Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:16, 28 January 2013

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, then place {{Talkback}} on my talk. If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, then place {{Talkback}} on your talk.

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Re: File permission problem with File:Ruski car.bmp

Whow, that was uploaded in 2004. The thing is, it was copied from the German Misplaced Pages as you can see in the licensing part. I presumed by now all these permissions were reacquired through OTRS. Perhaps the author should be recontacted.--Avala (talk) 11:42, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

The problem I found is that I can't determine what the original file name was on de.wiki. It definitely wasn't Ruski car.bmp, so I can't determine if there was an OTRS ticket number ever associated with it. —Darkwind (talk) 02:43, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I just did a thorough search in OTRS and couldn't find anything mentioning the zivotic.com/photo URL. It appears permission was never verified (at least not through OTRS). —Darkwind (talk) 04:47, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

I guess he should be recontacted then.--Avala (talk) 22:16, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Icons

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Icons. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 21:15, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Notice to DR/N volunteers! Dispute resolution discussions need attention

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there are currently discussions at Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard which require the attention of a volunteer. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. Below this message is the DR/N status update.

You are receiving this notification to request assistance at the DR/N where you are listed as a volunteer. The number of cases has either become too large and/or there are many cases shaded with an alert status. Those shaded pink are marked as: "This request requires a volunteer's attention". Those shaded blue have had a volunteers attention recently

If you would like a regularly-updated copy of this status box on your user page or talk page, put {{DRN case status}} on your page. Click on that link for more options.
Last updated by FireflyBot (talk) at 19:46, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

• Always use {{subst :DRN Volunteer-notice }} when using this template as notification.
• If your replies are directed to the template talkpage, the template was used without subst.--Amadscientist (talk) 01:26, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Bureaucratship

Cmach7 (talk) 01:29, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 January 2013

• Investigative report: Ship ahoy! New travel site finally afloat

• News and notes: Launch of annual picture competition, new grant scheme

• WikiProject report: Reach for the Stars: WikiProject Astronomy

• Discussion report: Flag Manual of Style; accessibility and equality

• Special report: Loss of an Internet genius

• Featured content: Featured articles: Quality of reviews, quality of writing in 2012

• Arbitration report: First arbitration case in almost six months

• Technology report: Intermittent outages planned, first Wikidata client deployment

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 14:11, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Excessive quotation

Hi Darkwind, I'm asking you as copyright issues clerk. I'd like to know whether the quotation in Ibex Cave is acceptable. We're talking about a 730-word quotation and, although sources and marked as a quote, I'm actually sure about it validity. Could you please light me? :-) Best regards and many thanks in advance --Ecemaml (talk) 09:42, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Just from a style perspective, that quote is way too long. From a copyright perspective, it does depend in part on the size of the original source material. However, as few as 400 words out of a 500 page book have been ruled by U.S. courts as copyright infringment, and that quote is 728 words, so I'd definitely say it needs to be trimmed or removed. —Darkwind (talk) 03:55, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Dalma Hills

You declined a G12 speedy delete I placed on this article earlier today, after you removed about half of it as a copyright violation. But it seems very likely to me that what remains was copy and pasted from here. What do you think? George Ponderevo (talk) 20:29, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Yep, that's another copyvio. I wonder why I didn't catch that... Looking farther back in the history, there's no salvageable versions at all. Anything without copyvio is excessively promotional (for some group in the area, which was removed in later edits). I've deleted the article as G12 after all. —Darkwind (talk) 21:54, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I guess you just forgot to check, but some prose screams out "copyright violation" as soon as you see it. Perhaps also a problem that Twinkle only allows one web page to be cited as the original source, not two as in this case. George Ponderevo (talk) 23:03, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

GOCE mid-drive newsletter, January 2013

Guild of Copy Editors January 2013 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter We are halfway through our January backlog elimination drive. The mid-drive newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the January drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 00:30, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Bus Lists closes

I know I came late to all three deletion discussions and was unlikely to gain consensus at that time but I believed my suggestion of transwikiing was a good alternative to deletion for these article. Would you have any comments on that suggestion both in regards to your closes and the wider discussion currently taking place about these list articles? Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 15:35, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

In re: the transwiki suggestion, I'd like to see a consensus (or at least a discussion) there at Wikivoyage that they would indeed find these types of articles or lists useful, before we dump the articles on them en masse. The lists can always be undeleted and userfied at any time to prepare for a transwiki, and I'd be happy to do that for you or any other interested editor. Just let me know (and ideally point me to the discussion over at voyage agreeing that this data is useful to them). —Darkwind (talk) 16:37, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Re: File permission problem with File:Fans at Tohoshinki TONE Tour.jpg

Trying to close a move request

Hello Darkwind. I saw your January 3 comment at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject South America/Falkland Islands work group/Units#Requested move when you relisted this proposal for further discussion. Another 18 days have passed since the relisting, and I'm trying to see if it's ready to close. Your objection was that the RFC was unclear. That's true, and in any event there was never a formal closure for the RFC. Leaving that aside, it does look like there is at least a simple majority in favor of the move. Editors are accusing one another of various conduct problems, and I don't see that we should take that as an obstacle to the move. In your opinion, would carrying out the move at the present time raise any concerns, if we just ignore the original RFC? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 20:39, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

I certainly have no concerns about completing the move on that basis. —Darkwind (talk) 20:54, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I'm starting to find out why the old requested moves stay unclosed for so long. EdJohnston (talk) 00:20, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I made a similar comment on IRC the other day... it seems I was a bit naive to say "oh sure I'll just go over and help out at RM" during my RfA. —Darkwind (talk) 01:14, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I have suggested..

.. a catch-all and know about WP:NOTVAND etc. Thanks! --Tito Dutta (talk) 14:02, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 January 2013

• News and notes: Requests for adminship reform moves forward

• WikiProject report: Say What? — WikiProject Linguistics

• Featured content: Wazzup, G? Delegates and featured topics in review

• Arbitration report: Doncram case continues

• Technology report: Data centre switchover a tentative success

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 22:54, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi

Perhaps a lesser duration block might have worked in this case than 6 months? I'll leave it to your discretion. You may finally be right; I just felt we could perhaps give a shorter term block, even perhaps a 24 hour block, to stop the spamming and see whether the ip corrects its course. Like I said, I'll leave it to your judgment. Thanks and good to see you around. Wifione 15:53, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I went for that length because they've made the same edits intermittently for a period of 5 months already, which seems to indicate a long-term intent to try to get these links into the target articles. Given that there's no productive edit history from this IP, I didn't see much of a risk of "collateral damage", and depending on their editing pattern, they might not even notice a short-term block like 24 hours. The warnings have certainly had no effect so far. I'd assumed if they decided to repent, they can always {{unblock}}. However, if you think it might be overkill, it won't bother me if you want to adjust it, especially if they complain. —Darkwind (talk) 19:15, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Your logic is perfectly fine. I'll just wait and watch if the editor realizes the issue. Shan't change the block unless there's a request from the editor, as you mention. Again, thanks for the reply and for taking time to read my message. Best. Wifione 19:19, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

User:27mpoole

I note you had cause to block this user for copyright reasons, and that they have been given a final warning here about failing to give copyright information when upladning files, however today they have upload File:AssemblyCorwin.jpg without the correct details. LightGreenApple _{talk to me} 02:01, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Articles for deletion

Hi Darkwind,

Can you please delete my article Artyom Shaloyan now? I don't want to waste time. Sorry. Bear my patience. Thank you. Raymarcbadz (talk) 04:15, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

You really need to stop creating articles in mainspace and then almost immediately requesting deletion. It can be seen as disruptive editing. If you're trying to create test or draft versions of possible new articles, please do so in your personal sandbox or as a userspace draft. —Darkwind (talk)

Also, you really need to stop deleting messages you leave on other people's talk pages. Especially if they've replied. —Darkwind (talk) 17:19, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

help with an user

the page is being altered completely. the user AjaxFiore is removing and altering information for no crucial reason at all, please revert his changes, he is also accusing me of vandalism

the page is about a mexican religious institution, that refuses to admit being pentecostal and a sect, he is removingWikiNuevo (talk) 02:16, 28 January 2013 (UTC) those sections to favor the church

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=La_Luz_del_Mundo&action=history