a ton! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.18.83.125 (talk) 19:57, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

92.18.83.125, you appear to be mistaken – you have not edited Young Rail Professionals, and your talk page has never been edited. As you can see from the large speedy deletion template at the top of the page, it is nominated for deletion for two reasons: G11, unambiguous promotion; and G12, unequivocal copyright violation (from here). The copyright violation is foundational (added with the first version of the article), so there is no clean version that it could be reverted to. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:57, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Nigora goat article

Hello, I was wondering how the Nigora article may be edited to improve it? I created the original article for public consumption/education on the Nigora breed ten years ago, and I have done my best to keep it updated ever since. The stub that exists in place of the article now contains inaccurate information regarding the foundation breeds, which needs to be changed. It also does not contain any in-depth breed information. I understand there was some concern that copyright may have been violated by content in the article; can you explain to me where you feel this may have be done? I own the intellectual property rights to the information used. I am also the founding member of the American Nigora Breeders Assoc. and own the content found in the ANGBA website and elsewhere. I provide the information, and my time, on a purely voluntary basis; I receive no compensation, monetary or otherwise, for my work. As to conflict of interest, I suppose this would best pertain to the Nigora Goat Breeders Society, LLC (now defunct): There was a paragraph in the Wikipedia Nigora article which stated, "The American Nigora Goat Breeders Association (ANGBA) is not affiliated in any way with the "Nigora Goat Breeders Society, LLC" (NGBS) created October 31, 2013, nor does ANGBA endorse or approve the breed standards of the NGBS." The reason for this is it was discovered that NGBS was plagiarizing the ANGBA website and group content, verbatim, and a cease and desist letter was sent to the founder of the NGBS. Since the NGBS was disbanded in 2015 it would make even having mention of the caveat moot, except for the fact their closing has left NGBS members without paperwork on their goats, and these members are now contacting the ANGBA to find out why they have not received paperwork from NGBS. Please let me know how to best improve the Wikipedia Nigora article. Thank you. Irthumper (talk) 10:39, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Irthumper, and thank you for disclosing your conflict of interest in relation to the Nigora goat. Please follow that blue link to read our guidelines for conflict-of-interest editors. In general, you are strongly discouraged from editing the article directly, but are always welcome to propose changes, additions or corrections on the talk page, Talk:Nigora, following the procedure outlined there. Requests that are not supported by independent reliable sources (i.e., sources unconnected to you or your association), or are unduly long, are unlikely to be accepted. Copyright violations were added to the page with this edit, as this useful tool shows. Please use the talk page of the article for any further discussion. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:29, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Bobby Lockwood

I've noticed that all of the IPs adding WP:BLP, quite possibly WP:COI-violating information to Bobby Lockwood geolocate to the UK (which is a tad obvious, I know), but the majority in the 86.* range, with some going into the 94.* range. Furthermore, this is quite clearly the same person as "Jasmine-Rioxox", as one of these IPs attempted to restore her version of the article - I had asked her in December to tweak the wording, which she did, and that exact wording was used in a restored version. What do you think? Is this worthy of being reported to an administrator? Perhaps page protection on Bobby Lockwood, under "persistent BLP violations"? I am interested in hearing your opinion on this matter. (On a personal note, I want to thank you for keeping an eye on the article. Much appreciated.) --Ches (talk) (contribs) 16:05, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Ches! I don't know, but my feeling is that this is pretty low-level background noise, and that probably admins have more important things to deal with. If it shows signs of getting out of hand then perhaps semi-protection would be appropriate, we could ask. Meanwhile, thanks to you too for watching it. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:28, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

No problem. Semi-protection may be the best way forward - I'll request that if any more of those IP addresses edit the article again. Some of the IPs seem to be single-purpose (by which I mean they only edit Bobby Lockwood). I will keep a look out. Thanks, --Ches (talk) (contribs) 16:33, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Copyright in UCC

JL&N, I thought I would take this here from the talk page for Course of Dealing to lower the level of excitement. I don't know how to tell you this in a more polite way, but you guys are just wrong about copyright law. What BD said is right, and you are getting bad advice from somebody.

Cornell cannot possibly have a copyright interest in the UCC. I have been teaching copyright and patent law for 25 years at GW Law School in DC, and I don't know (and am pretty sure I have never known) any copyright scholar who would agree that Cornell has a copyright in the UCC. The UCC is a statute, a uniform law adopted in many states. You cannot have a copyright in that.

Cornell is simply lying if they say they have a copyright in the UCC. They are not its author and it was dedicated into the public domain about 40 or 50 years ago.

You need to get better legal advice if it is as you described it. Your current legal advice source is terrible if it is telling you that it is copyright infringement to copy statutory texts.

There must be Wikipedians who are US or UK copyright lawyers who will help you out if you need it on basic copyright law principles. I would. I am sure BD would, Ed Colins too. Probably Notecardforfree would. Greg Jack (Pickett) might. There are more. Thank you for your no doubt well intended contributions to WP.

PraeceptorIP (talk) 22:01, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)PraeceptorIP, while the data itself might not be copyrightable, the work still can be, the web design, the typesetting (of hardcopy) and so on. Also, even if a work is in public domain, a copypaste is still plagiarism. (yeah, I'm one of those above too...) Montanabw^(talk) 06:31, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Agree of course

I was just re-stating the warning box that D left. I had written out a long further explanation basically saying what you said, but after 3 e/c's it would be redundant and pointless to add now. Crow^Caw 00:01, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks – on the rare occasions I don't agree exactly with what you've said I tend to go ahead and say so, in full confidence that you'll correct me if I'm wrong. Good to see you back, by the way – there were "no crows here" not too long ago. Do you know the Stevie Smith poem Not Waving but Drowning? Sometimes I feel it describes our situation at the copyright boards … "much further out than you thought … and not waving but drowning". I think we need more people, but who? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:22, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

• Yes, I got flung to the far corners of wherever for job-related stuff, and took only my iPad. Great for browsing but horrible for CP/SCV type stuff, and far too easy to mis-click (one of the reasons I don't have Rollback)! Also, good analogy with the poem! It does feel like pushing a car with a rope sometimes, especially with MRG's vastly reduced time in those boards due to her new role. I've been keeping an eye open for new commenters on those boards to see if we can shanghai encourage them to help out, with no luck so far. Still, we few, we happy few, press on though! Crow^Caw 18:58, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you very much for your helpful language support on the El Shahbaa AfD, which was closed as "keep." Your help was crucial. If interested, I spotted this today, is more up your alley than mine: Limousin_horse. Montanabw^(talk) 04:59, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Danny Lane

Hi there, thanks for your recent flagging of the problems with my edits to the Danny Lane page. I've now spent some time rewriting this page and fixing any issues that may have been unenyclopedic in tone or breached copyright. I have also made sure to keep your edits in the source code. I hope this all looks ok now, please let me know if there are any further issues. Thanks! Ljs90 (talk) 13:09, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your help/advice

Hello Justlettersandnumbers. I saw that you remove the link to redirect from "Centre de musique romantique française" to "Palazzetto Bru Zane - Centre de musique romantique". Actually he was right: Palazzetto Bru Zane - Centre de musique romantique is the entire name of the institution. The palace and the centre are just parts of the same name. Could you please replace the link? Or is there a way to change the title of the page "Centre de musique romantique française" in order to add the other part of its name? Many thanks in advance :) --JoséphineKirch (talk) 13:31, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

You have deleted a reliable sources in my article

Hi Justlettersandnumbers. I have recently added three references to the article Cropio. These references are from reliable sources. Explain me, please, the reason for deletion. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morena makarena (talk • contribs) 14:22, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

A few things for your consideration, Morena makarena:

1. The content you added was largely copied from here, as this useful tool shows. That is a copyright violation, and not permitted here; persistent violations of copyright can lead to suspension of editing privileges
2. It isn't your article, it's Wikipedia's article
3. Please read the notice I left on your talk page with this edit; in brief: conflict of interest editors are strongly discouraged from editing the article directly, but are always welcome to propose changes, additions or corrections on the talk page, Talk:Cropio. Requests that are not supported by independent reliable sources (i.e., sources unconnected to the company), or are unduly long, are unlikely to be accepted. Often that "strong discouragement" takes the form of wholesale reversion of COI edits (I would have reverted your edits even without the copyright violation).
4. You can mention reliable sources that you have identified either on the talk page of the article, or at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cropio, where they may influence the opinion of other editors – or indeed in both places.

Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:09, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Dealing with copyvio pages

Hi. I saw you dealing with copyright violations at Katie van Scherpenberg and wondered if you could help explain something to me. You've used the template requesting redaction of the revisions of the article that contain copyright material. The instructions at Wikipedia:Copyright violations#Dealing with copyright violations don't say to do that. It seems good practice though. Should I be adding that template when I identify copyright violations as well as putting a note on the article talk page, or is there some other process by which redactions are undertaken? Cordless Larry (talk) 21:38, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Cordless Larry! I think opinions vary on how important it is to revdelete after removing copyvio. My own thinking is roughly that if it's still in the history it's still visible to the world at large, albeit not so obviously as when it was in the article, whereas if it's been revdeleted only admins can see it. So yes, I think it's good practice, and I almost always request it as a matter of course (thus adding to the workload of, and trying the patience of, the few admins who handle such requests – who to date have been kind enough never to complain). It also seems to be a safeguard against mistaken, misguided or (occasionally) malicious editors restoring copyvio to the page. I think it should probably be mentioned in the instructions. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:57, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I'm sure that I've requested revision deletion in the past, but when I've dealt with a couple of cases recently I consulted the instructions and didn't find mention of it, and was a bit confused about its place. I think your approach is probably a good one, and I agree that it would be helpful if the instructions had something to say how/whether to do this. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:11, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

John Cabot University

You're right-- I had misread it as saying that it "is accredited by ..." -- which was the wording of the original source they originally used for the copyvio. I definitely agree that the fact they previouslymade use of the former corrupt system is relevant. Thanks for fixing it up DGG ( talk ) 03:19, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Your copyvio claims

Moved from my talk page

 – X4n6 (talk) 11:19, 18 April 2016 (UTC) 11:01, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

First, many thanks for the "Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!" - as I've only worked on this project for almost 10 years.

Beyond that, I think it's clear that your tagging of my work has gone entirely overboard. Regarding the Suzi Bass Award article, everything was properly sourced and attributed. I noticed there are 14 links to reliable sources in that article. And because you think you have found matching phrases like "is to celebrate and promote atlanta professional theatre through the evaluation and recognition of excellence" which is verbatim the awards' stated mission; or phrases like "the suzi bass awards founded in 2003," which is when the organization was founded; or generic phrases like: "twenty one professional theatres," "the color purple," "professional theatre community," "the suzi bass awards inc," "participating theatres," and "suzi bass awards is a not for profit corporation," etc. does not constitute copyright violations. They are reliably sourced statements of fact. They are not editorial content.

Likewise, I have not edited on the Jack Mitchell (photographer) since 2012. Specifically, not since this edit on March 10, 2012. So the fact that you would tag that entire page, four years later; after dozens of other editors have contributed - and with over 16 reliable sources in the article, all because of one source you believe may be suspect? And because of generic matches like: "alvin ailey american dance theater and," "on photographing dance and dancers," "mitchell moved from florida to new york city," "his own photographs," "from 1960 to 1970," etc., - indicates to me the use of the duplicate detector tool with very little understanding of the discretion required to use it effectively. Once again, these are statements of fact. In some cases, they are proper names! They are not editorial content.

Additionally, rather than tagging these articles, you should have followed policy required by WP:DCV and addressed your concerns on the talk pages first. I now see you have done the same thing by wholesale reverting my edits on Mike Nussbaum as well. Kindly revert your tags and state your concerns on the respective articles' talk pages, which policy requires. There they can be properly addressed. X4n6 (talk) 10:33, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

X4n6, have you actually read WP:DCV? Talk page discussion is the minimum action that should be taken if copyright violation is suspected. In your case, the foundational copyright violations at Suzi Bass Award and Jack Mitchell (photographer) are a near-certainty, and the part of that policy that applies is:

If the criteria for speedy deletion do not apply, you should blank the article or the appropriate section with the {{subst:copyvio|url=insert URL here}} template, and list the page at Wikipedia:Copyright problems; see instructions. This will give interested contributors a week to verify permission for the text or propose a rewrite. If, after a week, the page still appears to be a copyright infringement and no usable rewrite is proposed, it may be deleted by any administrator or reduced to a non-infringing stub.

So that's what I've done there. At Mike Nussbaum, the copyvio was added after the creation of the article, and the relevant bit of the policy is:

If all of the content of a page appears to be a copyright infringement or removing the problem text is not an option because it would render the article unreadable, check the page history; if an older non-infringing version of the page exists, you should revert the page to that version.

Which I did. Clear? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:01, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

• Thanks, but I do not want this conversation on my talk page. So let's keep it here. Regarding your question, have I read WP:DCV: I'll simply answer that the very first line of it is hard to miss, yet it appears that you did:

  "Handling of suspected violations of copyright policy depends on the particulars of a given case. If you suspect a copyright violation but are uncertain if the content is copyrighted or whether the external site is copying from Wikipedia, you should at least bring up the issue on that page's discussion page."

Pretty clear too. Correct? So I'm still waiting for you to remove the tags and discuss the specific concerns you have with each article on their respective talk pages. X4n6 (talk) 11:19, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

• I also noticed that you essentially blanked the Henry King Stanford article, before I assume, you had a moment of Zen and realized you had gone too far - so you restored some content here. I also noticed that you accused me of copy & pasting from a dead link. But the worst thing you find there was really just 1 out of 9 matches that could be viewed as too much. For that you could have easily just tagged that section, removed that content, or even (gosh!) just rewritten the paragraph. But instead, you blanked, then tagged, the entire article. But why you didn't choose any of the less draconian measures, you never explained. Again, it makes one question your judgment when it comes to the use of the detection tool. As for Terrelle Pryor, I counted 4 separate, reliably sourced and attributed, new sources in that edit: the Chicago Sun-Times, Forbes, Fox Sports and the Associated Press. But you're apparently accusing me of the copy & pasting hat-trick of lifting from 3 of those sources in the same 1 sentence. I also note that those edits are over five years old. So I really do find it extremely interesting that in none of the almost 1000 edits that have occurred at that article since - that no one, but you, has ever alleged a reason for concern. Extremely interesting indeed. X4n6 (talk) 21:24, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Wow, just wow. I stumbled across this after visiting X4n6's talk page. Justlettersandnumbers is to be commended for his/her cool head dealing with this crap. The gall of talking to a copyright editor like this after several blatant copyright violations is unbelievable.

Here, have a tiny barnstar!  InsertCleverPhraseHere  04:46, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Transporter Guy

I quickly checked this page and found that a fragment of text starting from The GIC channels are divided into three types: (1) a-amino-3-hydroxy-5-n ethyl-4- isoxazole propionate (AMPA)- was indeed copied, however it was copied not from the patent, but from the corresponding TCDB entry (this user uses TCDB abstracts). Both the patent and the TCDB entry contain the same text. Given that TCDB exists for a very long time, well known, and is under free reuse license, I would think that authors of the patent copy-pasted this text from TCDB, without providing appropriate attribution. The same could be with some other alleged copyright violations by this user. Yes, I am pretty much sure that the copy from TCDB was taken by authors of the patent. Let's compare the patent with another TCDB entry [5]. Both include same text (each with N- and C-termini on the inside of the cell, two amphipathic transmembrane spanning segments...) in another paragraph. Note that both paragraphs in patent that reuse text from TCDB do not contain any references, whereas other paragraphs contain references. If this is a copyright violation, it was made by authors of the patent. My very best wishes (talk) 15:34, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Actually, I think this all came from a review article published by Dr. Saier around 2000. But my time is up. My very best wishes (talk) 17:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

However, it was another way around in this case [6]. Here, authors of the TCDB database did a close paraphrasing (rather than a copy-paste) from an abstract from PubMed. ("Using all-atom molecular dynamics simulations, Jensen et al. (2012) showed how a voltage-gated potassium channel (KV)..."). The user copied this text from TCDB probably without knowing that the text was a close paraphrase of PubMed abstract. This should be fixed, but I do not think a few things like that warrant a full-scale copyright investigation.My very best wishes (talk) 16:32, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Two other cases (holin pages) appear to be rather remote paraphrasing. If they are copyright violations is disputable. My very best wishes (talk) 16:55, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, My very best wishes! A few things:

1. The copyvio blanking template carries, in large clear letters, a message which reads "Do not restore or edit the blanked content on this page until the issue is resolved by an administrator, copyright clerk or OTRS agent". Unless you fall into one of those three groups, please don't remove those templates from articles.
2. You wrote on Grahm's talk page "I am not an expert in copyright issues ... One suggestion would be to creators of the database to change their license and make it standard GFDL." Please read WP:GFDL; as you will see, that licence has not been compatible here since 2009, retroactive to 1 November 2008.
3. Please try a Google search for the string "The different channel (receptor) types exhibit distinct ion selectivities and conductance properties. The NMDA-selective large conductance channels are highly permeable to monovalent cations and Ca". You will, I believe, get hits (inter alia) for three pages: our article; the tcbd.org website; and a patent application dated 26 September 2001. Do you see any evidence that the tcdb page was created before that date? The earliest version on archive.org appears to be this, from 17 July 2010. It seems that tcdb copied from an earlier source, as it appears to have done quite often. That means that, whatever licence it has or claims to have, the affected content cannot be hosted on Wikipedia.
4. Either WT:CP or the talk page of the article would be a better place than this to continue this discussion.

Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:24, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I hope this helped

I truly apologize for the mess up at DYK with Céline Gittens. As a further mea culpa, I went out and found a few more sources and added some material on her background and personal life. I hope it was helpful, and I will not be in the least upset if you need to revert anything I messed up. I got it up to about 2000 kb by the drpda tool, so that should make any reviewer happy. Montanabw^(talk) 06:11, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

I don't know if the DYK reviewer is waiting for you to "bless" my extra edits, but maybe pop by there and drop a quick note as to your position. Thanks. (And wow, she is really a very interesting young woman, a good topic for an article) Montanabw^(talk) 17:46, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Those were very helpful edits, Montanabw, and nice extra sources. Thank you! I'd said I'd do no more to the article (it was a rescue after a copyright clean-up, not something I'd chosen to write about), but I added a tiny bit more after your improvements. And the mess-up, such as it was, was entirely my fault for not being clear that I intended to withdraw the nomination only if the initial length assessment was found to be correct. Thanks again, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:09, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you.

Just a quick note here to say once again, thank you! While I may not yet be fully proficient to untangle the writhing snake maze of dealing with potential copyright violations, there is progress in the learning thanks to you. I appreciate you taking up the issue and for showing me how you did it too. Gratitude abounds, AD64 (talk) 17:38, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your help

Thanks for your help on fixing List of Jim Rockford's answering machine gags for the copyright issues. Since I am more or less retired as a Wikipedia editor, your help is greatly appreciated. --Chris (talk) 23:03, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Maintenance

Don't you think it's time you applied for some more tools? Email me if you don't think it is and I'll try to convince you otherwise ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:08, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

London School of Business and Finance and all its pomps and works

Hi JLaN. Just a heads-up that I have begun clean up of this article following the London College of Contemporary Arts discussion. The details are at Talk:London School of Business and Finance. As I imagine my revisions will not escape the notice of the owner's brand managers, you might want to put it on watch. In the end, I also created a separate article on the owner, Global University Systems, which you might also want to put on watch. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:53, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Hi There, rewrited the UiPath page you marked as copyright infringement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:UiPath Could you please tell me if it's OK. Best! RoboticRPA (talk) 14:09, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Céline Gittens

On 15 May 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Céline Gittens, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 2012 the Trinidadian Céline Gittens became the first black ballerina to dance the twin rôles of Odette and Odile in Tchaikovsky's Swan Lake in the United Kingdom? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Céline Gittens. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Céline Gittens), 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.

— Maile (talk) 00:57, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Rejected draft: Churchill Retirement Living

Hi Justlettersandnumbers - thank you for looking at the draft of the article on this company. I had submitted this article previously and revised the wording to address the issue of it coming across as promotional. I thought I had done enough to rectify this issue, but it looks like not enough was done. I would try fixing this if it weren't for the other issue of source material. I think I've already uncovered as many sources as are available at present and if these are insufficient, it's going to be difficult to successfully overcome the problem. The organisation is quite well known in their sector so it may be that more usable sources can be included. In any case, thanks for taking the time on this occasion. Fbell74 (talk) 02:44, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Supposed copyright violation at Colégio Anglo Maringá

Please explain how you came to the conclusion that the History section of Colégio Anglo Maringá contained a direct translation. I was very careful to cite the source and to use my own words. I don't believe anyone involved in the copyright violation 'investigation' actually speaks Portuguese. I can assure you that it was a good faith edit and that it was not a direct translation. Thanks. giso6150 (talk) 13:37, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Giso6150, that's always a tricky one when translating from a foreign-language source; it was my impression that your translation, though elegant, was directly from the source. I'll answer more fully there, though. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:46, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Other possible copyvios by the Harrison Smith IP

The IP that was responsible for the copyvio recently rolled back on Harrison Smith (American football) made a few more edits around that time to other American football players. Seems some of them came from the players' university bios, just like Smith's, and were closely paraphrased. Duron Carter looks the most suspect. Also, a trustable user informed me that the IP apparently edits as User:Gcveintee now. Lizard (talk) 00:57, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for this reminder, Lizard the Wizard – I'd already started looking at other contribs of the IP. I've been able to be here only sporadically recently, and will now be away for a week or more; this will remind me to look further when I return. Meanwhile, do please blank and list any other copyvios you are able to identify, that'd be a big help. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:35, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Intriguing Possessive Theory

Noted your fascinating suggestion and wonder whether it deserves more than a moment's thought. I'm reticent; I might have to go to Land's End to find anyone else who supports it and time's precious. [[user:sirlanz|sirlanz}} 09:14, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

See for example W. Stannard Allen, Living English Structure, page 17. But yes, there are a few customary exceptions – World's End, stone's throw etc. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:31, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry to say that this is just simply not a happening thing. At the same time, I confess I'm no expert on books designed for foreigners facing the challenge of English as a second language, though, which is to say I defer to sources like the Oxford Guide to Style, Chambers, etc., and recommend them in this instance. Your piece of information is simply fanciful. [[talk:sirlanz}sirlanz]] 09:50, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Re: Alec Smithson sock

Thank you for your message, I've gblocked that account. Sorry for the delay.

--M/ (talk) 15:13, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for that, M7! So, is there anywhere or any way to request or co-ordinate a global nuke of his edits? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:14, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Probably the best way is to ask to some active global sysop on Meta.wiki. Thank you, --M/ (talk) 15:57, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Information missing! Jonas Burgert

Hi, I work a gallery that represents the artist Jonas Burgert and his page is missing a lot of information which keeps getting taken down when I try to include.

All of his exhibitions are missing and I wanted those to be added. Can anyone help with this?

Isa.aballi (talk) 09:46, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

TWL Questia check-in

Hello!

You are receiving this message because The Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to Questia. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:

• Make sure that you can still log in to your Questia account; if you are having trouble feel free to get in touch.
• When your account expires you can reapply for access at WP:Questia.
• Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed.
• Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, email us and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services The Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thanks! 20:24, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

NHEG wikipedia

I noticed that my changes to NHEG page have been undone by you. I would like to resolve this by understanding why this was done. Please let me know. Atchopra (talk) 12:44, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

I have reverted NHEG page to the changes I had made. Please don't revert back without explaining to me through talk as to what the issues are. We can resolve this without going back and forth on the wikipedia page. Atchopra (talk) 19:20, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Atchopra, I see that your account is very new. If you look at the edit summary I left with this edit, you will see that it reads "Copyright violation of http://www.newheightseducation.org"; I also posted a long message on the talk page, at Talk:New Heights Education Group#Copyright problem removed, which should give you some useful reading. Please do not add copyright material to Wikipedia again. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:49, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

NHEG wikipedia

Thanks for explanation on copyrights. I also have another question. Why were external links removed? Atchopra (talk) 01:27, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation to Teahouse. I appreciate your help. I have made couple of changes on NHEG wikipedia. Please check and let me know if they are okay. I am learning and I don't want to make more mistakes. Thanks Atchopra (talk) 15:34, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

CSD tag

Common communication format seems to match this page which has a CC license. But the material also matches this page and others, which claim copyright. How do we sort this out? (The lazy way is to say that it does not qualify as an article on other grounds)--S Philbrick(Talk) 12:47, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Sphilbrick! For once in my life I'm reasonably sure of my ground: the www.netugc.com page does indeed carry a CC licence, but it is a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, and so is not compatible for our (text-based) purposes. As things stand, that content can't be copied here. I believe that the G12 nomination was correctly based in this case and that both pages should be deleted (User:Nasirudheen too). OK, I've said my bit – now tell me what I've missed! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:08, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks - I sort of knew that but forgot. One of the things I have learned about myself is that it is easier to remember things if they make sense. I now recall seeing the table that specifies that 4.0 international isn't acceptable, but I never understood why. That's quite unfortunate, as I bet some select a CC license with the thought that it would make it useful for Wikipedia, and presume the most recent license should work. I see the footnote explaining that it isn't backwards compatible, but I don't know what that means (I know the generic meaning, not sure why it applies here). Do you know if there is a clear explanation anywhere?--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:22, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Okay, maybe I can figure this out for myself. While in some cases, the rewording appears to be largely a rewrite of 3.0 with possibly some clarification, such as specific mention that any purpose includes commercial, other aspects are more restrictive. Specifically the 3.0 attribution does not require a link to the license but the 4.0 does. So I think this means that if I take some 4.0 text and use it in another website I have to attribute it and include a link to the license, presumably the 4.0 license. However, if I copy that material into Wikipedia which uses a 3.0 license, that page won't have a link to the 4.0 license and thus is in violation of the terms.

Even this point is a little shaky. It doesn't explicitly say one has to provide a link to a 4.0 license, although it does say you must include "a notice that refers to this public license".

Do you know if this is the aspect that gave the lawyers pause, or if it was something else?--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:33, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

I also see that I should've checked the talk page first as Dianna made this point. I have developed a habit of checking the talk page of G 12's, as they often contain some relevant information (most of the time just the usual statement "it's okay for me to use this because I wrote it"); sometimes something very relevant to the license issue. I failed to follow that habit this time which I should have.--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:36, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Sphilbrick, I haven't tried to investigate whether a 4.0 licence could be used here, or if not, why not; nor offhand do I know of any discussion or explanation of that. What I gleaned from this conversation was that a change of licence would be a site-wide change, and that until and unless that happens, 4.0 can't be used for text. The bit I find hardest to keep at the front of my mind, specially when looking at tickets, is that it's OK (or even preferred?) on Commons, but not compatible here. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:04, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

• @Sphilbrick: Hi guys, I'm actually the one (for better/worse) that got the WP:COMPLIC template updated. Apparently the verbiage of 4.0 says something like "content must be re-used under this same version or later", so using 4.0 text would not allow us to re-publish under 3.0, according to legal. The thread I brought this up on was [7]. The whole enwiki would have to change to 4.0 in order to source 4.0 text and re-publish, and from what I gather there's already a group on enwiki who oppose any re-licensing of their contribs, so no telling how that rfc would go. Commons is already at 4.0 so image use under that license is apparently ok, since we don't host those images but just basically link to them. Images hosted locally on enwiki would be 3.0 so again no problem. Crow^Caw 16:30, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Crow, that's the conversation I was really looking for, not the slightly later one I linked higher up. This is going to keep coming up; perhaps we should make a shortcut or something for it? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:50, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Question

Hello! I wanted to ask (sincerely, and not in a pain-in-the-ass way) where the policy is about deleting PAID COI articles via AfD? I do see that the Orangemoody investigation resulted in a bunch of deletions, as you describe. However to me that seems like a higher-level admin intervention-slash-cleanup job. I'm really curious to see where it is written that COI/Paid editing can lead to deletion at AfD. I've seen people say not to consider COI lots of times at AfD, but never the deltion policy you mention. Thanks in advance for your time! HappyValleyEditor (talk) 21:44, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi, HappyValleyEditor, I'm sorry to have been slow to reply to this. I don't think there's a policy, but I do think there's a precedent, set as far as I know in the Orangemoody clean-up; but from what I understand there were other forces at play there too, including socking and copyvio. The only discussion of this that I'm aware of is this one. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:26, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to reply! Happy editing. HappyValleyEditor (talk) 22:29, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hi, dear Justlettersandnumbers, thank you for your help. Am going further with my translation and will notice you, when ready. Kind regards, --Gyanda (talk) 20:01, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Dear Justlettersandnumbers, i guess, my page is ready to be moved. Would you be so kind to have a look on it? If something is wrong, i would be glad to hear it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gyanda/Heiner_Thiel - Thank you in advance!!! --Gyanda (talk) 12:52, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Three years ago ...

animal breeds
... you were recipient no. 912 of Precious, a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:04, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Gerda! I felt honoured then, and do again now. Three years, eh? – seems like yesterday. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:04, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

I can't count: three years now ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:58, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Deleting mistake categories

Hi. If you ever make a category by mistake, as you did with Category:Montain ranges of the Apennine Mountains - don't just blank it. If you tag it with {{db-self}} it will get deleted faster than if a third party uses the {{db-empty}} method and it's better to get things deleted than to have blank categories lying around. Cheers. Le Deluge (talk) 13:47, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Le Deluge. Deletion of category redirects is not a topic we have much guidance on … so advice noted. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:51, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

CopyPatrol

Hello! I know you are active in dealing with copyright violations, so I thought you might be interested in the new CopyPatrol tool from Community Tech. It combs recent changes and lists possible copyright violations. The interface should be straightforward; hit "No action needed" if it is a false positive, properly attributed quotes, etc, and "Page fixed" if it needed correction and you've done so (this would include tagging for speedy deletion). We plan to add more neat features like rollback, CSD tagging, and issuing of templates to the user's talk page. Hope you find this useful, and thanks for your ongoing efforts in this important area of work! :) — MusikAnimal ^talk 01:10, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

RfA

Are you considering to accept an RfA for yourself? Given your revdel requests as mentioned at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#RevDel advice and the work on copyvios, you could possibly become an administrator like Moonriddengirl and MER-C, who also work on copyvios. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 15:19, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

+1 to that. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:33, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

+1 from me too! Go for it. --Zero^talk 15:46, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Frida Kahlo

Hello,

Sorry, didn't want to step on anyone's toes with my edits, but I thought that the sfn-format was standard these days so didn't realise that a discussion had to be had, as this has not been a problem in the articles I've worked on previously! I'm going to overhaul the entire article in the coming month, and would therefore be changing all references to sfn-format. I've now started a discussion on the article's talk page, please add your thoughts :) TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 20:01, 29 July 2016 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3

Sorry, I meant to drop you a note of apology. I'm away from home, only sporadic internet access, and I forgot. That was rude, if unintentional. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:28, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

No worries :) I probably should've started discussing my GA intentions earlier, but the article seemed so stable (aside from the recurring vandalism) that I didn't think I'd get any replies. TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 22:14, 29 July 2016 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3

Disambiguation link notification for July 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Musciame, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fillet. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:45, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Copyright violation help appreciated

Hello there, I noticed that large parts of FIFPro were directly copied and/or paraphrased from the official Fifpro homepage which -I believe- is a violation of copyright? I would report it myself but all the guidelines and rules are a little too much for me. Perhaps you can help out? cheers --Havlicek stole the ball (talk) 10:27, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Havlicek stole the ball: It is a copyright violation. I have removed the infringing text. Thank you for reporting. — JJMC89 (T·C) 17:57, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Phyllis Zagano, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages St. John's University and Marymount College. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Rosmah Mansor

Hi Jlan. Can you do me a favour? There's what looks like a viable draft of the above article at the subpage Talk:Rosmah Mansor/Temp that could be moved into main space. Not sure what's supposed to happen next to get this draft into mainspace. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 14:01, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Diannaa! I'm away at the moment, with only very limited and occasional internet. But from what little I see, that temp page may not be as viable as it at first appears; I'm bothered by the degree of overlap here, but perhaps you've already looked at and discounted that? As for the actual mechanism of moving one of those pages into place, I've no real idea how it should be done (except that it needs tools I don't have); specifically, I don't know whether a histmerge with the old version is needed, or if the replacement page starts a new "clean slate" history. But I'm pretty sure MER-C, who often does that task, will know and be able to advise (please?). Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:57, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Good catch, it looks like that website had the content first, according to the Wayback Machine. I will take it out. Hopefully MER-C can take it from there. — Diannaa (talk) 21:17, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

The rewrite is still not clean, it contained a copyvio from http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-571969. At this point, I don't think it can be trusted. MER-C 06:58, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

That was my impression, too, MER-C, based on the quick glance I took at it. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:33, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Maremma Sheepdog / Pastore Abruzzese

I don't know why you deleted the many integrations that I provided to the article about the Maremma Sheepdog. I didn't provide the sources because it was just a work of translation from the Italian article. Do you have the slightest idea of how much time and dedication it took to edit the English article, which is a mess and it is very lacking?

First of all I would change the name of the article, for nobody in Italy calls that dog 'Maremma', but - even if the ENCI calls it 'Cane da Pastore Maremmano-Abruzzese' - everybody knows it by the name of 'Pastore Abruzzese' ('Abruzzese Shepherd Dog'). It's just the American shallowness that changed its international name on unknown basis. (You may want to provide sources for that)

Also, being that breed almost unknown to the rest of the world, I wanted to improve the article. And, in order to do it, it is impossible to get the countless sources that you would normally have for Labrador Retrievers and German Shepherds, so the article necessarily needs to rely on the information provided by the Italian breeders and shepherds, respectively on their web pages and on Italian TV documentaries. That is why your necessity to make the article more enciclopedic falls apart.

You could have been right in deleting a few sentences of mine, but not the whole sections about the name, the origin, the Behaviour and the Training of the dog, which are easily verifiable and documented. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kid Hey GBE (talk • contribs) 15:11, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Kid Hey, you added a ton of unsourced, unreferenced material. Other wikis cannot be a source for each other —we need independent sources. If you know this information has sources, you most certainly can go to the sources cited in the it.wiki article to do so. Montanabw^(talk) 06:35, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Stewie Speer copyright issues

Hi - thanks for your message about this article, sorry for the delay in responding. I have followed your instructions and would very much like this article to be restored as soon as is practicable, so that I can edit and improve it. As per my multiple messages on the Stewie Speer talk page and my email to the Permissions today, I hereby confirm that I, Duncan Kimball (Dunks58) am the author of the original Milesago article from which it was adapted, and that I am the creator and principal author of the website Milesago.com. Thanks for your feedback, hope this will resolve the issue. If there is anything else I need to do to facilitate this, please don't hesitate to contact me. Cheers, Dunks (talk) 04:29, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Ban'ei article

If you would be kind enough to tag sections with 'citation needed' needing improvement in that article so I could concentrate improving them. (Foreigner has bad english, sorry.) 88.114.91.37 (talk) 15:23, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Luca Bestetti

Apologies. I had no idea. But now I see a whole litany on this editor in your Talk Page history above. The article subject still seems notable. Seems a shame. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:12, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Nothing for you to apologise for, Martinevans123 – if anything, I should be apologising to you. This is a pestilential long-term abuser of the good faith of other editors, and as we know the only possible way to deal with that is immediate, unconditional reversion, so I hope some kind admin will act on that soon. There's of course nothing to stop a bona-fide editor from recreating a page on the same subject. Pinging Lucas, Yopie and M7 in case any of them want to look at sock edits on other projects (or add the new ones to the global ban, perhaps?). MikeV, you blocked one of the earlier ones; do you see any value in a check-user request here? EthanSanders and Sergey7 are unmistakable socks, but there could also perhaps be others? Thanks to all, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:18, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Ping Mike V following fail above. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:20, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

... ah yes, Mike V's hot on socks - I should know. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:29, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

EthanSanders and Sergey7 are  Confirmed to each other. The previous socks are technically stale. As for a behavioral connection, I see a link to the master account so I've blocked them as socks of Alec Smithson. Mike V • Talk 23:53, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Yes, that broken Italian did look a bit too broken. Do you think Luca Bestetti is notable and worth saving? Of course, I can't re-create it until it has been deleted (?) Or maybe eagerly taking over a topic from a sockpuppet would taint my pristine reputation? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:30, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Mike V! Do have any thoughts about the creator of this? – there's some overlap of area of interest. Martinevans123, I just haven't looked at the importance or otherwise of Bestetti – my interest here is in limiting the damage of a long-term abuser, and to that end it might be preferable if the page were not immediately re-created (assuming it ever gets deleted, that is), in order to WP:DENY him the satisfaction. But you'll do as you think fit; you might like to note that nothing that person writes can be trusted. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:25, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Well, I must admit, I had assumed that Bestetti had at least been born. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:00, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Page Deletion - contested but ignored

Hi. My page was marked for deletion for various reasons to which I contested. Apparently, that was a waste of my time. Not sure why you're able to contest if it doesn't warrant further discussion. Nonetheless, is the page completely deleted, or can it be retrieved? I was in the middle of revising it to better meet the guidelines. I declared my conflict with the article, and did not agree with the notion that it was for promotional purposes, based on the fact that the subject is notable person. If you had read the revised version, before deleting it, you would have noticed that ALL sources were newspapers and/or magazine articles or repute. I had requested in my contest for assistance on direction and or help with the article itself moving forward. I would still like that assistance, if the article can be re-instated for revision and review. Please advise. I can understand wanting to ensure all content on the site is proper and legitimate, but if a page is created under my account as a draft, and not in the public domain, I'm not sure why it has to be deleted and can't simply be revised and re-reviewed. Please let me know what can be done. Lkadish (talk) 14:25, 29 August 2016 (UTC) Lkadish (talk) 14:26, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but you can't copy copyright content from elsewhere on the web into any part of Wikipedia, including your own userspace; that is copyright violation, and is not permitted here. Also, you should not be attempting to promote your relative here, regardless of whether or not she is notable by our standards (I don't know if she is or not). If she's important and interesting enough, some uninvolved editor will eventually create a page about her; please have the decency to wait until that happens, and refrain from editing it if it does. Sorry if this seems harsh; on the bright side, there are more than five million articles here, many of which are in dire need of improvement. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:03, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

User:Justlettersandnumbers - biased user

Two days ago I inserted information reported on the New York Times "The museum is situated in a 150-year-old building that was transformed from an old, closed-down hotel into a museum after four years of renovation." to the page at Roberto Gagliardi

User:Justlettersandnumbers removed this insertion within minutes and once again censored information found on accredited sources for unclear and unjustifiable reasons. User:Justlettersandnumbers then proceeded to remove the main points from the page, stripping it of its most important parts that are well-sourced and have been on the page for some time.

The actions of User:Justlettersandnumbers are not based on facts but on personal presumptions and he does not act by the book but by his own standards.

User:Justlettersandnumbers has continually censored (over several months), not only the sentence "The museum is situated in a 150-year-old building that was transformed from an old, closed-down hotel into a museum after four years of renovation" but other important facts from highly reputable sources known all around the world such as "La Nazione" (in the top 5 Italian newspapers) the Evening Standard, the Council of Chianciano Terme and Saatchi Museum's "Art and Music" official printed magazine (among other sources). These sources deemed the information in the public interest in Italy, the USA and the U.K. but User:Justlettersandnumbers strangely decided that the information was irrelevant or found some other reason to remove it.

People on wikipedia are published due to their personal and professional achievements. Once a person is deemed as notable, personal and professional information of certain stature is relevant if, of course, is backed up by reliable sources. This user has disputed very prestigious publications (who deemed the information notable enough to publish) and has demoted information as not fit for an encyclopedia due to its professional and personal nature when such facts are exactly what a page about a notable "person" are all about.

This user's contributions seem to have been carried out with the intention to remove the foundations of this page with the aim of eventually having it totally removed. This user has failed to have the page removed already once but continues to undermine the page by gradually eroding the page of its content.

User:Justlettersandnumbers undermines the foundations of Wikipedia and damages the integrity of thousands of other administrators, deleting the truth and betraying the bonafide of other wikipedia collaborators. In carrying out his censorship based on prejudice and in ignoring the facts, he is acting against the moral principles of Wikipedia.

User:Justlettersandnumbers , from an analysis of his actions on this page, can be defined as unfit to collaborate with a serious organisation like Wikipedia due to lack of proper and independent judgement.

It has become clear that the desire to demonstrate his power as censor has overshadowed his important duty to remain unbiased and serve the truth.

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.131.238.35 (talk) 16:04, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Giorgio Petrosyan, External links

Hi Justlettersandnumbers, please tell me why the external links was removed because it is useful to the visitor and provides additional information about the fighter? (https://234fight.com/mma/giorgio-petrosyan-wiki-profile/) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndeeF (talk • contribs) 20:07, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Er, no, AndeeF, that page is of no interest to Wikipedia readers as it is copied (without the required acknowledgement!) from Wikipedia. An IP, 93.171.160.105, spammed a lot of links to that site. I removed them and left a warning for the IP editor. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:21, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers, how do you know which pages are not interested in (?), you are interested in fighting? According to my statistics (Statistics website) Visitors switched from wiki spend on site of more than one minute, which shows the interest !!! I can provide real proof. Wiki copied in part, whether in the presence of reverse links on the wiki count on a return link to the article? Ta! — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndeeF (talk • contribs) 23:14, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Social Discovery Ventures. Copyright

Hello Justlettersandnumbers. This article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Discovery_Ventures) is a translation from russian article https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Discovery_Ventures . MoscowFF (talk) 15:49, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Then it would require copyright attribution, MoscowFF – which I see has now been provided by JJMC89. That leaves the question of how your translation happened to use some of the exact words of another website (one possible explanation is that you each independently used the same translation tool to translate the Russian-language page). Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:15, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers Thank you for answering my previous question. Could you tell me what should I do to restore this article? Or maybe I should just wait while issue are resolved? MoscowFF (talk) 10:19, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers Could you say, may I edit the article by myself to replace the disputable part? MoscowFF (talk) 13:42, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

This has already been answered on my talk page. — JJMC89 (T·C) 16:08, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Fernando Carcupino

Hi JLAN. As you have probably seen, I grew tired of reverting the sub-stub and expanded it today. I'm sure it won't be long until our friend shows up to "improve" it further in his own special way . Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:50, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Well, well, well, true to form he showed up in the dead of night (Italian time) under the guise of the Telecom Italia IP 82.58.82.206. I've reverted the edits and left a note on the talk page about the "honours" and need for better referencing before adding them. Keep an eagle eye on it. I will too, of course. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 05:18, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

I saw, Voceditenore; you seem to have established notability where I was doubtful. As for the nuisance, I think the best thing is to avoid any interaction at all other than immediate reversion of all edits. And yes, I'm watching ... Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:16, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Don't worry, I have no intention of interacting with him. Besides, his IP is dynamic, shifting constantly, and when he gets bored of Telecom Italia he switches to Wind. He went on a complete rampage between the 10th and 12th of this month, not only here but also globally ([8], [9], [10], etc.), including the Italian Wikipedia where he snaffled my new text for Carcupino while adding his own inimitable touches and of course monkeyed with his innumerable Natoli articles. He even has stuff on Simple Wikipedia. I've duffed him in to the admins there [11]. Onwards and upwards. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:43, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Bharti Dayal

Its not an autobiography ! its a knowledge update on Wikipedia and to Wikipedians !Required <ref>has been given now you edit as I am not a good editor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bharti Dayal (talk • contribs) 09:59, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Bharti Dayal, if you are Bharti Dayal you should not (in general) edit the page about yourself – that is autobiography and is strongly discouraged. If you are not that person you should not be using her name and should change your username immediately – please see WP:IMPERSONATE. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:08, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

FYI

See the Administrators' Notice Board on Simple English Wikipedia here for the latest onslaught. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:51, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

CCI case for Josephlalrinhlua786?

Hi JLAN, I'm just following up on a ping that JJMC89 dropped you on his talk page. Copyright stuff ain't 'zackly my forte, but I'm curious what your thoughts are on how to deal with Josephlalrinhlua786, and specifically whether or not you think a CCI is warranted. This guy was indeffed circa August 2016 for copyright violations, and I recently indeffed him when it became apparent he had continued the copyvios. Some examples:

• At Westworld (TV series) compare these to this reference.
• He was a major contributor at M.S. Dhoni: The Untold Story. Some obvious plagiarism includes this content which matches content found here.
• Here, we see:

"Learning the language wasn't easy for Disha as not only is Asuri an endangered language but there are very few references to it anywhere as only a handful people speak it in India and there is no script development for it."

compared to

"Learning the language wasn't easy for Disha as not only is Asuri an endangered language but there are very few references to it anywhere as only a handful people speak it in India and there is no script development for it." found here

I'm confident there are many more examples like this. I just choose not to clutter up your talk page with them. Anyway, your input is appreciated. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:25, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Cyphoidbomb! Yes, I think you should almost certainly request a CCI for this user (based on what you say – I haven't looked in depth at his contribs). While the general rule of thumb is a minimum of five examples of infringement, it's my feeling that a CCI request should be more or less automatic for any user indeffed for repeated copyright violations (unless there are really few contribs, of course). A big advantage of a CCI investigation is that it gives us the "authority" to presumptively remove all content by the user without needing to check each edit individually. In the case of M.S. Dhoni: The Untold Story, the page could be rolled back to this version; that removes a lot of content, but at least we'd be (reasonably) sure there's no remaining copyvio. I see JJMC89 has removed a good deal already; I do slightly wonder if there's any more lurking (I might try to take a look if I can ever find a bit of time do dedicate to Wikipedia). Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:14, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

I appreciate your thoughts, thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:10, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Araucana

Hi - that large block quote from the 2008 study seems very much overkill, especially in the light of this 2013 report.

"Significance

Ancient DNA sequences from chickens provide an opportunity to study their human-mediated dispersal across the Pacific due to the significant genetic diversity and range of archaeological material available. We analyze ancient and modern material and reveal that previous studies have been impacted by contamination with modern chicken DNA and, that as a result, there is no evidence for Polynesian dispersal of chickens to preColumbian South America. We identify genetic markers of authentic ancient Polynesian chickens and use them to model early chicken dispersals across the Pacific. We find connections between chickens in the Micronesian and Bismarck Islands, but no evidence these were involved in dispersals further east. We also find clues about the origins of Polynesian chickens in the Philippines"

That source is also used in Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact theories#Claims involving chickens, a section which is a mess - the two paragraphs need combining. Doug Weller talk 12:41, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Doug Weller, it's been a while! Yep, it seems excessive. I've not finished there by any means. I plan to remove essentially all unsourced material, but want to add some more sourced stuff before I do so. And yes, the other article has essentially the same material twice over. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:53, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, sounds good. Doug Weller talk 10:58, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Help on a request edit - Louise Blouin page

Dear Justlettersandnumbers, could you please help me on my request edit on Louise Blouin page. I made an request edit on 08:23, 24 March 2016 (UTC) on the talk page about the Philanthropy part and I have no news. I would like your assistance on this. Thank you in advance for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lbm user2015 (talk • contribs)

Request to investigate

David Israelite's first revision is a copyvio. However the copyvio seems to have been edited out. I have to go now. I know you do lots of good work in this area so if you could investigate how many revisions need RD1 I'd be grateful. Thanks, BethNaught (talk) 21:27, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, BethNaught! It didn't seem to me that the foundational copyvio was completely removed (Earwig was still giving me a good deal of overlap, though some was from job titles and the like). I removed everything and rewrote from scratch. I think all previous revisions should be revdeleted, and have added a request to the page to that effect. Please feel free to over-ride that if you don't agree. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:55, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

I've carried out the deletion. Thank you for your effort rewriting it! BethNaught (talk) 06:46, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Template:Infobox horse breed

Instead of reverting the edit you could have just fixed the obvious typo... --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:26, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, indeed, and if there'd been anything remotely obvious about it, I might have tried to do so. By much the same token, you could have taken a fraction of a second to preview your botched edit and see that the example right there on the template page was displaying a duplicated image, and so fix it yourself (the Preview button is there for a reason ...). Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:03, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

I've figured out how and when I can block IPV6 ranges. Brad Watson (Miami) will hopefully find block evasion a bit more difficult for the next 3 months. Doug Weller talk 19:30, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Oh, that's good! We need that sort of stuff like we need a hole in the head … Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:36, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Help

• Karachay horse. Myself and another editor took an initial whack at cleanup, [12] but the editor is apparently both a newbie and English may not be first language. Tons of Russian language links, possible copyvio on the new material. Given the language issues, this one looks like it's up your alley. Good luck! Montanabw^(talk) 02:25, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi! I don't speak or read Russian, but I had a quick look anyway. It seems to be better than many of our articles. I think the sources would need checking by a Russian-speaker (one seems to be a farm, so is probably not RS). The main question seems to be whether the breed actually exists, and the article seems at least to assert that it has official recognition. It'd be good to find some confirmation of that … Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:58, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

New Page Review needs your help

Hi Justlettersandnumbers,

As an AfC reviewer you're probably aware that a new user right has been created for patrolling new pages (you might even have been granted the right already, and admins have it automatically).

Since July there has been a very serious backlog at Special:NewPagesFeed of over 14,000 pages, by far the worst since 2011, and we need an all out drive to get this back down to just a few hundred that can be easily maintained in the future. Unlike AfC, these pages are already in mainspace, and the thought of what might be there is quite scary. There are also many good faith article creators who need a simple, gentle push to the Tea House or their pages converted to Draft rather than being deleted.

Although New Page Reviewing can occasionally be somewhat more challenging than AfC, the criteria for obtaining the right are roughly the same. The Page Curation tool is even easier to use than the Helper Script, so it's likely that most AfC reviewers already have more than enough knowledge for the task of New Page Review.

It is hoped that AfC reviewers will apply for this right at WP:PERM and lend a hand. You'll need to have read the page at WP:NPR and the new tutorial.

(Sent to all active AfC reviewers) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:33, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Nazaire Group

@Justlettersandnumbers: - Hello Justlettersandnumbers, I wanted you to know that I am a resident of Long Island, and fond of conglomerates and groups. I am writing about businesses, and organizations as a 3rd party contributor, informing through cited material information of organizations and groups, raging from Alphabet Inc., an American multinational conglomerate(owners of Google, etc.) to lodges & secret societies, such as Independent Order of Odd Fellows.

Resolving issues on the Talk Page of Academy of Art University

I tried pinging you, but I am not sure you got the message, so I am just restating what I put on the Talk Page of Academy of Art University: I have raised what I believe are legitimate issues on the Talk page concerning:

   Car collection
   Courses section
   Fashion Week reference
   Online courses reference
   Accreditation reference

Instead of responding to what I believe are logical arguments presented in cooperative language, @Justlettersandnumbers: ignored me completely, until he/she finally dealt the “COI” card. I believe this is an “ad hominem” attack, as per Graham’s Hierarchy of Disagreement, if not actually name calling, going against the fundamental Wikipedia policy of “assuming good faith.” Perhaps it has been a problem that I have posted anonymously, and therefore have not gained respect, so I am now a registered user, to ask one more time, for Justlettersandnumbers (talk · contribs) to address my concerns, which I feel are legitimate, before I take these issues to Dispute resolution.Freespeechman (talk) 07:58, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Challenge

Hi, excellent work! I moved the Swedish ones to Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic) though. That list will be copied every 100 entries into the European one so it'll rejoin that soon enough. Hope this is OK. Happy editing!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:36, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Dr B, I wasn't sure where to list them – now I know! Your challenge is much-needed stimulus to this lazy editor – thank you! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:40, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Well you're doing some terrific work, always good to see content coming in for different countries!♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:40, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you re italics

Thank you for bringing to my attention the rule that there should be no italics for proper names. - Blairall (talk) 18:18, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Well, Blairall, it's perhaps more of a guideline than a rule – certainly it's very widely and routinely ignored here. Your edit drew my attention to that page, where I made a couple of small additions – so thank you! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:06, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Justlettersandnumbers. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Double redirects

Please have a look at Wikipedia:Double redirects, particularly "Wikipedia's MediaWiki software is currently configured to not follow the second redirect". When you created Smaland (cattle) as a redirect to Småland (cattle) (itself a redirect), you made a double redirect, which does not work.

You may be misreading Category:Redirects with possibilities: "Articles should link to these redirects. Do not retarget links to these redirects directly to the article to which they redirect." This is guidance to editors not to change links (within articles) that link directly to the redirect. In other words, "don't change [[Smaland (cattle)]] in an article into [[Swedish Red Pied|Smaland (cattle)]]". On the other hand, it is essential that double redirects be resolved to the eventual target page, because they simply doesn't work otherwise. Hope that makes sense now. --RexxS (talk) 22:43, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the trouble to post here, RexxS. Everything you say makes sense if you choose to read it in that way. But the advice at Category:Redirects with possibilities does not actually specify links in articles, just links in general. What I wanted to do was create redirects to the "redirects with possibilities" that I had created (I can't write those articles myself because (1) I don't have access to a high-quality Swedish research library and (2) my understanding of Swedish is anyway pitiably poor). The bot has re-targeted those redirects to Swedish Red Pied, which doesn't really help anyone to find that article, but does make my intentionally-created redirects much harder to find. I don't want the software to follow the second redirect, i want people to be taken to the potential new article, and then have to follow with a single mouseclick if they're not interested in creating it. I don't know how that accords with all our "rules", but I do know that it is intended to expand the encyclopaedia. I think the bot should be told not to "fix" double redirects if the second one is "with possibilities". Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 02:14, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

SILVA ribosomal RNA Article

Dear Justlettersandnumbers, I tried to update the following article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SILVA_ribosomal_RNA_database which is partly wrong and completely outdated, but my efforts resulted in blocking my account and deleting the information I added. So I would ask you to delete the whole entry - better no information in Wikipedia than wrong and outdated information. I do not know who started the entry, but obviously it was not maintained. Many thanks. Frank Oliver Glöckner, PI of the SILVA project. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.95.7.19 (talk) 16:54, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Dr. Glöckner, and welcome to Wikipedia. I'm sorry that your first experience here was not a good one – unfortunately, that can happen. There are a number of things you can do:

• The account Silva wikipedia, which edited SILVA ribosomal RNA database on 18 November, is blocked only because the name is not allowable under our rules here – no editor may contribute under the name of an organisation. The owner of that account can request a change of username at any time. Or you can create an account for yourself whenever you like.
• Once you have an account, you can, if you wish, nominate the SILVA page for deletion. I think its fairly unlikely that that would succeed – you would need to show that the database is not widely discussed in independent reliable sources, and thus is not notable by our standards, and I think that would be hard to do. I don't have the necessary power to delete the page, and even if I did, there'd need to be consensus to delete before I could use it.
• In any discussion related to SILVA you should make it clear that you are connected to the project; there's guidance on this here.
• You are always welcome to propose or request changes to the article by posting on the talk-page, Talk:SILVA ribosomal RNA database.

Please ask here if you have questions or if you need help getting started. Wikipedia particularly needs and values expert editors, so I hope you will stay with us. Please be aware that in Wikipedia, as in academia, one cannot simply copy material from other published sources and post it here – we try quite hard to protect the copyrights of authors. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:27, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Städelschule

Hi, you recently edited the article on Städelschule in Frankfurt am Main. Working at Städelschule, we translated our German version of the article and uploaded the English one recently. Unfortunately I cannot read your comment to the edits in full length. What else - besides the copyright infringement - was your concern?

Kindly, Marie — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarieEgger (talk • contribs) 16:00, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi! MarieEgger.Thanks for making clear your conflict of interest in relation to the school; please follow that bluelink to read about that, and read the section I posted on the talk-page wtih exactly that title. Also, please don't remove the copyvio blanking from the article again: you don't have that right, and repeatedly doing so could lead to trouble. Please wait patiently for the matter to be sorted out – which i'm afraid may take some time. If you translated the dewiki page, you must provide attribution for that content on the talk-page – please see {{translated page}}. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:32, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

kathiawari horse

hello justlettersandnumbers i am equine expert from gujarat state of india, kathiyawad is the region in gujarat known for its horse and are named after it as kathiyawadi horse, there are many mistakes on kathiyawadi horse article which should be removed, so you should help me to correct it, not remove it. the title "kathiawar" is totally wrong spelling and information are very short and unclear. so please try to help me in this contribution by not reediting the kathiyawari horse article. please do this favour, i hope you will understand — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aniruddhbhaidhadhal (talk • contribs) 02:24, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

please try to help me if i am wrong

article like kathiyawadi horse, kathi darbar, chetak are well researched by me for 10 years. i am from the area where kathiyawadi horse are found and have information about it. second this is that i belong to kathi community who have developed this breed and are still owner of kathiawari breed. i am trying to help wikipedia about this information. but i am poor in english language, so i can not express my information properly so please try to help me, i am not your enemy. there are many mistakes about article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aniruddhbhaidhadhal (talk • contribs) 05:26, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

I'll do what I can to help, Aniruddhbhaidhadhal. Please understand, though, that you will have to get used to our way of doing things here. For example, your first step after your edits have been rejected should not be to make the same edit again, but to start a discussion on the talk-page. Until you do that, I very much doubt if any progress will be made at Kathiawari. Also, please take great care not to copy content into Wikipedia from other sources, as you did for example here, unless you are absolutely sure that it is suitably licenced for use here (in which case you must provide attribution). In that particular case, the GFDL licencing of the page is not compatible with Wikipedia – you can't copy from there. I'll leave an invitation to the Teahouse on your talk-page; you could also try asking at WT:Wikiproject India if there is anyone who could help you with language. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:53, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Just a drive by comment, Aniruddhbhaidhadhal posted to my talk page, and I moved that conversation over to his so others might also assist. I explained my concerns with the edits. Montanabw^(talk) 23:52, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

I see now the pattern, this supposed politically correct person, have had some issues against horse/cattle breeds before. Mr Justlettersandnumbers, you deleted plenty of information on a wikipedia page that doesn´t belong to you and that you didn´t created it (it happened the same with me). Next time, you should start a discussion on the talk page yourself, before destroying other works that took years from them. You never set a foot on the ground, to study and research these cattle and horse breeds yourself, so respect other works. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.37.171.168 (talk) 17:46, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

kathiywadi horse

sorry but i do not want to promote anything,( i am not from that community) but only want true information to be displayed, can we add this

"horse derives its name from the region kathiawar,mostly prominence of kathi darbar community,this people are the main breeder of the horse so proud are the kathi darbar of their mares that they rarely sold them (source:-1884 Gazetteer By Bombay Presidency Vol8 Kathiawar, page 89)" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aniruddhbhaidhadhal (talk • contribs) 02:34, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected

AfC Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Undiscussed moves of Italian abbey articles

Why have you moved so many articles on Italian abbeys from their standard English language names, at which most of them were stable, to Italian names, with no discussion whatsoever? You were wrong to do this - see the standards on use of English article titles, common names (in English) and so forth: you were presumably unaware of them, or you would not have caused so much damage. Please move them back again. Eustachiusz (talk) 22:46, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Eustachiusz, I reversed a couple of cut-and-paste moves and several undiscussed page moves, all performed without discussion by Rococo1700. Our article title policy is completely clear on this matter: "Do not ... use obscure or made-up names". If you disagree with the current name of any of those pages, please start a move request in the normal way. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:00, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry - I should have checked more carefully. Most of them are on my watchlist and when your moves all showed up en masse I assumed the worst. Best wishes, Eustachiusz (talk) 23:59, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Just as I moved some of those articles from one name to another, you have done the same. Some of those articles were first written by me, and I agree with the WP article title policy, that I should now have named them the way I did. You can start a [[[WP:RM|move request]] to move them back. But as it stands the category of Italian abbeys has some abbeys called all the following ways:

• Abbazia of so and so
• Abbey of so and so
• So and So abbey
• Monastery of So and So
• So and So abbey

We need a consensus. Other categories for other countries provide a template. Please provide an argument that substantiates your position and do not just revert the names given by author on a whim. For example, Abbey of Santa Maria delle Macchie, San Ginesio should be Santa Maria delle Macchie abbey, San Ginesio. If you wish to change this, please use Move request. I will post this to User:Eustachiusz also. It is always good to see who is interested in a certain topic.

Rococo1700 (talk) 03:41, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

In my view there has been no standard in nomenclature for naming abbeys or monastery. When in doubt, see what is customary: In reviewing Category:Benedictine monasteries:

the German category (137 pages) and the American site (39 pages) follow the sequence of (Name) abbey or Abbey. The French category (115 pages) uses both the sequence above or Abbey (Name). No consistency. The Spanish category favors monastery (since abbey has no direct translation in Spanish) and Monastery of (Name), which mirrors Spanish language grammar.

In looking at the choices, I prefer the German and American naming system, it seems the most consistent, and gives the primary name primacy, always helpful.

Rococo1700 (talk) 03:52, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Incorrect Copyright Claim - Charlie Zeleny Wikipedia Page

Hey there Justlettersandnumbers, the 4 books referenced from links on Amazon.com mention the subject Charlie Zeleny and actually public domain information referenced in the original Wikipedia page article that has been up for over 5 years on the subject Charlie Zeleny. It is common knowledge that the subject is in fact a pro drummer, music director, producer and solo artist. The Charlie Zeleny Wikipedia page has been up for over 5 years (last major update 2011 prior to 2016) and looks like it was actually referenced in the Encyclopedia of Bohemian and Czech-American Biography, Volume 1 by Miloslav Rechcigl Jr. which was released just recently on November 10th, 2016.

Here are multiple sources stating that Charlie Zeleny is an American drummer, music director, producer and solo artist:

• http://www.paiste.com/e/endorser_det.php?page=bio&endorserid=4606
• http://www.futurecomposer.com/2010/12/01/musician-profile-charlie-zeleny/
• https://www.discogs.com/artist/690830-Charlie-Zeleny
• http://www.protectionracket.com/artists/item/charlie-zeleny
• http://pearldrum.com/artists/drumset-artists/charlie-zeleny

Please remove the incorrect copyright claim when you get a chance. Also, please let me know if I need to change the reference to Amazon's books in any way to avoid this issue in the future. Thank you very much. 100.35.194.25 (talk) 14:53, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Confused

Hello all of my edits were taken down from a page I edited for not citing plagerism. I am confused because I cited my sources correctly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Destrest (talk • contribs) 03:09, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Destrest! I reverted your addition to Ousmane Sow because you copied large chunks of text word-for-word from this article on JSTOR. Please read the message I left for you on your talk-page about this; if you have questions you can ask there or here. Just to be completely clear: it doesn't matter whether you've cited the source or not, you can't copy from it. You have to write in your own words. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:53, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy Saturnalia!

		Happy Saturnalia
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:39, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Horse breed infobox

Not sure why the infobox on the Kathiwari article formatted so strangely; perhaps just because no photo. As far as a "proper" infobox, if you have ideas for things to change at {{Infobox horse breed}}, feel free to pop over there and initiate a discussion. If adding a separate parameter for height range is one idea, I'm not completely opposed, though clearly there is the issue of the partial truce that I definitely do not want to stir up again. Montanabw^(talk) 06:50, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

The other animal breed infoboxes, which are based on {{infobox animal breed}} have, among other things, parameters for conservation status, distribution, height, weight and coat colour, all of which I'd like to see added to the horse one. I don't know why horse and donkey got left out when all the others were updated. I might try to sketch out something in a sandbox and invite criticism. Meanwhile, yes, let's keep waving that white flag. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:42, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Nordeus talk page

Can you please check out Talk:Nordeus so we can try to work things out. Thank you.--VuXman ^talk 09:56, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	I think you deserve this for cleaning up articles, Calum Graham‎ in particular. Thought it would be a simple thing to do, but I noticed it was a lot of work. So here's a thank you for taking care of articles like that! Nettrom (talk) 12:07, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Nettrom! That's very generous of you, considering that what I did there annihilated the work you'd already put in to improve it. Best regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:14, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Buon Natale!

May you have very Happy Holidays, Justlettersandnumbers

and a New Year filled with peace, joy, and panettone!

Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 13:04, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Alexandre Mars‎‎

Thanks for your attention to Alexandre Mars‎‎ and finding that copyvio. I'm not sure if you saw the discussion on the article's talk page or on WP:COIN, but Mars' PR director, Jennepicfoundation‎ (talk · contribs) has been running roughshod over that article. I'm hoping to get a few other voices commenting on this paid editor's conduct. Toddst1 (talk) 15:55, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers‎ (talk · contribs) Thanks for your help with the copyright info. I've replied to the post on Alexandre Mars's talk page.

Aequales

You're quite right, I have no idea what the group is playing in the picture. They are clearly a trombone quartet, but that only meets the very broad definition of an aequale, as a piece for equal voices or instruments, which is not really what the article is about. I have inserted a more clearly-associated illustration: a score of a 19th-century trombone funeral quartet. HLHJ (talk) 19:36, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

I think that's much better, thank you, HLHJ! Personally, I'd much prefer to see a historic edition there rather than a modern one, though. I seem to have a copy of a nineteenth-century Breitkopf print of the same works, presumably downloaded from IMSLP (it carries the date of composition, 2 November 1812 – the Day of the Dead in that fateful year). Would that be better? If so I can easily upload it. I don't know the full publication history of those pieces, but as WoO they were presumably not published in Beethoven's time; nor do I know if there's an extant manuscript. The edition I have might even be the first printed edition. Regards, seasonal wishes, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:20, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

That sounds great. It could be used to illustrate Old Cathedral, Linz#Music, as well. Please do, when you have time. I've made an aequales category on Commons, so if you stick it in there, then if anyone prefers to read a modern text they can find both easily. A recording would be marvelous, but I haven't found a suitably-licensed one yet.

Incidentally, the Indiana group lists some pieces they've played, including Václav Nelhýbel's "Tower Music", arranged for eight trombones, which seems to reference the aequale tradition. They've posted some recordings of Canzon Septimi Toni No. 2 by Giovanni Gabrieli and suchlike, too. Alan Swanson has posted a score and a recording of his "Equale per quattro tromboni, “Academic Discussion in Groningen”", but it's not very 18th-century, nor, obviously, public domain!

Will Kimball's trombone history teaching page also has a section on Beethoven's "Drei Equali", with a primary source in translation. Thanks for telling me that it was composed on the 2nd of November; I was wondering if it was a response to a performance. Best wishes for the holidays! HLHJ (talk) 21:20, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

I'll try to upload it soon … but see below! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:47, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello again, Justlettersandnumbers. I hope you had a nice Christmas. I found the original public-domain text of the document I quoted in the aequale article (in blackletter, here: pp.20-21 page, record). I hadn't considered the copyright on such a short translation; good catch. I post the original text here, followed by my own translation:

In der ersten Klasse wird bei Ankunft der Geistlichkeit durch eine kurze Trauermusik (Equal) mit Posaunen oder andern Blasinstrumenten das Zeichen zur geistlichen Trauerhandlung fuer die Anwesenden gegeben, nach deren Vollendung sich der Leichenzug in bewegung sesset, welches wieder mittelst der blasenden Trauermusik angezeigt wird, mit welcher dann waerend des Zuges die Gesangmusik, die ein drei- oder vierstimmiges Misserere singet, abwechselt bis zum Eingange der Kirche oder Grabstaette, wo der Einsegnung der Vers.: Requiem aeternam, gesungen wird. Nach erfolgter Einsegnung und dem allgemeinem Gebet wird eine Trauer-Motette gesungen.

For first-class [funerals], the arrival of the clergy will be announced by a short mourning-music (Equale) played on trombones or other wind instruments. This will mark the beginning of the funeral service. After this, the funeral procession will set out, again suitably announced by mourning music on wind instruments. During the procession, this shall be played alternately with a three- or four-voice choral Misserere until arrival at the entrance of the church or graveyard, where the Requiem aeternam is sung in benediction. After the benediction and common prayer, a mourning motet is sung.

Have you in the meantime found a professional public-domain translation? I'm sure a professional translator intimately acquainted with the funerary rituals of early 19th-century Linz would do a better job, so if you have, please post that. If not, could you please put this quote into the article, with the original text in a footnote? HLHJ (talk) 04:43, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

HLHJ, as you may have seen, I have answered there. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:37, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Happy Christmas, Happy Holidays, Happy New Year

To all who watch or visit this page:

Duccio di Buoninsegna, Madonna with Child (detail), Museo d'Arte Sacra della Val d'Arbia, Buonconvento

My very best wishes for the Christmas holidays and for the New Year. For family reasons I will be on Wikipedia only infrequently (if at all) for several days from now. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:47, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Holiday card

Wishing you a Charlie Russell Christmas, Justlettersandnumbers!

"Here's hoping that the worst end of your trail is behind you That Dad Time be your friend from here to the end And sickness nor sorrow don't find you." —C.M. Russell, Christmas greeting 1926. Montanabw(talk) 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Let's clean up some beef!

Thanks for your edit to Template:Beef. Please help me update the articles removed from the navbox by removing the navbox from them (WP:BIDIRECTIONAL). Ibadibam (talk) 23:26, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your support! I made a BOLD edit, and have followed up with a rationale on the talk-page. I was thinking of waiting for some reaction there – perhaps for a day or two – before cleaning up as you suggest. But please do as you think fit. I certainly would be glad to see it gone from the breed articles – it collates a mass of trivial or irrelevant topics and so serves essentially no useful navigational purpose. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:39, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Incidentally, what do you think of a beef cattle breed navbox? Is it worth making, or would it be superfluous to Category:Beef cattle breeds? Ibadibam (talk) 20:45, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Ibadibam! As I (more or less) said on the talk-page there, I believe that the idea that cattle breeds can be categorised into a single use is only really going to be applicable to a small minority of mostly industrial-type breeds, and that the vast majority of breeds round the world are probably dual- or triple-purpose – not counting modern "uses" such as vegetation management and heritage conservation. It's also often a very modern categorisation, as many breeds were used as draught animals until the second half of the last century; a breed like the Chianina has two thousand years of history, and has been a "beef breed" since the 1980s. Where I live, the last working cattle disappeared less than thirty years ago.

So I think that navboxes based on geographical criteria alone are more likely to be useful. I've made quite a lot of these (I think most of what is in here other than the British and dog topics). But why don't you suggest this at WT:FARM and see what others think? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:26, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm not that invested in the idea; just sussing out your opinion. I think the existing navboxes are more than sufficient. Ibadibam (talk) 21:41, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

I restored the beef cattle category on the Piedmontese because they are considered premium beef producers and are established as a foundation breed (F1) for beef cattle (F2). I understood that Category: Beef was intended for food, but cattle that produce both beef (F1) and dairy products (the latter of which is actually a secondary trait world-wide for this breed unlike Holsteins) should not eliminate them from being categorized as beef cattle. The F1 bulls and cows are used far more often in beef production than anything else. ^{Atsme📞📧} 23:56, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Doing a drive-by, keep in mind that navboxes don't have to be 100% bidirectional; that's a guideline, not a policy. WP:BIDIRECTIONAL has had a lot of drama over that questions. It is, in my view, perfectly appropriate to keep the beef navbox on beef cattle breed articles as a secondary box to a navbox on cattle breeds or whatever. Montanabw^(talk) 19:08, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, agreed (on the first bit) – notice that I haven't said anything about bi-directionality here or at Template talk:Beef. But you don't need to be a genius to guess which way an RfC would go if there was to be one.

À propos, I think it's time to pre-emptively turn {{Equine}} into a portal or something – it too introduces a mass of only marginally relevant links to a lot of breed articles, and makes a very inviting target for those who enjoy trying to enforce guidance as rules. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:58, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Heh, there was a major spat at WPEQ over someone who removed it from all 400 breed articles -- and I think before that there was a huge spat about including it! But we have a portal. Portal:Horses (maybe it should be linked on the navbox, it's in the project tag at the talk page, but readers don't go there. Dana boomer created the portal and I maintained it for a while after she left, but got a bit tired of doing so. At present, it is useless for navigation because all it can do is link to the category tree, which is a mess. I rather like our navbox, actually; though there is room to tweak some aspects, we do need a navbox that is an overview of the equine project, from breeds to activities, etc...IMHO. I think that navboxes that are too narrow are of no real benefit to the reader. But that's a discussion for the WPEQ page. What I do think we need is to take a look at the complete anarchy that is the category structure and whether there is a way to make that more sane. Montanabw^(talk) 18:28, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Unrelated topic

We probably need to have a broader discussion at WPEQ over whether putting "History" or "Characteristics" first in breed articles should be standardized or on an article-by-article basis. The latter may be the best approach, but the problem is when it's a fine line. (i.e. long history sections before describing appearance can be discouraging to the younger reader that often is the primary consumer of horse breed articles. I flipped one on the Kathiawari due to its prior GA status, but most of the time, the distinction is not a big deal because the articles are short anyway, so no long sections to discourage the reader. Montanabw^(talk) 18:28, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Just noticed

You may want to take some of the material in this source with a grain of salt; while it may be accurate for stating something is an endangered breed, it listed the Waler horse as an extinct breed, which it most certainly is not ([13], [14], [15], etc...). The same report also lists the "Palouse" as a breed of Australia -- and that is an old name for the American Appaloosa (see Palouse River). They also classify the "warmblood" as an Australian breed. I presume they got their lists from the DAD-IS or something? (big sigh) These governmental agency reports that get relied upon are absolutely terrible. (You've heard me rant about the USA "breeds"before... the "cow pony.," "broomtail" and the "cayuse" listed as breeds? Arrgh) Anyway, just letting you know that these international agencies may have a GIGO problem with their data. They are more RS than the fan breed pages you have diligently been trying to deal with (and thank you), but they are kind of worrisome. Montanabw^(talk) 00:29, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Er, yes, I know that! The database just holds the data submitted to it by each country, and "Breeds currently recorded in the global Databank for Animal Genetic Resources" (2007) is based on that data (the title is a hint!). So of course it's only as good as the data itself. It is indeed really surprising if the National Animal Germplasm Program of the USDA Agricultural Research Service doesn't know anything about American horse breeds, but if it doesn't that's hardly the fault of the FAO! Looks as if the Trade and Market Access Division of the Australian Government Department of Agriculture isn't much better. Fortunately, many countries do manage to report their breeds accurately, often with useful and detailed information. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:09, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

It appeared that the list of breeds data was from the same sources that the FAO DAD-IS gets theirs? ( i.e. national ag agency reports...?) At least, the USA list looked similar to what the FAO has... so, maybe my question is this: Which nations, in your view, have proved that they do a good job and which ones appear to delegate it to their most junior woodchuck? Seems, to me, overall, that the larger first world nations seem also to be the worse "offenders" with their listings. I suspect that the poor third-world nations might actually do a lot better? Your thoughts? Montanabw^(talk) 19:57, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Mostly, as I said above, I think countries submit good and useful data; too often, even if the data is there, I find that it would need deeper knowledge than I have to interpret it (the various Mongolian horse breeds, for example). As I recall, Germany over-reports (almost 200 horse breeds IIRC), which makes it relatively hard to sift the useful data from the useless. Somebody (France, perhaps?) reports every plumage variety of each chicken as a separate breed – not really helpful. Because the reporting is done by government agencies or ministries or whatever, breeds without official recognition are quite likely to be omitted. Anyway, why not try a strongly-worded letter to the USDA, telling them what you think of their reporting of horses? (reporting of cattle looks pretty much OK). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:26, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Sigh. Surely you jest? Change the USDA report standards? Have someone who knows what they are talking about compile data? I wish. They have stuff that's 25 years old and never updated (I suspect the reason they list some extinct breeds is because they've copied over records dating to the 1800s...) The problem with the USA is that we are so fond of non-regulation of "free enterprise" that we don't care if breeds are officially recognized or not except where there is an import/export thing going on where we agree to recognize stud books from other nations for the purpose of importing "purebred" animals (follow the money. In the USA, always follow the money) -- there is no licensing of breeding stock done by the government, the only thing that is seriously regulated are issues surrounding disease transmission and food safety. And the regs for "recognized breeds" are... hopeless [16], [17]). As a result, we have laws like this one-- with no further definition or guideline. Sorry, I'm ranting. But here's my favorite of the day: 1500 "Wild"Mustangs? But 30,000 "Spanish" Mustangs? (Most modern Mustangs have small amounts of Spanish blood, though there are a few remnant populations that are near-pure -- but the stats from the USDA to the DAD-IS really should have been flipped...) Sorry, went down a rabbit hole. It's really rather depressing. Montanabw^(talk) 18:55, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Adamson University - RD1

Thanks for that one - only 1725 revisions had to be deleted to get back to April 2008! :-) Nthep (talk) 12:37, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

I'm really sorry, I did realise it was going to be a lot of work – that's why I only vaguely asked if it should go all the way back to the first copyvio on 15 September 2005‎! Many thanks for dealing with some of these, not many people do (and it's not hard to see why not). Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:28, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Not a problem, doing them in batches of 250 did test the software or my laptop though. Nthep (talk) 17:31, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Copyright "violation" issue

Hi - so sorry for my previous lack of repsonse but I have only just come across your message to me, re copyright issues. For the record, I am Duncan Kimball of Sydney Australia, (dunks58). I am the co-founder and copyright owner of the milesago.com website, and I am the editor and author of most of the material therein (unless otherwise stated there). I am anxious to ensure that the contributions in question can be retained in the relevant articles. I am happy to undertake whatever procedures are necessary. If you could please advise how to go about this, I would be most grateful. Thanks and best regards, Dunks (talk) 15:04, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, Dunks58, I was hoping you'd get in touch. Here's where I think we are: an email about this was sent to OTRS about six months ago, but it wasn't in itself quite sufficient for us to accept as permission. Someone (not me) replied to it asking for some clarification, but as far as I can see no reply was ever received. I'll forward the email to the sender. It has the number 2016081910002945 in its title; as long as that is quoted in any reply we should be able to join up the dots. We're also going to need a full list of all articles that contain content copied from that site – I hope you'll be able to help with that? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:24, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers and Dunks58, there's a notice on milesago.com here that all material is authored by Duncan Kimball unless otherwise stated and that all of Kimball's material is released on CC-By-SA 3.0. Isn't that enough as long as cross-checks are made between the WP articles in question and the pages on the website where the text comes from to verify that no other author is credited? Voceditenore (talk) 15:40, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Certainly looks that way to me, Voceditenore – many thanks for finding that (it's not on any of the many pages of the site that I've looked at, perhaps because they were archived versions). Provided it covers all subpages of the website (Duncan?), all that's needed is to compile a complete list of all our pages with stuff copied from there, and then add a suitable attribution statement to each. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:00, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Page mover granted

Hello, Justlettersandnumbers. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, and move subpages when moving the parent page(s).

Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when suppressredirect is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:

• Wikipedia:Requested moves
• Category:Articles to be moved, for article renaming requests awaiting action.

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, post here, or just let me know. Thank you, and happy editing! – Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:41, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Nina Menkes article

I just kinda stumbled across this article in a very indirect way. I guess you could say I have a very minor interest, but not a conflict of interest here. In any case, I'll probably work at the article slowly over a couple of weeks. I may ask a very good editor to help a bit. In any case let me know if you have any objections to any of my edits. There's a lot of material and a lot of COI there, so I'll se what I can do. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 20:59, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, Smallbones! I've not much interest in the topic, but no desire at all to see people trying to use our pages to promote themselves, so I took a brush-hook to what was there. There's been socking as well as the COI, by the way. She's clearly notable, it shouldn't be too hard to find some factual information about her (not that I managed to find much). Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:12, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 21:16, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Claus Drexel

Thanks for letting me know. I think it got moved along with the main page, I certainly didn't intentionally move the talk page and now I know if it ever comes up again to uncheck that box. Katharineamy (talk) 20:46, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

It's surely not your fault – it was misnamed from the start. Now tagged for deletion. Normally, it's the ones with /Temp at the end that have a special function. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:50, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Justlettersandnumbers. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is The Wikipedia Library -OUP.
Message added 07:35, 4 February 2017 (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.

--Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 07:35, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Italian singer

Looked at a fairly superficial review like a probable keep to me, but I cannot read the foreign language sources, figured you would have some credibility on this discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aura D'Angelo. My own view open to change pending further info... Montanabw^(talk) 00:57, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Charles Adelson

You marked this page for speedy deletion on the grounds of alleged CSD G10 problem. Please explain to me why you think the page "attacks, threatens or disparages." It is a neutral and well-sourced page about a notable figure, whose fame is primarily in connection with an ongoing murder investigation of a prominent Florida law professor. I checked Google News a few minutes ago and found 43,800 hits for Charles Adelson, mostly related to the murder. If you feel something in particular "attacks, threatens or disparages," please remove it. The decision to remove the entire page is inexplicable. Indeed, the only threat I can see in connection with the page is your threat to block me from editing on the basis of a false accusation of having created an attack page. Knowitall369 (talk) 00:36, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Well, that seems to have been resolved by the deletion of both Charles Adelson and Wendi Adelson. I've also reverted some edits at Dan Markel that appeared to be unduly negative about living people without proper factual references. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:09, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

RfC requested about tags

I have requested RfC to address the issues you raised with maintenance tags. I am obviously not the right person to address said tags. — አቤል ዳዊት^?(Janweh64) (talk) 19:02, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

As has been pointed out to me this is not the proper use of an RfC. However, I converted it a normal discussion and would like your input before I request that the tags you placed on Roger Gosden be removed. Simply, placing a Template:COI on an article without explanation on its talk page is a violation of policies in WP:COI and is even highlighted in the documentation of the template. Please join the discussion.— አቤል ዳዊት^?(Janweh64) (talk) 04:57, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

References on Robert Orledge

Hi, I note you reverted my changes to the references on Robert Orledge. I don't have any problem with reverting to the untemplated format for references, but is there any reason to keep a dead link (the Liverpool university one) when a one line stub (after removal of all the copyvio I found) has 2 references to support it?— Rod ^talk 09:37, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

In my personal view, very little, Rodw. I was thinking of the guidance at WP:KDL. But please do as you think fit. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:44, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Consensus

Hello Justlettersandnumbers. When making an edit that causes drastic changes to a Wikipedia article, especially one that removes a large amount of information created by other users, such as your recent edits to Pekin (duck) please discuss it on the article's WP:Talk page first. Doing this allows other editors to discuss the potential changes with you, so you can be sure that WP:Consensus has been reached, as this is a Wikipedia standard. EditSafe (talk) 04:16, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Errm, EditSafe, there was already consensus on the talk-page that the article needed to be overhauled. Please see the section Talk:Pekin (duck)#Wow, where three editors agreed on exactly that. You were one of them. I suggest continuing this on that page. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:03, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

I do not think that anyone wanted you to remove all of the content and replace it with a short section of your own like you did. EditSafe (talk) 22:56, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Your comment

I don't think you have much to apologize for. It is true, in general, that new users tend to be met with hostility and that it's a problem that this drives away what could otherwise be useful contributors. I just don't happen to think that was what was happening in this case. But if you have evidence to the contrary, maybe it is I who should apologize. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:40, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

North American Piedmontese

I don't understand why you removed so much information from the NAP article and made accusations that the information was promotional or it was a brand name, or whatever else you stated as the reason for removal. What you did was not unlike removing information in an AQHA article about double-registered paints and palominos, and calling Quarter horses a brand name. Your questions on the TP of the article leads me to believe you didn't do any research before you started removing information. I updated the few dead links and provided more links - which you could just as easily have done rather than delete and add tags. I think the right thing to do in this case is for you to go back to the article and self-revert or replace all the information you removed from that article. ^{Atsme📞📧} 22:26, 19 February 2017 (UTC) ^{Strike on 16:10, 20 February 2017 (UTC)}

revision made on the Lloyd Klein Page

Hi Just: I am hoping I did not delete the recent paragraph that cites a recent personal issue that made tabloid headlines regarding alleged attacks on Mr. Klein and subsequent arrests revolving around the incident. The contributor (kbabej) who wrote the article should know better as she or he has contributed substantially to wikipedia biography articles. It seems to me to be a clear violation of wikipedia rules regarding posting potentially libelous and defamatory posts regarding living persons. I did a deletion of that edit as it has repercussions of great harm to the LLoyd Klein brand which was separately listed from Mr. Klein the person but merged into his biography page. As you I know I am closely involved with the topic and do not want to break the COI rules about interfering in an article, however I do recall that the rare instances that such an action is permissible is when it is one that is of defamatory nature. Your advice and guidance is appreciated.Fashionator (talk) 00:08, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your note, Fashionator. I can't look in detail now, but anything sourced only to the Daily Fail should be be removed without hesitation, and removing unreferenced or poorly-sourced defamatory content from the biography of a living person is not just permitted but an obligation. I'll try to look more carefully when I've had some sleep. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:23, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Article Redirection

I noticed you just placed a redirect on the article Utrechts-Alblasserwaards. Should you do the same then for the South Hollandic and other dialect-related articles lacking sources? Wishing you well, Tezamen (talk) 21:50, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Tezamen! I just happened to come across that one short stub. It had no references at all, so I redirected it. With suitable sources it could presumably become an article. Please do the same at South Hollandic and other similar pages if you think that appropriate. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:55, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Emma McClarkin

Hi, I have reviewed the copyvio notice on the article Emma McClarkin and have removed all parts that were directly copied from other websites. Please remove the copyvio box. --dimi_z (talk) 13:47, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, further to the above comment, has there been any movement on this? Many thanks for your help. We are new to this but want to make positive contributions. Alexwikipediaedits (talk) 10:30, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Alexwikipediaedits! There's an OTRS ticket relating to that page, which I'm hoping someone other than me will handle. Unfortunately there's quite backlog (around 500 tickets last time I looked), so a little more patience may be needed. Unfortunately the rewrite by Dimi z (which should have been done at this page, not in the article itself) does not seem to be useable – see this comparison.

Just one thing: why do you refer to yourself as "we"? You should know that Wikipedia user accounts are strictly for individual use – if there's more than one of you, you must each make your own account. Am I right in assuming that you have some personal or professional connection to McClarkin? If so, you must declare it – I'll leave a note on your talk-page. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:32, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you

Sometimes its easy to get lost in the everyday & lose sight of the little things you have done along the way. I just wanted to thank you again for your gentle encouragement & help in 2015 in creating my first article. Apparently I have now created enough valid articles to have "autopatrolled" permission. Find bruce (talk) 04:55, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for this, Find bruce – it was my pleasure! I remember that article, though not the actual name of the cyclist (of course I could easily look it up). As it happens, I've seen your name a couple of times, and have looked to see what you've been up to – which seems always to be the law. That we managed to retain a valuable editor after an initial minor setback isn't such a "little thing", though – it's really crucial to the future of the project, and something we often get wrong. I'm truly pleased that you're still around, and that you took the trouble to post here – thank you! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:42, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

law, politics, history, cyclists & fish - what I enjoy & interests me is an odd mix, never managed to find more than 3 in one article. The cycling articles are a lot of work finding reliable information, so I do them only occasionally. For me its mostly about finding the overlooked aspects whether it is whole articles or cleaning up tables & references. In writing that, it seems to be true for most editors - finding the combination of what needs to be done that corresponds with their interests. Cheers, Find bruce (talk) 10:38, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

About Thomas Campbell (Australian politician) - good outcome, and thank you

Hi, Justlettersandnumbers,

• Short version: the encyclopedia is better because of this.
• Long version: not applicable, see the short version.

Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 09:32, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Emma McClarkin

Many thanks for flagging a potential copyright issue for the Emma McClarkin page. Further to Dimi's edits, are we able to remove this copyright notice? Now that we are fully aware of the protocol, we will make sure we adhere to it. Thanks Alexwikipediaedits (talk) 17:33, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Rolf Gindorf

Thanks for taking care of the copyright violation problem at Rolf Gindorf. I'm still rather new at this, and I wasn't sure if I should remove the material altogether or try to get someone who could read the German articles to try to fix it. I asked for advice at the help desk but the result was not very helpful (mostly because I phrased my question badly). Glad to have it cleared up, and to have some idea of how to proceed in the future. Cheers! Leschnei (talk) 18:24, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

What you did achieved the desired result, Leschnei, so thank you! There's whole article to be rewritten there if you're interested, but it might indeed be easier for someone who reads German. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:42, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Johann Adolph Hass

Hello,

On 5 February you posted a close paraphrasing tag on the above article. I have attempted to reword it a bit, could you take a look at it and if it's better remove the tag? Thanks. Jdcooper (talk) 20:56, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Jdcooper! I put that tag there because someone emailed OTRS about the close paraphrasing, and it didn't seem to me to be quite bad enough for the copyright problems board (on reflection, I could have been wrong about that). I've had a look at what you did, and at the original Grove article and … well, I'm still not happy. If Grove says "It was large instruments such as these that so many later 18th-century German composers had in mind, with good Bebung effects, discreet volume and a fairly bright tone", then our article simply cannot read "It was large instruments such as these that many late 18th-century German composers (such as C. P. E. Bach) had in mind when composing for the instrument, with good bebung ability and a bright tone". I've convinced myself, that's a copyvio, I'm going to go and fix it. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:55, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Ok, fair enough. I didn't fix that bit because I didn't understand it! Jdcooper (talk) 10:59, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Well, that's certainly fair enough, Jdcooper! – I don't think many people know what bebung is, or indeed what a clavichord is, for that matter. Thank you for what you did to improve that article, and for reminding me that I'd put that tag there. There's a lot more to be written about him if you are interested, he seems to be much more important than our article implies. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:11, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm glad to hear that! But me, I'm a clean-up gnome. I will add him to my watchlist and leave it to the experts :) Jdcooper (talk) 11:26, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you

for pointing me to http://www.aviculture-europe.nl/nummers/09e06a12.pdf. It was a good reading experience. --PigeonIP (talk) 19:44, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

My pleasure, PigeonIP. It's good to see you around. I haven't yet looked at the Paul-Erwin Oswald pages you recommended, but thank you for the links. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:09, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Palazzetto Bru Zane

Thank you for your comment on my article. I was not aware of the fact that the inclusion of 'original research' (or just personal knowledge) is not suitable for Wikipedia and that the official homepage of an institution does not count as an appropriate source - I see the point that it is not independent even if it is reliable and verifiable. However, I found most of the general information about the foundation's activities in mostly German newspaper articles (where I got to know it in the first place). It would seem odd to me to add a reference to every single sentence (they organise concerts, they publish CDs, and so on), but would the article be acceptable with these newspaper articles given as sources? I could also delete the information that is only available via the homepage; I only strived for thoroughness in adding those and I thought mentioning say the Internet radio might just be as rewarding for the interested reader as it was for me when I came across it. CharlesVilliers (talk) 17:56, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, CharlesVilliers, content added here should normally be supported by independent references unless it is really unlikely to be challenged. As a general rule, we don't normally just overwrite someone else's article – though it does sometimes happen if the existing text is really poor. I don't think that's the case here. Also, I've asked for the page to be moved back to Centre de musique romantique française, on the basis that the centre (which is, what, six or seven years old?) is a separate topic from the Casino Zane, which has three or four centuries of history, and deserves a page of its own. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:26, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you again for your quick reply. The name of the foundation/organisation/centre is indeed Palazzetto Bru Zane - Centre de musique romantique française, even if it may seem counterintuitive. Not only their homepage and the logo confirm this, but also newspaper articles such as this one, see the first sentence: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2017/feb/23/mehul-uthal-cd-review-deshayes-beuron-bou Just as you put it, Casino Zane may be the most appropriate name for the building itself, while Centre de musique romantique française rather acts as a subtitle explaining the nature of the organisation. I invested some time in writing this article and very conscientiously checked all sources I could find. I will try to edit my version with giving these sources more precisely. Concerning additional information that is to be found on their homepage and is also very unlikely to be challenged - do you strongly advise against including it? CharlesVilliers (talk) 18:53, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

CharlesVilliers, the best place to discuss this is the talk-page of the article, perhaps you could take it there? It would be polite to invite comment from In ictu oculi and perhaps some of the other editors who wrote the content that's there now. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:58, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello, and thank you for your improvements on the article. Glancing over your edit summaries, I get the impression that you are quite upset with the previous and maybe the current state of the page. You have every right to do so. Still, I find expressions such as ″this is an encyclopaedia, for heaven's sake!″, ″uninspiring opera″ or the term ″hijack″ you used in the move discussion inappropriate and directed rather to me as a person than strictly limited to the matter. I regret you had a rather harsh attitude to all my additions, which were meant to be constructive; for example, you removed the mention of the Centre de Musique Baroque de Versailles as unreferenced, while at least one of the given links draws this comparison ([[18]]). As a new member, a newbie, I think I deserve a more respectful, kinder treatment. I had to adjust and am still adjusting to the change from reader to editor. I personally think it's great what the Palazzetto is doing—otherwise I would have had no interest in writing about it—but I was very aware to keep a neutral tone. English is not my first language so I may not always have succeeded. But as I understand Wikipedia, suboptimal phrases can continuously be improved by everyone and that's what I was hoping for to happen. CharlesVilliers (talk) 13:24, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for your close attention to the editing history of the article on David and Simon Reuben. Edwardx (talk) 13:18, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Thanks, Edwardx! But it seems I've still not finished there, there's more. Working on it now. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:25, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Someone really needed to get on top of it, and well done for doing so. Edwardx (talk) 13:30, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Reuben Foundation

Just stumbled across Reuben Foundation. Looks like the same COI editor may have added problematic material. Edwardx (talk) 13:21, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, that'll be next. What a mess! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:25, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! Edwardx (talk) 13:31, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

thanks for creating 'geometry of fear', well organized and very informative page.

LairdUnlimited (talk) 19:57, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Allthingsgo, I'm pleased to hear that someone has read it – almost all those people are so very thoroughly forgotten! I started that short page when I was writing about Robert Clatworthy and found we had nothing on them. Best regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:39, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is about the topic American Pekin Duck. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Seems that EditSafe filed a request for volunteer interference. --George Ho (talk) 01:59, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

We have a second round of statements at WP:DRN#Talk:American Pekin_Duck#Previous_and_current_revisions. --George Ho (talk) 17:27, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Look familiar?

Newly registered account via Italian Wikipedia Klein49. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:46, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

And another one registered yesterday via Italian Wikipedia Eco2346. Here on English WP, they just tried to re-create Bob Marchese (the actor who portrayed Carlo Biotti in Piazza Fontana: The Italian Conspiracy) and as you saw, also added nonsense to Lierna Castle. The edit patterns of both accounts both here and cross-wiki speak for themselves. Do you think it's worth filing an SPI? Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:45, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

First thing, big kudos for your patience and tenacity in keeping on top (?) of this – thank you, Voceditenore! I don't know whether there's any value in a local SPI for what is mostly a global problem, affecting many Wikipedias where admins may perhaps be fewer and less experienced than here. A few Smithson socks ago I asked M7 to globally lock a couple of them, which he/she did (thank you!). When I asked if we could also globally nuke the sock edits, the reply was "ask an active sysop on meta" – which I didn't, probably a mistake.

I see that Vituzzu, who is an active admin on it.wp, is also a check-user on meta, which may be just what we need – so pinging in the hope he may be able/willing to advise whether anything can or should be done, and if so what and how (Vituzzu, if you see this, we can provide any amount of background if needed, just ask!). What would be still better would be to know what might be done to keep it under control in the future. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:32, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

I don't know if I'm on top of this, but I must say this whack-a-mole game is becoming extremely tedious. He had gone almost a year here w/out creating registered sock accounts and now two in as many days. Anyhow, an adminsistrator on it.wp, AttoRenato, successfully requested a global lock on the latest one above Eco2346. I've now applied here on Meta for a global lock on Klein49. We'll see what happens. I'm not sure if this account has to be blocked on en.wp first. Anyhow, if he tries any more of these, I'm strongly tempted to create an LTA page for Smithson. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:17, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I blocked Klein49: no mercy, sorry, waiting for glock ;) I agree with both of you: the game is tedious and the guy is becoming more and more dangerous above all for minor wikis, avoiding the bigger ones, too much guarded. I dont'know if LTA will do, but good luck. I guess: impossible a big-global-universal-end-of-the-world-filter for the word "Natoli" :D ? It might help. Ciao! AttoRenato (talk) 08:58, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi AttoRenato. Thanks so much for the block on it.wp. That should make the global lock easier. You're right, he's especially a danger to the smaller Wikis. He's creating havoc on simple.wp. LTA isn't a sanction as such but it is very useful in preserving institutional memory and helping others spot future abuse. At the moment, it's only me and Justlettersandnumbers on en.wp who are keeping him on watch and know his patterns. {{{{SIGH}}}}. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:17, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Actually, VdT, I've noticed AttoRenato keeping a watch on some en.wp pages too (thank you!). I've no idea how to do an LTA page, but I'm happy to contribute. What I really want to know is where to go to ask for and discuss a global solution. We asked the Foundation for better tools to deal with long-term abuse; this seems to be just the sort of thing we need them for. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:56, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

You mean something like the ability to globally nuke the edits of globally locked accounts? I guess one problem is that it wouldn't work with IPs, and most of his damage now is done via IPs, which shift constantly. There's potential for a lot of collateral damage. Or perhaps the idea of global edit filters for words like "Natoli", "Biotti", "Polli", "Sperlinga" etc.? The problem with that is that there would have to be some way from exempting extended auto-confirmed users and it wouldn't stop him from adding nonsense to exisiting articles as long as the additions didn't include those words. I guess you could start by raising the issue at meta:Wikimedia Forum or perhaps contact User:Mdennis (WMF) for suggestions on who best to approach. Re an LTA page, I've done one before. I'll see about cooking one up and post it if the nonsense continues. (It's bound to!) I'm also going to warn simple.wp and Wikidata. He's made numerous edits to Wikidata. Lord knows what "facts" he has added to that dubious "knowledge base", many of which can get automatically incorporated into infoboxes or even generate articles on some wikis. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:45, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey! :) So, improving blocking tools in a way that is less wack-a-mole and more intelligent is in the works, but isn't going to be an instant change. The work is being done as part of a grant from the Newmark Foundation and craigslist Charitable Fund meant to help combat harassment and trolling, but with collateral benefits (see Meta:Community health initiative). Our blocking tools are dinosaurs, easily circumvented. Our Product team is working to change that. In terms of global edit filters or global rollback, those would likely be best raised at the Community Wishlist survey if you're looking for WMF assistance. Otherwise, a discussion at the forum or even starting with the WP:VPT might be the way to start, prior to filing a Phabricator ticket. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 13:38, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Maggie . Voceditenore (talk) 19:30, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

He's back..., check please. Bye. --AttoRenato (talk) 03:30, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Up your alley

Non-English speaker with good intentions, and probably knowledge, but what a mess. Karachay horse. You are better at untangling this sort of mess than I am, good luck! Montanabw^(talk) 23:04, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Montana! Actually you mentioned this before (Help, dated 13 November 2016). I still feel the same – it could do with some tidying up, but it's better than most of our breed articles. Some of the references should probably be checked, but I don't speak Russian and I most definitely don't know any Karachay-Balkar. Why not list it in the clean-up section of Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English in the hope of attracting someone who does? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:09, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Capel Manor House

Quick query - don't understand why we'd want to revert to the old (1976) West Kent and The Weald Pevsner, when we've got the new one (2012) available. KJP1 (talk) 18:55, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi, KJP1! I had two reasons for doing that: (a) I could see it on Google books, but had no preview for the more recent one (do you?), and there may be more there that can be made use of; and (b) Pevsner himself is listed as an author of that edition (published before he died) – I linked directly to our page on him for that reason. But I don't feel particularly strongly about it, I was really more interested in removing the sock-puppet edits. Do you want to change it back? Or cite both? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:09, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

In my great good fortune, I've got the entire Pevsner, old and new. I do think there's a bit more we can take from the new, so I'll have a look and, if I can, I'll cite the new. As you say, the 1976 version was also by Newman and Pevsner - Newman started as one of Pevsner's many drivers. Agree entirely re. the sock puppet edits - I strongly suspect the whole original article was "lifted" from somewhere. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 19:18, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

That sounds excellent, thank you! Yes, I cleaned up five articles with large contributions from Gyles82, who was indeffed for copyright violations; in three of them I found blatant copy-pasting, in two I did not, and so removed the text on presumption only; but, like you, I'm quite convinced it was plagiarised. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:01, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Wendell M. Levi: The Pigeon

Do you have access to The Pigeon by Wendell M. Levi? There shall be a preface mentioning Karl Stauber (Swiss photographer, author, ... ) I would like to read... (don't know the year)

I am preparing to write articles about Karl Stauber, Dr. Werner Lüthgen and Wilfried Detering (in German). Lüthgen and Detering just died this February (both are recipients of the "Bundesverdienstkreuz am Bande"; de:Liste von Trägern des Bundesverdienstkreuzes#Verdienstkreuz am Bande (not included)). Karl Stauber had his 90th birthday. --PigeonIP (talk) 08:50, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi, PigeonIP! I don't have any access to that book beyond what Google gives me, which is snippet view of the 1957 edition. Stauber is mentioned more than 40 times – I assume he supplied some of the illustrations? I look forward to reading about him. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:40, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

I am just able to get "matching items" in the 57th edition via hathitrust (but no snippets)

82 photographs of Stauber are mentioned...

rereading the article: "persönliche Widmung" is a book with personal dedication Stauber got from Levi... – no preface :(

btw.: thanks for using the notification-tool. This way I get the pings (sometimes) in time^{and in other projects (de-wp, wm-co)} to be able to answer ;) --PigeonIP (talk) 12:03, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

"how did this end up here??? (sorry!)"

Well, I can explain, though you've probably figured it out for yourself by now. If you're still curious, all is explained here. Maproom (talk) 15:12, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, worked it out, Maproom. What I don't know is whether you should/could have changed "{{AFC submission|||ts=20170320225800|u=Maproom|ns=118}}" to read "{{AFC submission|||ts=20170320225800|u=Galical|ns=118}}". That would I think have averted the strange behaviour. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:03, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Quin Abbey

Hi: Looking at the text now, you are correct that I should have taken greater care to paraphrase the content more. Although the Clare County Library is clearly named as the source, this was in many places way too close to the original.

It might have been preferable to just rephrase/condense the offending parts. However, I realize that a quick correction was needed.Drow69 (talk) 15:53, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Drow69! And yes, in an ideal world where we had dozens of editors working on copyright clean-up and each had the luxury of unlimited time to deal with each suspected problem, it would certainly be more friendly and better for the individual article to rewrite all infringing content. I do actually try to do that to some small extent. The hitch is that, in general, an editor who adds one copyright violation very often also adds another, and establishing with reasonable certainty whether that has or has not happened can be very time-consuming. So I'm afraid I usually just revert to before the first identified "bad" edit unless there's a clearly-defined block of offending text that can be neatly excised. It's not ideal, I know. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:14, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Rodeo bulls

JLAN, I've been helping the editor who is working on the rodeo bull riding articles — I think all that is really needed is a talkpage heads up and ask her to fix stuff, perhaps with a link to the copyvio results you are relying upon so she can see the trouble areas; this is a fairly new user who learns quickly and has a lot of good faith. She’s been real good about taking advice when I’ve offered itWe have a teachable person and I don’t want to lose her as an editor because she has a good combination of energy and interest that we need more of around here. Try not to bite too hard, OK? Montanabw^(talk) 17:12, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Late reply, sorry! Yes, saw some of the kerfuffle on your talk-page. It's kind of just OK to remove the copyvio template from a page once you're quite sure there's no remaining problem, but do please make double-sure that you really have got it all – you'd missed several bits at Challenge of the Champions, as you saw. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:05, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Sensory processing disorder

Hey, can anything be done about the copyvio situation on the article? It's been tagged for a month now and gets 1,000 views daily (was also in the news recently because a woman's son who was patted down by the TSA had this). Opencooper (talk) 15:00, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Opencooper, sorry I didn't answer this sooner. I've now looked in more detail at the article history, and it's not good news: it needs to be rewritten. I've posted an explanation on the talk-page. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:31, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Hey, no biggie, thanks for looking into it. That's unfortunate. As I don't feel comfortable editing a medical article myself either, I've posted a plea at WikiProject Medicine. Opencooper (talk) 05:03, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Translationese

Hi, thanks for your comments a few weeks ago at the Village Pump. Unfortunately I had to put down Wikipedia for a few weeks there and I didn't get to push the discussion further. I myself don't know how to create a template, but I'll try to use the templates you suggested if I encounter this again. I do agree with Thnidu though that an in-line template would be best. FYI, the link to the Village Pump discussion is here. - Wwallacee (talk) 09:34, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Hieroglyphs

The comments on the CP listing gave me the impression that the idea of having the list was the copyright infringement (as opposed to the issue being the copying of text), and the AFD seemed to conclude that no, having the list was fine. If you think I misunderstood something, please feel free to put the item back at CP. Nyttend (talk) 22:24, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

I think you've got the right idea – that the copying of an ordered list by an author whose work is still in copyright could well be unacceptable. I didn't see that the AfD discussion had really gone into that. I've been ducking this because it's well outside my comfort zone. I suppose I'll start a talk-page discussion … Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:32, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology

That article always drives me nuts - lots of fluff, grandstanding/POV/best thing since sliced bread statements. I keep an eye on it mainly for outright-vandalism but every time I read some of it I think "DAYum this thing needs a complete overhaul". Your recent changes have been a big improvement, so thank you. Shearonink (talk) 16:07, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Well, thanks, Shearonink – but really I only chipped a little at the tip of the iceberg. There's a lot more to be done there, I think. I thought I'd wait to see if those initial changes would stick before I did too much more. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:14, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Btw, you've inspired me so I've decide to chip away at the Alumni section - WP:BLP concerns etc. My criteria atm is that if the person's WP-article even just mentions that the person attended TJHSST then their name stays. Then I'll go back through and add references for those folks. Shearonink (talk) 16:20, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Chinese academy of sciences

Hello, you have removed all edits I added in this change [19]

I saw you later removed inline weblinks too, but the information I added is merely an expansion to what is there already.

I would appreciate it if you could add it back yourself. Thanks!

Pieceofmetalwork (talk) 23:15, 10 April 2017 (UTC) Pieceofmetalwork (talk) 23:15, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Pieceofmetalwork, those institutions were – like almost everything in that page – without any reference. Please feel free to add them back yourself with appropriate reliable sources. Thank you, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:02, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Because you removed the references... A link to a website on a domain owned by the academy of sciences is a proof of its existence. Having inline links is bad practice, right, but then you can't remove the links, then claim that there is no source, because those were the references. Pieceofmetalwork (talk) 21:24, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Zwirner gallery page

Hi there,

I've been trying to fix the page for DavidZwirner gallery, because it's massive out of date and thin. Here are my suggested edits, which are purely factural and fully referenced. Could you let me know why it all keeps being deleted?

Extended content

The David Zwirner Gallery is an American contemporary art gallery owned by David Zwirner. It has two gallery spaces in New York City and one in London, and has plans to open in Hong Kong in 2018.[1] History 1990s In 1993, David Zwirner (b. 1964, Cologne, Germany) opened his first eponymous gallery on Greene Street in the SoHo neighborhood of New York City.[2] In its first year, the reception of its exhibition by the young Los Angeles-based artist Jason Rhoades, along with a gallery expansion in 1994, contributed to the gallery’s early recognition.[3] In 1994, David Zwirner presented the U.S. debut exhibition of Belgian painter Luc Tuymans.[4] The roster of artists during this decade also included Raoul De Keyser, Stan Douglas, Marcel Dzama, On Kawara, Toba Khedoori, The Estate of Gordon Matta-Clark, John McCracken, Raymond Pettibon, Yutaka Sone, Diana Thater, Franz West, and Christopher Williams. 2000s In 2002, Zwirner moved his gallery from SoHo to Chelsea (525 West 19th Street). In 2006, the gallery then expanded from 10,000 to 30,000 square feet (2,800 m2) by adding spaces at 519 and 533 West 19th Street. Artists who joined the gallery during this decade included Tomma Abts, Francis Alÿs, Mamma Andersson, Michaël Borremans, R. Crumb, Philip-Lorca diCorcia, Marlene Dumas, Suzan Frecon, Isa Genzken, Jockum Nordström, Chris Ofili, Michael Riedel, Thomas Ruff, James Welling, Lisa Yuskavage, and the Leipzig painter Neo Rauch, who had his U.S. debut exhibition at the gallery in 2000. The gallery also announced the representation of a number of estates, including those of Dan Flavin, Alice Neel, Fred Sandback, and Al Taylor. From 2000 to 2009, David Zwirner also was a partner with Iwan Wirth in Zwirner & Wirth, a gallery on Manhattan’s Upper East Side, which focused on private sales and historically researched exhibitions. Following the move of David Zwirner’s part of the business to Chelsea, highlights have included Dan Flavin: Series and Progressions (2009), a major survey of the artist’s work in fluorescent light, and Primary Atmospheres: Works from California 1960-1970,[5] a critically acclaimed survey of West Coast Minimalism which is often credited with contributing to the transformation of the market for many of the “Light and Space” artists. 2010 to present In 2012, David Zwirner expanded into Europe.[6] The gallery opened in an eighteenth-century Georgian townhouse on Grafton Street in London’s Mayfair district with a solo exhibition of new paintings by Luc Tuymans.[7] After a renovation overseen by architect Annabelle Selldorf of Selldorf Architects, the building has almost 10,000 square feet (930 m2) throughout five floors, with main exhibition spaces on three levels.[8] The gallery announced its exclusive representation of Judd Foundation in 2010, and the Estate of Ad Reinhardt in 2013. Other artists who joined the gallery included Carol Bove (2011); Doug Wheeler (2012); Jeff Koons, Yayoi Kusama, Oscar Murillo, and Jordan Wolfson (2013); Karla Black, Bridget Riley, Richard Serra, Wolfgang Tillmans, and Kerry James Marshall (2014); Blinky Palermo and Jan Schoonhoven (2015). The gallery announced its exclusive representation of William Eggleston in 2016, and of the Estate of Ruth Asawa in 2017.[9] As of 2017, the Estate of Felix Gonzalez-Torres is co-represented by David Zwirner and Andrea Rosen Gallery.[10] Further expansion continued in 2013 with the opening of a new five-story 30,000 square foot (2,800 m2) building in New York’s Chelsea neighborhood (537 West 20th Street).[11] Also designed by Selldorf, it became the first commercial art gallery to receive LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certification.[12] The building was featured on the cover of Architectural Record[13] magazine and featured in Architect magazine.[14] The inaugural exhibition was a presentation of significant large-scale works by Dan Flavin and Donald Judd.[15] David Zwirner Books was founded in 2014 as the stand-alone publishing house of David Zwirner. The imprint publishes catalogues, monographs, historical surveys, artist books, and catalogue raisonnés related to the gallery’s exhibition program.[16] Zwirner's son Lucas is Editorial Director at David Zwirner Books.[17] In early 2018, David Zwirner will open a new location in Hong Kong. With interiors by Annabelle Selldorf, the gallery will incorporate close to 10,000 square feet of exhibition space on two floors of H Queen's, a new building in the city's Central district designed by William Lim.[18] Artists: Tomma Abts Anni Albers Josef Albers Francis Alÿs Mamma Andersson Ruth Asawa Karla Black Michaël Borremans Carol Bove R. Crumb Raoul De Keyser Philip-Lorca diCorcia Stan Douglas Marlene Dumas Marcel Dzama William Eggleston Dan Flavin Suzan Frecon Isa Genzken Felix Gonzalez-Torres Donald Judd On Kawara Toba Khedoori Jeff Koons Yayoi Kusama Sherrie Levine Kerry James Marshall Gordon Matta-Clark John McCracken Giorgio Morandi Oscar Murillo Alice Neel Jockum Nordström Chris Ofili Palermo Raymond Pettibon Sigmar Polke Neo Rauch Ad Reinhardt Jason Rhoades Michael Riedel Bridget Riley Thomas Ruff Fred Sandback Jan Schoonhoven Richard Serra Yutaka Sone Al Taylor Diana Thater Wolfgang Tillmans Luc Tuymans James Welling Doug Wheeler Christopher Williams Jordan Wolfson Yun Hyong-keun Lisa Yuskavage References 1. • Qin, Amy (2016-06-09). "David Zwirner Gallery to Open Outpost in Hong Kong in 2017". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2017-04-06. • • "David Zwirner's Art Empire". The New Yorker. Retrieved 2017-04-06. • • "The Rhoades Less Traveled - Previews - Art in America". www.artinamericamagazine.com. Retrieved 2017-04-06. • • Villarreal, Ignacio. "Exhibition of new paintings by Luc Tuymans inaugurate David Zwirner's new space in London". artdaily.com. Retrieved 2017-04-06. • • Viveros-Faune, Christian (2010-01-26). "David Zwirner's 'Primary Atmospheres' Is California Sweet". Village Voice. Retrieved 2017-04-06. • • Magazine, Wallpaper* (2012-10-05). "A trio of US galleries opens in London before Frieze Art Fair | Art | Wallpaper* Magazine". Wallpaper*. Retrieved 2017-04-06. • • "'We wanted something that screamed Europe'". Financial Times. Retrieved 2017-04-06. • • Westall, Mark (2012-03-13). "David Zwirner to Open Two Major Galleries in London and New York in 2012". FAD Magazine. Retrieved 2017-04-06. • • "David Zwirner Represents the Estate of Ruth Asawa | artnet News". artnet News. 2017-01-09. Retrieved 2017-04-06. • • "Andrea Rosen Will Close Her Gallery After 27 Years | artnet News". artnet News. 2017-02-22. Retrieved 2017-04-06. • • Westall, Mark (2012-03-13). "David Zwirner to Open Two Major Galleries in London and New York in 2012". FAD Magazine. Retrieved 2017-04-06. • • "David Zwirner Gallery | Open Green Map". www.opengreenmap.org. Retrieved 2017-04-06. • • "David Zwirner". Retrieved 2017-04-06. • • "David Zwirner". Architect. Retrieved 2017-04-06. • • USA, AICA. "AICA-USA | NEWS & EVENTS | Review: Dan Flavin and Donald Judd at David Zwirner Gallery". www.aicausa.org. Retrieved 2017-04-06. • • "David Zwirner Will Open David Zwirner Books in Chelsea This Fall | ARTnews". www.artnews.com. Retrieved 2017-04-06. • • http://theartnewspaper.com/news/in-the-frame/zwirner-prodigy-turns-to-in-house-publishing/. Missing or empty |title= (help) 18. • Qin, Amy (2016-06-09). "David Zwirner Gallery to Open Outpost in Hong Kong in 2017". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2017-04-06. Categories: • 1993 establishments in New York • Culture of New York City • Art galleries in Manhattan • Art galleries established in 1993 • Art galleries in London

Many thanks 1-ona (talk) 14:44, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi, 1-ona! I've been trying to fix it too – it was a long way from what we regard as suitable content for an encyclopaedia. The best place to talk about this is the talk-page of the article, Talk:David Zwirner Gallery. Do you have some connection to the gallery, by the way? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:56, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Changes in "American Pekin"

Hello again. The article is reverted back to your version. You may improve it right now; I told the other editor to refrain from editing it for a long while. --George Ho (talk) 13:19, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, George Ho, I'll try to get to it soon. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:05, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Stig Harder & Fashion Net

Dear Justlettersandnumbers,

I apologize for the mixup.

Could you help get the articles back for FASHION NET at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fashion_Net and my own at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stig_Harder? I read the reason was there weren't enough references online to establish notability.

Here are several references from print publications back when the Internet was in its infancy:

Extended content

stigharder.com/media/harpers-bazaar-1995.jpg stigharder.com/media/henne-2002.jpg stigharder.com/media/british-vogue-1995.jpg stigharder.com/media/british-vogue-1996.jpg stigharder.com/media/cooper-hewitt-1997.jpg stigharder.com/media/elle-japan-1996.jpg stigharder.com/media/guardian-1995.jpg stigharder.com/media/le-monde-1997.jpg stigharder.com/media/net-magazine-1996.jpg stigharder.com/media/netuser-1996.jpg stigharder.com/media/new-york-times-1996.jpg stigharder.com/media/paper-magazine.jpg stigharder.com/media/planete-internet-1996.jpg stigharder.com/media/time-magazine-1996.jpg stigharder.com/media/usa-today-1997.jpg stigharder.com/media/vogue-1995.jpg stigharder.com/media/wired-1996.jpg My executive membership at the IADAS (click on letter H): https://www.iadas.net/membership/ Thank you so much. Warm regards, Stig Stigharder (talk) 07:05, 17 April 2017 (UTC) Dear Justlettersandnumbers, I found the archived page for Cooper Hewitt's "Mixing Messages" exhibition in 1996-1997 where Lumiere was included: https://web-beta.archive.org/web/19970215142503/http://mixingmessages.si.edu:80/mm/dialogue/comm5.jhtml;MSkKN8ldt0c3R4wNNhG9EntHIMA793ySd5zF1QNZss8m0lA I see the article itself is missing from the archive, but my staff back then did a screenshot: stigharder.com/media/cooper-hewitt-1997.jpg

Warm regards,

Stig

Stigharder (talk) 20:37, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Stigharder, I'm afraid you really are asking the wrong person. I've spent several hours of my life, over a period of several years, trying to clean up inappropriate promotional edits made by you or people connected with you, and I have absolutely no interest in seeing any of the articles restored.

That said, it looks to me as if you might perhaps have enough sources there to justify requesting a WP:deletion review with the reason "significant new information has come to light since ... deletion that would justify recreating the deleted page", so that's an option you could consider. I think you should expect some fairly vigorous opposition if you do decide to give it a try. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:08, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Justlettersandnumbers.

Warm regards,

Stig

Stigharder (talk) 19:19, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	I pottered over to Francesco Clemente this afternoon intending to fix some of the content issues I knew were there... lo and behold, you'd already done a sterling job of fixing the problems with the article. Thanks for your hard work! Yunshui 雲水 11:52, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Yunshui, much appreciated! That's a work-in-progress, though, still far from complete. I hope to get back to it soon, if you don't get to it first. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:03, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Laws of London

Hello, another editor has (or rather, had) tagged the page as g8, the notice giving the criteria 'redirect to non-existent page' or 'to itself' etc. I have removed it, as your redirect to the appropriate section seems valid to me. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 15:51, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

I saw, Eagleash, thank you for that. I've added a {{R with possibilities}} tag to it. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:10, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

OK good. I wasn't sure whether you might have w/listed it... Eagleash (talk) 16:33, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Paid Editor radar?

How good is your undisclosed paid editor radar? I saw your post at the noticeboards trying to deal with one... I've just done an unusual thing for me and nominated a couple articles for AfD... [20], [21], [22]. Anyway, noticed the same person created each. I did a bit of digging and this user is prolific in article creation, but quality... ? Anyway, I don't know if he's over-eager or an undisclosed paid editor, plus you know I can get bitey when I get on the track of some sort of problem, so thought I'd ask you if either 1) You want to sniff about with your nose for problems (radar, perhaps?) or 2) If this is outside your balliwick, perhaps you can point me to the guru(s) of sniffing out paid editors. Montanabw^(talk) 06:41, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

If I have any radar at all, I'd say it's somewhere between poor and pathetic. There are some very switched-on people at WP:COIN, with real perception and investigation and research skills, so that's where I'd usually take suspicions of this sort. Even so, I'm pretty certain that it isn't the problem here, which appears to be just the common Wikipedia disease of creating yet more stubs about completely non-notable sportspeople because they've once kicked or struck a ball or whatever for money. Which reminds me, there's a discussion of that guideline underway somewhere … Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:46, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Yes, there is a link to the discussion from WT:WikiProject Horse racing. I'm ambivalent, I agree about the kicked a ball thing, but I had quite a debate once over a jockey who won the Grand National back in the 1800s, when the facade of "amateur gentlemen" was maintained... won that round, but saw a need for guidelines. Montanabw^(talk)

Totally different issue: Yanardag. Not sure what to do with this; clean up or AfD. Thoughts? Montanabw^(talk) 05:34, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) If the horse is on both a postage stamp (currently pictured) and the Coat of arms of Turkmenistan, it obviously meets Wikipedia notability requirements. Softlavender (talk) 07:45, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Yep, agree with Softlavender – he's surely notable. Here's a mention in the Daily Telegraph, for example. And yes, it certainly needs some work, which I'm not planning to put in (I had a go at Chetak, though). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:43, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Heh, my situation too. Maybe I'll just post at WPEQ talk and see if anyone bites. Montanabw^(talk) 03:49, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) User:Montanabw I think I have a fairly good nose for spotting UPE but I don't see anything that raises my suspicions with this editor. Everything appears to be sourced and verifies from the cited sources and the content is not promotional. As to whether they are notable... WP:NSPORT isn't my expertise. SmartSE (talk) 09:02, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Montana, this ↑ is one of the switched-on editors I was referring to. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:23, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Take up a fair old chunk of your page, I'm afraid  ;)

(About half of Astley's Art of Riding, 1584, removed to reduce page size)

Best of luck! — O Fortuna ^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 16:09, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

10:24:13, 7 May 2017 review of submission by 5.80.9.116

• 5.80.9.116 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Good Bad Poems (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Just etc..,

Many thanks for the advice. I am not able to develop my article on Good Bad Poetry after the fashion that you suggest, and I have concluded that it is best if I abandon it.

Thank you again for the trouble you have taken to help me.

Lewis Jones.

Just, Thank you for taking the time to explain. I did new edit, putting references in parenthesis, as I couldn't figure it out how to use a template (I did spend a lot of time trying to learn - but I understand that what it is important is the I provide a reliable source. Some editors have been using Yad Vashem website, whom I was told by an editor at Wikipedia is partisan. I am using references from books mentioned in your list.

I care about integrity and neutrality on history of the Holocaust, which, sometimes is very politicized. Henia Perlman (talk) 00:31, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Courtesy notice

This is a courtesy notice to let you know I have posted at ANI to get further input on the Balfour Declaration citation question. Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Balfour Declaration. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:48, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

LDR

Hey Justlettersandnumbers there seems to be a list defined reference error with ref name r|jsc in this edit. I can't look any further because the page is locked. Regards CV9933 (talk) 11:18, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, CV9933! – my mistake, as so often. I've asked for it to be fixed. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:48, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Louise Blouin

Dear User:Justlettersandnumbers, i noticed you just undid my edits on Louise Blouin Wiki article without a proper explanation why that information should not be there on Louise Blouin Wikipedia page. You explain one resource is not reliable, What about others? I also checked your history on this page. Most of the time you demotivate new users to contribute on Wikipedia. 122.160.30.242 (talk) 12:39, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

The Daily Fail is not a reliable source. If you look at the edit I made after that, you'll see that I did add back the Observer reference, with a little actual information from it. The tone of the actual text you added was not appropriate to an encyclopaedia. Oh, and if your edit is undone, please don't just make the same edit again, but instead start a discussion on the talk-page (if you wish). Your accusation of demotivation of new users is a serious one; if it has basis, you should certainly take it to WP:ANI. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:51, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

OK, Let the others decide. You are disrupting me to improving the article. To resolve the issue I am inviting @Montanabw:, @Barek:, @BOZ:, @CactusWriter:, @Canley:, @DaGizza:, @David Levy:, @Daniel Case:, @Deor: and @Ealdgyth:. In the meanwhile i undone your edits and mke it correct as you suggest by adding more references. 122.160.30.242 (talk) 10:45, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

I have no idea why I was pinged on this, but here is my opinion as just another editor. As stated by Justlettersandnumbers, The Daily Mail is not a reliable source. And, IMO, neither was the small tabloid newspaper New York Observer. Nor are self-submitted bios in the UN book or the Huffington Post. If the only information to be included is that Blouin was the CEO of Trader Classified Media than a single Bloomberg News [23] citation should be sufficient. I note that "she led over 7,000 employees worldwide" is not mentioned in any source. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 00:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

No clue why I was pinged either - but I don't do BLPs if I can avoid it, so someone else is a better judge. Nor am I Brit, so I really can't judge the Daily Mail. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:24, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Guys, it's a total mystery to me – the IP has added the same poor content 5 times now, I've just no idea why, nor how the pings were chosen. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:03, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Holocaust ...

Re: this edit, I'd change the system to the one I use for most of my articles if I thought I could get away with it. I find the system on Middle Ages much much much easier to deal with, but I swear that some folks on Wikipedia think that if it has a template, it HAS to be better. Don't ever even try to figure out WP:List defined references, it'll explode your head. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:47, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thank you for the help with the copyright violations on The Holocaust, it's very much appreciated. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:49, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Ealdgyth – we got it done despite some hiccoughs, probably mostly thanks to your rather convincing examples on the talk-page. As for the reference format thing, I had to laugh – far from popping my head, LDR is to me the neatest and most straightforward system of all, my invariable choice when there is choice. Examples at Il Primo Libro delle Canzoni or Johannes Engel, if your head can take the pressure. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:03, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Don Reitz

Can you please list your particular content concerns about this article on the talkpage so I may address them? I would like to address your concerns.  —አቤል ዳዊት^?(Janweh64) (talk) 03:14, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: I have moved this article to draft and resubmitted it to AfC. I implore you, beg you to name your concerns on the draft talkpage so I may fix them before the article is approved again as I am certain it will be. —አቤል ዳዊት^?(Janweh64) (talk) 09:28, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Hand of God Article

Hi, so I'm curious what information I posted that was copywrited? I can't see it on the History and I don't recall the specific edit. I'd like to know so I could avoid problems in the future. jlcoving (talk) 21:52, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

jlcoving, I'm afraid I can't give you an exact answer to this, as – like you – I can't see the two edits you made to Hand of God (TV series). But as far as I remember, you had added a bit of plot summary identical to what was on one of the websites listed on the talk-page (the editor after you then added a lot more). I think you'll have to ask an admin if you want more precise detail. In general, the advice is that everything you write in Wikipedia must be entirely in your own words – it's almost never OK to borrow text from other places. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:40, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Cirque du Soleil - Volta

Hi Justlettersnadnumbers, I created the page for this Cirque du Soleil show, and it was rejected and deleted due to "copyright violations"... Could you further explain exactly what was the violation? I'm new and I don't know exactly what I did wrong. I used confirmed sources for all the material, and spent hours creating a page that was all of a sudden wiped; the show has now premiered and we have no page for it. Thanks. Estebanpirazo (talk) 18:05, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Estebanpirazo! I'm afraid I missed this message earlier, as it was at the top of this page instead of at the bottom. Volta (Cirque du Soleil) was redirected and its history hidden because it contained material copied from elsewhere on the internet – we don't allow text copied from non-free sources here. There's a message about this on your talk-page, with the header Copyright problem: Volta (Cirque du Soleil). There's no objection to you restarting the page provided you are sure there's enough in-depth coverage of it in independent reliable sources – just go to the page, hit edit, remove all the text that's there and start writing. If you have questions, the Teahouse is a good place to ask them, or you can ask here. Good luck! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:13, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Justlettersandnumbers, I contacted Cirque du Soleil directly regarding your comment about the material found on their webpage being copyrighted, and their answer is that the material on those pages is part of their press releases, and free to use if needed. I actually explained them what I used their information for, and they answered they have no problem with me using it in the creation of the Wikipedia page for the Cirque du Soleil show Volta. Please let me know how to proceed in this case, to reinstate the Wikipedia page I have created, and let me know if you need me to forward you the e-mail I received directly from them stating this material is free to use. The page I created also has several other references to independent material that are free to use for the creation of the Wikipedia page of this show. Thanks. Estebanpirazo (talk) 11:44, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

May 2017

It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you.

May 2017

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made to Bonin Bough has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you.

Actually, I have not reverted it. But this edit was inappropriate for a COI that was properly declared: in the edit summary and on my userpage. —አቤል ዳዊት^?(Janweh64) (talk) 00:32, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

{{long dash}}

FYI Born2bgratis is now going around articles changing {{long dash}} ( ——— ) to unicode 11835 (⸻) with predictable consequences. See for example Bede (which I've reverted), and the discussion on his talk page. Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 11:13, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Willie J. Hagan

See Talk:Willie J. Hagan. X4n6 (talk) 07:10, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Edit requests

Justlettersandnumbers, thank you for your corrections of my edits. Please forgive me that I am not yet totally familiar with Wikipedia etiquette. But I am learning. I hope you'll find some time for edit requests I left on Talk:Jürgen_Schmidhuber and Talk:Felix_Gers. (BTW I can hardly believe the sheer number of your edits on so many different topics.) Slowfun (talk) 16:55, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Justlettersandnumbers. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is meta email - newspapers.com.
Message added 23:14, 23 May 2017 (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.

--Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 23:14, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Justlettersandnumbers. Please check your email; you've got mail!
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.

Deletion of Monoranjan Roy

I could not find reasons for deletion. It just says its advertising. I did make the article in neutral manner without intent to advertise. I need to understand it to avoid deletion in future, can you help me understand the reason and provide me with the copy of deleted article. Ritz082 (talk) 06:02, 27 May 2017 (UTC)ritz082

Ritz082, I nominated that page for deletion because it appeared to be intended only to give publicity to a person that you apparently have a close (and also, apparently, undeclared) connection to – it was you that took this picture of him, was it not, as you claim on that page? I invite you read WP:PROMOTION and WP:PAID. I can't provide you with a copy of the page, but you can ask the admin who deleted it, Cryptic. In case you are thinking of re-creating it, may I also suggest that you read about notability – it is very unlikely that that person meets our criteria for inclusion in this encyclopaedia. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 07:53, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers Thank you for letting me know the reason. I did meet the person, but the idea was not promotion. I do feel that his name mention is required in wiki. I do want to re-create the article, and I have read notability, but will do only when I am sure it is not going to be deleted / questioned again.Ritz082 (talk) 09:35, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Justlettersandnumbers

Thank you for the link. I started to read them. It's very challenging.Henia Perlman (talk) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Giuseppe Pinelli

Giuseppe Pinelli wasn't killed (consequently, he wasn't victim of human rights abuses). Please, don't change the page. --151.65.128.21 (talk) 19:48, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

copywrite violation

kindly revert my talk page back to a time BEFORE you gave me a warning

the article you reverted is currently in the process of being edited, and it is being CHECKED for copywrite here constantly https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Novar+plc&oldid=&action=search&use_engine=1&use_links=1&turnitin=0 and by ANOTHER ADMIN

you have now not only gotten in the way of this process but have warned me about copywrite for NO REASON

~ T. Spike ~|✉ 16:37, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Tony Spike, you can remove a warning from your talk-page if you want to. It might be an idea to take some notice of it first, though. As you can see here, the text you added was unacceptably close to the source, and you've already been warned about this. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:48, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbersyeah well i have already removed everything from my talk page and left a note their explaining what is happening ...i may have already been warned about it but it makes no difference to me weather i have been warned already or not since im still trying to sort the problem out

besides the only reason this is happening in the first place is because the company names remain the same between the two articles, anyone who actually bothered to look at that fact before removing it would notice and i will challenge anyone that thinks otherwise

now ....goodbye

~ T. Spike ~|✉ 17:00, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Francesco Clemente

HI, You suggested changes to Francesco Clemente I replied to you on my talk page also. Please read. Please guide me what to do next, I spent a lot of time in fixing article and I read and researched a lot to fix this one and adding info. I was totally unaware of those two links as being flagged for copyright violation. Please guide me, should I remove those 2 and republish the changes? HeatherMPinchbeck (talk) 15:51, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

HeatherMPinchbeck, I suggest you post on the talk-page of the article. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:53, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I made all the changes and even checked it thoroughly, please let me know should I publish it again? I made myself clear about any COI on my talk page again and again and if you don't want me to fix articles I'll not in the future, I told you that it was a random selection as I always try to fix articles with banners. So I spent a lot of time on this article and researched a lot, I don't want it wasted. Please, let me know, Thanks. HeatherMPinchbeck (talk) 04:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Bonin Bough - Question

Hi Justlettersandnumbers,

I wanted to reach out as you've rejected the entry for Bonin Bough a few times now. I'm just curious as to what more is needed - as Bonin is one of the most awarded executives in marketing and one of the youngest C-level executives in the world (no puffery here :) And has been INDUCTED into the Advertising Hall of Fame. Just wondering how a person who used to be a doorman at a NY bar has a Wikipedia page, but Bonin is not considered notable enough? There is a ton more reliable press out there on Bonin so is it just a case of adding those? Please let me know.

Thanks!

Sofia

Sofia, please see the reasons I left at Draft:Bonin Bough when I declined it. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:04, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Undone edit for GNA University

Dear User, This content is written for GNA University, and the section you re deleting consists departments of GNA University which i think is an important information of university. Kindly take this into serious consideration.

Manik.sarna (talk) 09:46, 20 June 2017 (UTC)Manik.sarna

Thank you for declaring your conflict of interest, Manik.sarna. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:02, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

I am a freelance photographer and stay in same area where GNA University and Lovely professional university is located. So i am updating the information which i gathered about these institutes. These are very basic infos which donot even promote any of them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manik.sarna (talk • contribs) 10:05, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Manik.sarna - Sorry, but adding content to articles citing your personal knowledge, experience, or relationships with others constitutes original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. Content that's added to articles must either be attributable to a reliable source, or directly attributed to a reliable source. I highly recommend that you review these policies and guidelines, as they're very important to understand and follow. If you have any questions regarding them, please let one of us know. Cheers -- ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:10, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Oshwah for explaining this. I would certainly edit the points mentioned by you. Can i put the names of Different Faculties/departments in the GNA University page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manik.sarna (talk • contribs) 10:14, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Mark Gottlieb (Literary Agent)

Hello Justlettersandnumbers. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Mark Gottlieb (Literary Agent), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: claims significance, representing multiple notable authors indicates significance as well. Use WP:AFD instead. Thank you. SoWhy 14:49, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

OK. It seems you and Bbb23, who deleted it for the same reason last night, don't quite agree in the interpretation of that criterion. Oh, well, AfD it is. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:59, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

It would be a boring world if administrators agreed on everything.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:03, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch!

		The Guidance Barnstar
		Hey! Thanks a lot for explaining me on the references. It helps out a lot. Thanks again buddy! Adityavagarwal (talk) 20:21, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Side Note: I felt the second version of the barnstar (the one I gave) better than the first; however, if you like the first one, I would change it to the first. Adityavagarwal (talk) 20:22, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Adityavagarwal! As I said, if you have more questions, ask away (better there than here, but either is fine)! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:30, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi!

Hi! Thanks a bunch for your inputs on Mallard. Yep, Peking duck relates to the domestic duck (which is in fact a descendant of the mallard). Earlier, that section of food was not present, when in Talk:Mallard/GA1, there were suggestions to add the food section with canard a l'orange, etc. So, I added them. Adityavagarwal (talk) 18:50, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Simon Philby

Hi there,

RE: Simon Philby, there is no conflict of interest present. I am simply creating the wikipedia page on behalf of Mr Philby's team as a free copywrite.

I agree that my citations need to be improved, however this is my first full article so this has been a wikipedia learning curve.

However I ask that the COI tags be please removed.

regards,

Jacka1993 (talk) 11:17, 28 June 2017 (UTC)jacka1993Jacka1993 (talk) 11:17, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for declaring your conflict of interest so very clearly, Jacka1993 – obviously, if you are writing a page for him you have a COI. I had already seen what you wrote here, "Personal image of Simon Philby, provided by Mr Philby himself for a biography wikipedia page that I am writing for him". So really the only remaining question is whether you are being paid for your work on this and pages such as Leslie Benzies ("Hi there, I am contacting you on behalf of a client who is working on behalf of Leslie Benzies"). If so, please immediately make the necessary paid-contribution disclosures. Thank you, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:44, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Disruptive copy-editing of "Reeves's muntjac" page

I noticed you deleted a lot of valid data of "Reeves's muntjac" with your "copy-editing". Please wait while i revert your edit and re-do it properly.Trurle (talk) 06:56, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

finished for nowTrurle (talk) 07:55, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the "disruptive", Trurle. My only edit to Reeves's muntjac was to remove some poorly-referenced and ill-written content you had added (please read WP:BURDEN). I don't see that your recent additions are much better, but they certainly aren't the only problem that article has. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:35, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Please see ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Hello Justlettersandnumbers , I mentioned you at ANI. Section is Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Magioladitis_high_speed_editing. — xaosflux ^Talk 11:53, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Disruptive Erasing on "Margareta Boivin" page

Just to clarify your job as an editor of Wikipedea is to help people edit their content for publishing, and not to delete content that has not been published yet. Please use your due-diligence by putting my content back promptly and making it available for me to further edit it.--Sebastienb06 (talk) 04:38, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the "disruptive", Sebastienb06, first one this month. Thank you also for your definition of my job here – I'd been wondering about that, labouring under the misapprehension that I was a volunteer.

The content you'd added to Draft:Margareta Boivin was removed as a copyright violation of her website. You can read it there, but you may not copy it into Wikipedia. It is anyway entirely unsuitable for inclusion in an encyclopaedia. Oh, and if you have some personal or professional connection to Boivin, you have conflict of interest (please follow the blue link to read about that). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:26, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

DAD-IS for USA

The DAD-IS list is absolute garbage for US horses and should not be used as a source for any American-based breed. Breeds reported by United States of America: Horse. I mean, seriously, it includes non-American-originating breeds like the Akhal-Teke, but not the Arabian; it includes something called the "Moroccan Spotted" that I've never heard of, (nor the "Kanata pony") and its attempts to document "American" breeds are absurd, there is no such thing as a "Wild" Mustang (as Mustangs are feral) and a broomtail is a low-quality horse, not a breed. A Cayuse is a bit more ambivalent, but if there is such a breed, it's actually a western Canadian landrace. So whoever compiled this particular list was an idiot. Montanabw^(talk) 10:24, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I know you think that, and I'm happy to take your word for it. But the National Animal Germplasm Program of the Agricultural Research Service of the US Department of Agriculture is clearly a reliable source by our standards, so what it reports to DAD-IS is presumably the same. Where did I cite it, I can't recall? – I do mostly try to avoid doing so, out of deference to your views. On the other hand, Germany reports with extreme (actually, almost excessive) care; I don't understand why you've removed that reference from Gypsy Horse? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:10, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

OK, got it, it was American Drum Horse. The list must surely be reliable for a statement that this breed is not included in it? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:43, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

The German link was tossed because all it was for was the statement that "Tinker Horse" is a breed name, when the same thing is repeated in the next sentence with breed association links. So, it's not a moral issue (other than the word being a racial slur) but it was duplicative. If you want to restore it, well, I find it annoying, but only a single mosquito-level of annoying. Montanabw^(talk) 23:21, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

rather long rant

As for the DAD-IS on the Drum Horse article, stating the negative is irrelevant -- US government doesn't officially recognize or license breeds they way they do in Europe anyway. (This may not be a plus for the quality of our horses, but it's reality. All free enterprise here. Caveat emptor.) Also remember that the USA also is not good about playing with the United Nations in general, so these UN programs are often ignored in the US with the minimal effort possible put forth. It is perhaps simpler in Europe, where people apparently have a lot more trust in governmental agencies and international organizations. Kudos to Germany. (heck, the Germans are rockstars -- Angela Merkel is becoming my new political hero these days too: [24] ). ;-) Montanabw(talk) 23:21, 9 July 2017 (UTC) But for the US DAD-IS list in general, you don't have to take my word for it, you know enough about breeding and genetics to see how bad the USA list at DAD-IS is for yourself. I have to rant, though. The 40-some breeds listed are not all of the breeds present in the USA and the list is pretty random, with no clear criterion for inclusion -- they aren't listed on account of being either rare or common (the QH and Morgan are very popular; the Cracker horse is rare), or for being American-developed (The AK and the Clydesdale are listed, the Standardbred is not) or anything else. I see some breed pages reference a 1993 FAO breed survey, who knows... it could go back to some list done up around in 1950. They also have some totally horse-ignorant WTF content, such as saying the Missouri Fox Trotter is "usually brownish-orange" (yes, they really did) or do absurd things like listing the "Palomino" as a breed (see here) when it is genetically impossible to fix the color as a breed trait... Palomino is an incomplete dominant There is a Palomino color breed registry, but it admits all breeds based only on observed color, including at least one flaxen chestnut purebred Arab. (A good rant on that here) The DAD-IS also lists Assateague and Chicoteague horses both, even though they live on the same island and are the same breed (a state line crosses the Island, that's the only difference, it's political not genetic). And I doubt it reflects a true genetic bank: I doubt they have germplasm from a "broomtail", because there is no such thing -- and the "Conestoga" (also questionable as to if a breed or a type) definitely was not extant into the era of DNA sampling. In short, the issues of rare breed preservation and conservation breeding are separate from the issues of developing new commercially-viable breeds and the government is not involved with either one. Thus, my conclusion that the DAD-IS list is next to useless for the USA other than, maybe, the info available nowhere else (say, if we do a Conestoga horse article). But review for yourself... have you ever heard of a "Moroccan Spotted"...? new one for me…

Montanabw^(talk) 23:21, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I know you think that. Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#DAD-IS. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 06:59, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Mass Deletion in Aurochs

Sorry sir, I just edit some in Aurochs but I don't know that I suddenly delete so much characters and save. I'm so sorry sir for anything what I've done. Jaspergeli (talk) 02:45, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

We all make mistakes, Jaspergeli, but not all are as easy to fix as this one was. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 07:00, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

suspected of sock puppetry

very sorry for any of my mistake. password of my previous account was lost. so I have to register another account. my previous account is not in any use.I am not using another account. I hope you will understand my situation.please do me a favor to understand my problem. I request you to take back deletion request.I am new at Wikipedia facing many problems help me to be editor like you.sorry for my poor English — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aniruddhbhaidhadhaldhadhal (talk • contribs) 14:59, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Aniruddhbhaidhadhaldhadhal, if by "my previous account" you mean Aniruddhbhaidhadhal, it really doesn't matter whether you've lost the password or not, as you are indefinitely blocked for misuse of more than one account – misuse which it appears may be continuing. If that's not who you are, you can make your case at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kjp007. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:36, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Contributions to Janet Echelman

Hello, Justlettersandnumbers, I am writing to you here to discuss your conflict of interest citing to multiple of my edits on Janet Echelman's page and her related pages. All information on the pages that I added is information that can be obtained by reading her website, press about her works, and related websites like unnumberedsparks.com. I am not a paid employee for Janet Echelman and am concerned by all of the reversion that has been done to my edits. Thanks, Artisteditorial (talk) 15:51, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Ping

Pinged you at Yanardag talk, but I had a typo and it didn't send. Ongoing discussion and more source content. Montanabw^(talk) 05:31, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Unwarranted Deletions

Hello. I am one of the primary editors on the VCU School of the Arts page. I saw that you removed quite a bit of text from the article yesterday, but many of your edits seem ill-informed. You claim that the persons listed under "Alumni" have no sources to support their attendance at VCUarts. However, the Wikipedia entries for Diana al-Hadid, Sam Beam, Tara Donovan, Teresita Fernández, GWAR, Jason Butler Harner, Donwan Harrell, Michael Hearst, Sterling Hundley, Zachary Knighton, Philip B. Meggs, Wiley Miller, Steve Segal, Carol Sutton, Alice Tangerini, Phil Trumbo, and Mike Wieringo all mention Virginia Commonwealth University as their alma mater. In fact, the Sam Beam source that you explicitly claim bears "no mention of this school" ([Paste Magazine]) in fact does so quite plainly. "With a BFA from Virginia Commonwealth..." begins the third paragraph; a Bachelor of Fine Arts is only obtainable as a studio arts student. Beam has also spoken in interviews about painting his own album covers, which I would be happy to cite as well.

I'm curious to know why you did not check the corresponding articles. If it was a matter of sourcing, the citations could have been borrowed from each person's respective article. Though many of these individuals' pages are poorly written, I don't suppose it is my duty to touch up every page linked across a single article. You also left a single link to List of Virginia Commonwealth University alumni lingering after you deleted the VCUarts list, despite its lack of sources.

Admittedly, checking back I've noticed that some of the individuals I included are alumni of the university and not the school specifically; I can remove their names from a future list. Nevertheless, practicing slash-and-burn across whole swaths of text contributes little to the improvement of an article. It would have been far more helpful for you to check the corresponding pages, verify the sources, and introduce them into the existing text. I have noticed on the history page that I am the only editor to make significant positive contributions to VCU School of the Arts since May. I understand that my editing career on the encyclopedia is far less illustrious than most, and I certainly am not asking for lenience or leeway, but collaboration would be welcome.

Furthermore, your assertion that "Wikipedia is built on independent reliable sources and cares little or nothing what people or bodies say about themselves" is just plain silly. Wikipedia editors regularly employ direct, primary, and reflexive sources to describe a copywritten entity, organization, business, or other collective or private body. The featured article Homer Simpson cites DVD commentary via the character's creator; the page for Harvard University cites Harvard's official website and fact sheets throughout; Yale, Oxford, UVA, MoMA, and Louvre all cite official websites and communications to support the same information that you claim is unsuitable for primary sources. Standards and guidelines without precedent is mere platitude.

I am writing this not as a reprimand or to instigate an argument. You are clearly an accomplished editor who feels strongly about this website and your role in making it the best that it can be. But I do mean to impress upon you that I would like to build this article into something more in-line with the standards of Wikipedia—and I cannot do that alone. Deletion without consideration of how the text could be improved only sets the entire page back. Doopliss77 (talk) 18:35, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Your recent edit

This is just rude. Please read WP:BITE and WP:CIVIL.

Not only was it downright bad manners, you're also incorrect. Medieval is a legitimate spelling in many parts of the world and is widely accepted on Wikipedia. See our article Middle_Ages#Terminology_and_periodisation. Oh and WP:ENGVAR. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 09:58, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Well, er, yes, exactly – WP:ENGVAR. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:01, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Mayuto Correa

Hi Justlettersandnumbers. Thanks for keeping an eye on this. I presume you saw the utter dog's dinner the editor in question had made previously in expanding the discography. Took me nearly an hour to clean it up yesterday. Having said that, I restored his latest edits as they simply put the discography in chrono order, which is actually a help and the work added checks out. Here's the rather messy background to this article and its COI editors, who may or may not be the same person. Grrrrrr. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:35, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

You've done all the work there, Voceditenore, so all thanks to you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:43, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Mark T. Johnston

I wasn't sure how the system works at Wikipedia so I created my article after fixing an error in the James E. Avant article then by using the many existing articles with stubs I found at Category:American horse racing biography stubs as a guideline. There are numerous of them that have less info/citations than mine. Here is a list of a few. Should I move these to a DRAFT page for editing improvement?

Thank you for your help.

James E. Avant
Frank "Buddy" Abadie
Whitey Abel
Menotti Aristone
Patricia Cooksey
Bill Cubbedge
Cam Gambolati
Edwin J. Gregson
George Martens (jockey)
Robert H. Tourtelot
Marion Van Berg
Ian Wilkes

Expand template reverts

Am getting a lot of "already reverted" warnings in trying to do "June 10" which I have checked out. Can you please use {{Checking}} on whatever date you want to do, so we don't duplicate effort? Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 00:04, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

I've abandoned June 10 for too many "already reverted" (but not every single one; are you jumping around in the list?) Anyway, I'll pick another date, you can complete June 10 at your leisure. Mathglot (talk) 00:17, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

COIN

FYI: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Janet Echelman — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:29, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Case opened

You were recently listed as a party to or recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Maglioladitis 2. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Maglioladitis 2/Evidence. Please add your evidence by August 6, 2017, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Maglioladitis 2/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Miniapolis 17:05, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Johannes Engel

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Johannes Engel you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of David Eppstein -- David Eppstein (talk) 21:21, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Johannes Engel

The article Johannes Engel you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Johannes Engel for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of David Eppstein -- David Eppstein (talk) 02:02, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Heiner Thiel in collection of Scottdale's museum

Dear Justlettersandnumbers, i emailed the museum and got the confirmation that they do have a work of Heiner Thiel in their collection. Quote: "We do have a sculpture by Heiner Thiel in our collection and I have attached a photo for you to see. It is “Untitled” and measures 36 inches high x 33 inches wide x 5 inches deep, and is made of aluminum. We do not have our collection available online yet, but are working on adding it to our website." - These info come from the Registrar of the museum. - Question: is this enough to verify the fact and could i add thus this to the site or is this still insuffient? Please let me know, what you think. Thanks. --Gyanda (talk) 19:48, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Gyanda, Wikipedia is built on what is reported in independent reliable sources. Unlike in the academic world, where this kind of personal communication is common and is regarded as fully reliable, here if there isn't a reliable published source for the information we don't include it in our pages. So I think it's better to leave it out for now. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:33, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. I rest my case. Kind regards, --Gyanda (talk) 13:12, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Your edits to Native Art Department International

First you move the article into a draft space telling me there aren't enough references even though barely 24 hours have passed and I'm years more experienced as an editor than you. Then you get pissy when I simply revert your changes when I have more than enough references and decide you don't like the article anyway. Wikipedia is fun, but it's no place to use as a cudgel for your own cultural bias and inexperience. Both Maria Hupfield and Jason Lujan have shown extensively as artists--you can look that up yourself quite easily. Stop enacting the white supremacy that is ruining the world right now. thanks--A21sauce (talk) 02:27, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

A21sauce, you need to read or reread wikipedia's rules on assuming good faith and no personal attacks. I've worked with JLAN for a number of years and collaborated on dozens of articles. This editor is experienced and has a passion for high quality (along with a sharp tongue and no sufferance for fools). I've had my disagreements with JLAN over the years over issues related to a European-based viewpoint, but your accusations of "inexperience" and "white supremacy" are completely uncalled for. It was rightly pointed out to you that the quality of your edits is the issue. As an experienced editor yourself, you should know better than to make such broad-based, ad hominem attacks. I've been a member of WP:IPNA for a number of years and I have not ever witnessed JLAN expressing bias against Native American people or any other ethnic group; if anything, this is an editor with a strong interest in other cultures. Now, please either find more sources to establish that the topic is notable and not merely a PR piece, or move the article to draft space or a user sandbox until it is ready for prime time. Montanabw^(talk) 06:32, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

A21sauce, however experienced you believe you are, you created a poorly-referenced BLP article which did not adequately demonstrate the notability of the subject. I moved it to draft space so that you could develop it at your leisure, but you chose to undo that. Now the community will decide whether it should be kept. If the topic is notable you need only to add the sources which demonstrate that notability – as you could easily have done when you created the page. By the way, how is Akiko Nagashima notable? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:10, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

(AFD stalker..) I thought this was a good nomination. The 'organization' just isn't notable.104.163.142.4 (talk) 08:08, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

A beer for you

Mr.justlettersandnumbers, thanks for the observation, a friend of mine was responsible for searching and adding the links, he ended up just pointing to wikipedia for every other link after a few ones and ended up adding a slash('/') to an '.html' page, which was really our main source of reference. Thanks Again. Surge10 (talk) 12:42, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Tawag ng Tanghalan (season 2)

Hey, please bring back my article. The season's semi finals just started today so 1 source can be found. I'm about to put the source when you delete the page. It's already there on the draft page and I've submitted it for review. Thanks. Leo kingston (talk) 10:49, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

James D. Spaniolo

Many thanks. I'll work on it some more. - Kent Kllwiki (talk) 14:06, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Kawina Surinamese music

Fair enough you moved it to draft - but the English language version of Wikipedia needed an ambiguous template for 'kawina' What I wrote on Kawina is factually correct and I don't have time to put more energy in it. Your choice either you leave it for someone else to add info to or you just let it rot away in the draft space ;-) Rdeman (talk) 01:30, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Really it's your choice, Rdeman – in general it's up to the person who adds the content to make sure it is supported by suitable reliable sources. Unfortunately we already have many, many thousands of poorly-referenced articles, and I for one don't want that number to increase. The genre seems to be just barely notable by our standards, so we should perhaps have an article on it. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:24, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Copyright violations

Hello talk:Justlettersandnumbers,

Are you still involved with copyright violations? If so, I stumbled upon this article. It appears that there's some serious copyright violations, especially in the "The attack" section. What do you suggest we do from here? Étienne Dolet (talk) 08:29, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi, EtienneDolet! I'm actually taking a bit of a break from WP:CP at the moment, but I looked at May 24, 1993 PKK ambush. I'm not immediately seeing any problem; the attack paragraph started out like this in 2011, and has evolved naturally since then. No serious copying jumps to my eye (OK, "33 soldiers and 5 civilians" could have been rephrased). Have I missed something obvious? What do you see that is troubling you? From what source? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:17, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

13:59:37, 8 August 2017 review of submission by IssaDeK

• IssaDeK (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Richard Hirschbaeck (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Justlettersandnumbers. Thank you for your review and helpful comments on the Richard Hirschbaeck artist page. I am at the moment trying to improve the page based on your suggestions. I am an administor of the Richard Hirschbaeck estate, but I wished to make the article as my own contribution to the work of Richard Hirschbaeck. I am trying to attain more independent sources for the writing, to write in a more neutral tone and not reference the website itself too much. I have permission from the copyright owners of the estate to use material and excerpts from the website, therefor, the copyright has not been violated. As for the "notability", it is a case which is, I guess, hard to argue. I will cite as many independent sources as possible, and I would like to note that an entry in the German National Library does imply by itself notability, where Hirschbaeck is mentioned. Any other guides would be very helpful. Best regards.

Hi! Why did you delete my edit? I think it was an important edit, and I feel that when we work together and do not judge, it helps. Besides, it was a good edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.193.80.5 (talk) 12:20, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Colette Mazzucelli

Thanks for your help on Draft:Colette Mazzucelli. I am an OTRS volunteer who has been in contact with the subject about 'her' article. I restored it to draft space because I suspect that the 30 kilobytes removed from the article history (due to undisclosed paid editing by a blocked sockpuppet of someone who advertises Wikipedia editing services on LinkedIn) may actually have some content in it that demonstrates notability of the subject. The article was deleted for lack of notability some time after that content had been removed. I have also pointed out WP:NACADEMIC to Dr Mazzucelli, who assured me that she and her colleagues will make every effort to comply with that and other applicable guidelines in getting her article up to Wikipedia standards before submitting it for review.

I'd appreciate if you kept an eye on it, and also appreciate any improvements you care to make. If you believe the subject is notable and will survive another AFD round, feel free to move it back to main space. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:47, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Oh, I see you're an OTRS volunteer also. If you want the background for proper context, please see VRTS ticket # 2016082710007096. It's an old ticket from a year ago, and I took it over on 22 July this year. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:50, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Anachronist – I've been aware of this for a while. Personally, I don't see the notability, but I'm prepared to be convinced. I note with amusement that her pet cat is now editing the page. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:09, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Hathorn

See the goings-on at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rose Van Thyn during the last few minutes. - Sitush (talk) 12:53, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

I have just rewritten Thomas Hal Phillips, which is on the CCI list. I'm am utterly bamboozled regarding what I am supposed to do in order to indicate that the article is now effectively new. Do you have any idea? - Sitush (talk) 18:46, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

I've marked it as cleaned. You can use {{subst:CPC|c}}. — JJMC89 (T·C) 19:33, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

OK, thanks very much for that. - Sitush (talk) 19:43, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Yep, though it may not be the best or only way to do it. Taking stuff out of order: after you are sure the page is clean, the steps are:

• add {{subst:cclean|url= url, including "http://" |CCI= SomeUser }} to the talk page; if you didn't identify any specific copyvio and just presumptively removed all his text, just leave the url blank; SomeUser is just the CCI name, so here 20110727
• if you did identify a specific copyvio, use {{copyvio-revdel}} (on the article) to ask for all revisions containing it to be hidden
• go to the CCI, edit the section; delete everything after the first colon (all the diffs), and add a {{y}}, {{?}} or {{n}} depending on what you found, perhaps with a word or two of explanation ("cleaned", "rewritten", "presumptively removed", etc) and sign

For what it's worth, what I do to be sure the page really is clean is:

• if it's an obvious copyvio, make a note of where from; but if it's not obvious, waste no time searching for a source and just presumptively remove instead, which a CCI specifically allows us to do; in either case:
• if he created it, remove all running text, save, then start the rewrite
• If he added stuff later, either revert to the preceding version or completely remove the bit(s) he added, save, rewrite

All this may seem like a lot of bureaucracy, but in the end it's the rewriting that takes the time.

Oh, another thing you can do instead of taking them to AfD is blank them and list them at WP:CP, where they are liable for speedy deletion after seven days unless a viable rewrite has been proposed in the interim. You probably know all this, of course. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:48, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, i don't know what is happening. Everything i write for the site https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denis_Piel is verified and correct. What am i doing wrong and why are you not accepting this? please let me know how to move forward and what i;m doing wrong as i really do not understand. Everything i have written is factual and with links to appropriate places. your help and explanation would be appreciated, thank you denis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ideasperson (talk • contribs) 17:35, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

PAD!ES

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denis_Piel re this site. i make changes that are all verified and don't understand what i'm doing wrong that whatever is up gets taken down. and incomplete information is put up. why is this and what can i do to make the changes that are all verified with links to prove correct to make them permanent? thank you for your help and please explain why you are taking these down and what i need to do. Curiously enough all of this was up for a very long time until you saw problems. please explain and help me understand what i need to do to have this corrected. thanks ideas person — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ideasperson (talk • contribs) 17:42, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Ideasperson, I left the edit summary "Rm a mas[s] of unreferenced stuff, including copyvio from http://chateaudepadies.wordpress.com/about/". Content you add to Wikipedia must be verifiable by reference to reliable sources, and must not be copied from other published material such as books or websites. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:09, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Marawi - citations needed

Hi, I'd appreciate if you specified what was the problem with citations in that article instead of just adding a refimprove template. Alaexis_¿question? 04:33, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Alaexis, there was no problem with the citations as such, but for a cultivar with hundreds of years of history there are surely better sources than a couple of newspaper articles – reference works on viticulture and oenology, for example. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:09, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Draftify log

I have had a chat with Evad37, and at my request he modified the User:Evad37/MoveToDraft tool to add a 'Draftify log' functionality similar to the CSD log functionality of twinkle. I know that you are a regular user of the tool and thought that you might like to know as it seems like a useful way to keep track of draftifications afterward. All you need to do to activate the tool is to create a page at User:Justlettersandnumbers/Draftify log. Cheers and keep up the good work. — InsertCleverPhraseHere ^{(or here)} 06:08, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Insertcleverphrasehere, that seems to be a good idea. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:09, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Edit on Blockbuster LLC

Hello, you recently reverted my edit on Blockbuster LLC on the basis of Spam. I added The Blockbuster Fan Page as an external link, because they track the open franchise-owned Blockbuster stores. I don't completely know all of Wikipedia's rules, so I'd like for you to explain why the edit was removed. -KevinTheGuy (talk) 22:23, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, KevinTheGuy, that wasn't a good choice of edit summary on my part – I'd have done better to cite WP:NOTLINK. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:09, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Interdisciplinary Design for the Built Environment

I'm not a regular contributor to Wikipedia, and perhaps not fully familiar with all its conventions. But I am struggling a bit to understand the justification for peremptorily merging/redirecting this page. By comparison, why does the page you created: Young Man with a Horn (Miles Davis album) have its own page? Does it have more visibly independently-sourced content? Why is it not simply merged into the general Miles Davis page? I've always thought the whole point about html was that you could have a series of independent pages with, crucially, links to follow up whatever was of interest making it possible to navigate and follow up anything you wanted. If things are all merged together, that becomes a whole lot more difficult. Very disappointed. Torino-Topolino (talk) 16:10, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Clarifying Wikipedia:Do not include the full text of lengthy primary sources

Hello. Your comment here made me think that an RfC at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) intended to clarify whether Wikipedia:Do not include the full text of lengthy primary sources should apply to more than just primary sources would be a good idea. Let me know if you want to contribute to its wording. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:24, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for this, Cordless Larry; in an ideal world I'd say "yes, of course that needs to be done". In this less-than-perfect one, I see broad scope for extended discussion leading to an inconclusive result. Sorry, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:08, 18 September 2017 (UTC) P.S. let me know if you do start it, though.

Well, it's not an RfC (yet), but I did start a discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Does/should WP:NOFULLTEXT apply to more than just primary sources? and your comments would be welcome. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:18, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

A furious prosimian for you

		The Angry Tarsier of Appreciation!
		For your careful and dependable work to find and remove copyright violations. It's a painstaking job. Thanks!--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:20, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

That's a very charming prosimian, Fuhghettaboutit, I'm delighted to receive it, thank you! I often notice with pleasure your clear and accurate explanations of copyright policy. We seem to be steadily sinking under the weight of copyvio (though probably less rapidly than we are under the weight of paid/COI editing). If you have any thoughts on how and where an attempt might be started to make some impression the WP:CCI backlog (78000 pages last time I looked), I'd be interested to hear/discuss them – even the CCI request process is backlogged. Meanwhile, I thought I'd have a go at the much smaller list oustanding at WP:CP. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:15, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Justlettersandnumbers! I would have responded sooner but I've barely been on the past few days (issues in RL). You're echoing my feeling, especially of late—of the extent of the mountain we face. I actually wrote a post expressing similar sentiment (pessimism) (mostly about paid editing) just by coincidence about a half hour before your post above. Would that a knew what to do. I see no way that any of it can be tackled without many new editors, both willing to do thankless work, and capable. Of course, in the short term, on the specific issue of CCI, there's always a drive of some sort, maybe set up as a competition, with virtual awards to be given, prefaced by a training page? Maybe the fact that the ACTRIAL trial is running has freed up some hands to put to use more than usual? Just thinking out loud. But if you think that nascent, half-formed idea has any currency, I'd be happy to try to collaborate. Of course, though I do a lot of copyright work, I do little on the CCI backlog end of matters. I believe copyright work is vital, but that area of it I must tell you I find mmm... numbing, despite knowing its importance.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:06, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Thinking about anything I could do to lessen the load, I noticed that {{db-g12}} instructs admin to list at WP:CP if they decline the tagging, rather than providing any nudge to clean up remaining copyright problems themselves, if willing and able. So, I've made this edit, linking admins to the copyright violations section I wrote at Wikipedia:New pages patrol.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:40, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Randomly dropping by to express my appreciation for your copyright violation work too! Alex Shih^Talk 15:24, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

BVIS

Hello. I was just perusing your RFPP request. It seems there is BVIS Ho Chi Minh City, then BVIS Hanoi, then additionally a BIS Hanoi. Actually there's also a BIS Ho Chi Minh City. I'm sure how they should be consolidated, if at all, but I thought I'd just mention that BIS Hanoi is not BVIS Hanoi. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 09:14, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Aargh, thanks, zzuuzz! – I checked that they were in the same city, owned by the same company, didn't look up the actual physical addresses. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:22, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Understandable, and quite a confusing situation they have there (the RFPP request remains, btw) -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:31, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Women in Red/The World Contest

Hi. Thankyou for your participation in the challenge series or/and contests. In November The Women in Red World Contest is being held to try to produce new articles for as many countries worldwide and occupations as possible. There will be over $4000 in prizes to win, including Amazon vouchers and paid subscriptions. If this would appeal to you and you think you'd be interested in contributing new articles on women during this month for your region or wherever please sign up in the participants section. The articles done may also count towards the ongoing challenge. If you're not interested in prize money yourself but are willing to participate and raise money to buy books about women for others to use, this is also fine. Help would also be appreciated in drawing up the lists of missing articles. If you think of any missing articles please add them to the sub lists by continent at Missing articles. Thankyou, and if taking part, good luck!♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:41, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Edo Segal

Hello. Thank you for making me aware of the edit warring policy. Is there any way we can get the page deleted? The content that's been approved and remains up there is unimportant and irrelevant, and the mention of the Golani Brigade could potentially be damaging given recent news. Is there a Wikipedia criterion for deletion that fits this reasoning? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Claire.c.n (talk • contribs) 18:14, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

• I don't know what "recent events" you're talking about--that stuff about the brigade is well verified, in an online article, and you added, or re-added it yourself. But what you could do is pull different, more relevant content from that article. And I say "could" because I don't know if you can--I have not seen you edit the article neutrally. Drmies (talk) 18:20, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Drmies – as you've seen, there's very little in the page (which is why I've proposed merging it). I don't know exactly how that stuff got there, but I think I may have written some of it – the page has an extensive and tedious history of COI and copyvio. Claire.c.n, your first step is probably to declare what connection you have to Segal (your use of "we" makes it pretty obvious that there is such a connection), and specifically whether you receive any payment of any kind from Segal or any of his businesses (paid editors must declare the source of payments they receive, in accordance with our Terms of Use). Once that's out of the way, you can request changes to the article by posting on the talk-page; there are instructions there on how to go about that. If you wish, you can try nominating the page for deletion, but I think he's been written about just enough that the nomination would possibly not succeed. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:43, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Hmm that other article really has no meat on it either, does it. This Edo Segal guy is kind of interesting (though that one article is waaaaay too puffy) and has been mentioned a few more times, but I don't know how much more we can get out of him. One thing you could consider is sending it to AfD... Drmies (talk) 20:19, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Indeed, Drmies, he certainly does not seem to be just your ordinary successful businessman. I must admit I've not looked very hard for further sources for the page, probably because there are so many other topics I'd rather be writing about. You? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:05, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Google News didn't have much to add. I may come back to this to see if AfD is a valid option. Drmies (talk) 15:23, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Category:Graphic artists

I don't think this is a viable category. It will get deleted. I suggest you use one of the others in Category:Artists by genre.Rathfelder (talk) 11:03, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Rathfelder, you may well be right. Which of those categories is, in your opinion, the right one for graphic artists – artists who work in graphic media such as silk-screen, woodcut, engraving etc., but are not by any stretch of the imagination graphic designers, who prepare advertising copy and the like? By the way, I don't think we should categorise people by nationality unless the nationality is stated, with reference, in the article text. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:13, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

I was hoping you knew the answer to that question, because I don't. Maybe "Graphic artists" could be a useful category, but if so it needs to be populated. Perhaps you could have a look at the entries under graphic designers and see if any of them would be better there? Rathfelder (talk) 12:35, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

That's a good idea, Rathfelder, thank you; I'll see what substantial categories I can add to it, rather than piecemeal individuals. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:50, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Interesting article, possible source

This article on working horses in France is the google translate version, if you can read it in the original French, it may be better. But looks like it may have good info on some of the French horse breeds, possibly including some on the extinct breeds list. Anyway, thought it might be up your alley. Montanabw^(talk) 00:57, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Adding open license text to Wikipedia

Hi

Thanks for your changes to Wikipedia:Adding open license text to Wikipedia on dealing with text that has been added under a license that isn't compatible with Wikipedia. I think that the sentence 'Please do NOT attempt to rephrase the text without first removing it, as this can give rise to a derivative work' might be a bit confusing. I'm trying to write this page to be usable by people who are fairly new to Wikipedia. Is there any guidance anywhere on 'how much/how to' rephrase copyrighted material so it doesn't create a derivative work? This is quite unclear, the current sentence makes it sound a bit like you can't rephrase text from another source at all.

Thanks again

John Cummings (talk) 09:33, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi, John Cummings! I'm certainly open to suggestions on how that sentence could be improved. Here's my take on the sticky question of "rephrasing":

1. we don't do it – it tends to lead to close paraphrasing
2. what we do is write new text, in our own words, to express the ideas, concepts and facts in the sources
3. if there's been a copyright violation (content copied more or less directly from a source), then it needs to be removed, either by reverting to the version before it was inserted, or by excising the copyright content and any text that derives from it (see the instructions at WP:CP)
4. if instead someone fiddles with the wording a bit to make it slightly different from the source, the problem is not solved and a derivative work may have been created (like painting a moustache on the Mona Lisa); that modified text will still need to be removed.

I'm aware that others may have a rather more tolerant attitude to rewriting problem text without first removing it, but I'm not sure that that tolerance is in accordance with our policy (by which I mean, I don't think it is). I'll have a look at the text I added to your page and see if I can suggest something better – I wrote that in some haste, as I wanted to try to correct what appeared to me to be some quite mistaken advice. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:28, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers:, thanks very much for your thoughts, perhaps something like this? I'm trying to keep the instructions accurate but succinct, TLDR is a real issue:

1. Remove the text and attribution from the article , either by reverting to the version before it was inserted (being careful not to lose any other work done on the article), or by deleting the text.
2. Rewrite the text in your own words and avoid close paraphrasing which will create a derivative work.

John Cummings (talk) 11:00, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Heiner Thiel

Dear Justlettersandnumbers, recently i worked on the article and found that there were all these ref name-tags, which i couldn't understand. And then i re-entered the original links, with the result that now this message came Cite error: A list-defined reference named "ref9" is not used in the content (see the help page). and this got me very nervous. I asked at the help-desk, how i could erase this and someone wrote that you were so kind to work on the formatting of the article and had put the ref name tags there... and now i erased all your work, i just didn't understand, why they were there. Could you please help me to understand? I don't want to do things wrong and i can only excuse myself for having erased all the work and effort you put into it. It was just that i did not understand. Sorry. Kind regards, --Gyanda (talk) 12:10, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Gyanda, there's nothing to apologise for, please don't give this another thought. I made those changes because I couldn't make head or tail of an early version of the page. If you've now worked out how to do without them that's fine with me. However, I remain concerned both that Thiel is not really notable by our standards, and that you may have some personal or professional connection to him. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:51, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

The only connection i have is that i like his art. I'm only writing on abstract artists, whose work i like. I try to build up some knowledge on the terms of this part of art, as i haven't studied it - but studied literature instead. So i still have to learn a lot about art and it is a nice work as i am retired now and do have lots of time (and am not very mobile, due to physical handicap, so i do my best to be useful still :-). Thank you very much for your work on the article! Kind regards, Gyanda — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gyanda (talk • contribs) 20:03, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

What was wrong with this statement?

Art Research Center First Exhibition: October 29 1966 to January 31 1967 Kansas City, MO Public Library, 12th & Oak. Seven members participated in the first ARC Exhibition. Michael Stephens, Constructive Artist, Designer, Lecturer, Nancy Ann Stephens, Artist, Designer, Jon B. Thogmartin, Architect, Structural Artist,Norton Nelkin, Wittgensteinian, Philosopher, Theoretician, Gary Rice, Theoretician, Computer, Programmer, Philip J. VanVoorst, Artist, Graphic Designer,John Abbick, Artist, Conceptual Modeler,Harold Chase, Systematic Artist. Source The Kansas City Star Nov 13 1966 (Philboyxp (talk) 17:33, 10 October 2017 (UTC))

Well, quite a lot, I'm afraid, Philboyxp. Relatively minor problems are that It's All Capitalised As If It Were The Title Of A Book Or Something, and that it is nonsense (do you really believe that Gary Rice was a computer as well as a programmer, that Nelkin could have been a Wittgensteinian if he were not also a philosopher?). More serious problems are your conflict of interest in relation to this page, and the apparently insuperable difficulty that most if not all of these people are fairly thoroughly non-notable, such that listing them in an article does not really expand our understanding at all. I'll leave a note on the talk-page about conflict of interest and how to handle it. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:43, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Lau

My error,of course. I obviously should have either deleted or rewritten much more thorly ,but the simplest thing noe id delete it snd I just did that. Apparently I was working too late at night. DGG ( talk ) 16:05, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm so sorry, I meant to leave you a note to say just that – that some of the problematic initial text had slipped through your rewrite, but I forgot – I've been very caught up in real life today and have only visited very briefly here. How I wish that we had a real-time copyvio check on page creations that would simply block the save function on text that appears to be copied. It'd stop a lot of run-of-the-mill copyvio, but would also catch the occasional good-faith mistake such as this one. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:36, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

It would have stopped this, but there are always borderline problems--the programs we have mark lists of publications and similar uncopyrightable text that could not be expressed otherwise as copyvio. More generally, there's of course the problem of how much effort to use on rewriting promotional articles. DGG ( talk ) 17:57, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Art gallery editing Wikipedia articles

Hi Justlettersandnumbers,

I have a question: I work for an Art gallery. My job involves curating and writing about some of the artists we host. I've been getting acquainted with Wikipedia these last few days to see how I may be able to contribute within guidelines. Would my contributions be considered COI editing? I am not paid by the artists involved, but my employer is an arts organization that hosts some of these artists. I noticed you have been involved in editing Wikipedia articles for some of the artist pages I would like to contribute to, so thought you'd be a good editor to ask for advice. Thank you for your help :-) Liz CroatianNeptune (talk) 12:25, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi, CroatianNeptune, and thanks for asking! In my personal opinion, yes, you would be considered to have a WP:COI in relation to any artist or work that the gallery markets, and should limit your contributions to our articles on them to talk-page requests (ask if you don't know how to do that). Based on what you say, I'm pretty sure that you should also make a paid editor disclosure. But that's just my opinion; if you'd like a more general view, you could ask at the conflict-of-interest noticeboard. Welcome to Wikipedia, by the way! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:36, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Justlettersandnumbers, Thank you for your advice. I will follow it. Best wishes. CroatianNeptune (talk) 13:55, 18 October 2017 (UTC)