User talk:EoRdE6/Archives/2015/February

Please comment on WP:AN#Closure review: Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC to physically restrict access to the Helper Script

Hello! You have been selected to receive an invitation to participate in the closure review for the recent RfC regarding the AfC Helper script. You've been chosen because you participated in the original RfC. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. This message is automated. Replies will not be noticed. --QEDK ♠ T ♥ C 14:22, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you and asking for more instructions

Thank you for your suggestion, which I followed. Can you kindly see if my un-delete request is properly filed? Now what is the next step? You said "A Suggestion: To get Expertscape back I would suggest heading over to WP:UNDELETE and asking for Expertscape to be "userfied to Draft:Expertscape. Sound good? EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 02:19, 1 February 2015 (UTC)" S.Burntout123 (talk) 03:09, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

@Burntout123: I cleaned it up for you. Soon an admin will come by and put the content of the page at Draft:ExpertScape or something similar where you can work on it. I'll ask for them to put a link on your talk page when they do it. Sound good? EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 03:14, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! I wished the editors were all like you. Can you please remain involved here and observe the procedures as we go along? S.Burntout123 (talk) 03:16, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Of course, I will attempt to help you in any way . I cannot guarantee the article will stay however but we can try. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 03:17, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

RfC - Helper Script access

An RfC has been opened at RfC to physically restrict access to the Helper Script. You are invited to comment. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:28, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

 Done. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 16:51, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Transmission loss

Any reason for adding links to transmission loss to multiple articles? That page appears to be a redirect, so usually a link there (instead to one of the specific terms being disambiguated) is a mistake. K7L (talk) 03:00, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

@K7L: it was an actual article but was changed to a disambig but the person who changed forgot to do link cleanup obviously. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 03:06, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Withdrawing AFDS

Hi EoRdE6, You're allowed to withdraw at any given time, You've stated on both the AFD and the talkpage you withdrawn so you've done everything by the book as far as I'm concerned,
Personally I think you done right closing it and I'm baffled as to why the other editor has some sort of issue with it ... But meh ignore the loon she'll get over it!
Happy Editing :), –Davey2010^Talk 02:13, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the support! Always nice to have someone who understands and can explain policies EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 02:15, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome :) - I'm amazed I managed to explain it without including some expletives! , Anyway I'm glad I helped! :), Have a great day, –Davey2010^Talk 02:24, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

• Whilst I think the AfD itself was misguided at best, I do commend you for withdrawing it. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 11:01, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

PC reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:00, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! I will use it carefully. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 20:03, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

RfC

Hi. One of the reasons AfC is in such a mess is because the rewiewers can't/won't read instructions. Instead they IAR and make a mess of things. One of the reasons why many good faith efforts to improve things fail is because people can't/won't read the instructions on the RfC. This small proposal is just a stepping stone to bigger things but it's an important one. I can understand that if you are still in school you don't have time to look more positively on these efforts. You may think it's all a joke but we do in fact need your help to demonstrate to our millions of readers that Wikipedia is a very serious undertaking. They are the people who donate the $70m budget that makes this thing work. If you need any help with anything don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page - I don't bite. Happy editing! --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:33, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

just as Kudpung says. Many things in Wikipedia are multiyear efforts; our system of consensus does not lend itself to sudden major changes, and many that have been tried don't work all that well, or need to be refined subsequently over the years. Some of us have the luxury of being able to work on those time scales. But even those here for a short while or a small number of hours can still do fine if they learn the rules for the part of things where they work. I know it's very hard to keep from being impatient, but WP rewards patience. DGG ( talk ) 06:52, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

The New Fly Fisher

Hi EoRdE6,

I think I have made all the necessary changes your recommended to the article "The New Fly Fisher". Please let me know if anything else needs to be done for it to be published.

Thank you very much,

Webhayes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Webhayes (talk • contribs) 15:19, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

@Webhayes: I've reviewed it for you. It can be found at The New Fly Fisher. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 19:15, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Lixxx235 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

--L235 (talk) As a courtesy, please ping me when replying. 02:30, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:International Space Station

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:International Space Station. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

 Done EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 00:17, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Barnstar for you!

		The Reviewer Barnstar
		Thanks for your helpful review and comments on LentiGlobin BB305! NickCT (talk) 16:22, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

@NickCT: Thanks! Article looks much better! Feel free to remove the tag if you haven't already. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 16:25, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Lizard Squad

How can it be less formal wording, when it is merely removal of information? It's called being more to the point.

(Personal attack removed) --Vaypertrail (talk) 00:42, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

First lets keep this at the discussion at Talk:Lizard Squad ok? Second could you stop with the personal attacks already? Thanks EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 00:47, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Orphan

You marked String quartets (Waterhouse) as orphan, that is correct but misleading. I am in the process of creating the article, and while it is in it's present state don't want attention = links. There will be, - could you check article histories before tagging? Wait a day or two? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:19, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: While yes I can check article histories when tagging with AWB, if an article is an orphan it should be tagged as such. No harm is done having the tag at the top of the page until you are ready to add links to it.

However next time you build an article I would suggest using the Draft: namespace where there is no deadlines or page reviewers. When you have finished building the article there, you just use the move tab at the top of your page and move it to the mainspace. Of course your way works too, but expect page reviewed and semi-bots like AWB to add tags. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 17:01, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, but you might also have checked my history ;) - I wanted the 14 Feb date on that article, and on another one, and got it ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:06, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: The page creation date and history moves when you move a page but I understand what your saying. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 17:12, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Ghana Intrenational School

Please delete it--Rberchie (talk) 17:10, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

@Rberchie: Hi, Ghana Intrenational School has already been deleted, click on the link to find out why. The one with the correct spelling "International" has been kept. No other deletions are needed. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 17:17, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Orphan tags

Can you please not slap orphan tags on the articles I've been creating over the past few days? I intend to link them in due time. Connormah (talk) 04:26, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

@Connormah: And when you link them, you can remove the tags. But until then, they are orphans and really should be tagged as such so other editors can help integrate and link them. No harm done by having an orphan tag on an article. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 04:28, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, but with the volume of articles I am creating, it creates a lot of unnecessary work to remove tags off of all of them. It's not a glaring article issue that needs to be tagged right away. Connormah (talk) 04:32, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

@Connormah: I'm using AWB which allows me to quickly in a bot like method tag and clean articles. Its easier on my part to not see who created each one. More importantly a bot will(should) remove the orphan tags when linked. I'll make an effort to skip yours but no promises EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 04:45, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Hm, didn't know that there was a bot that does it. Anyways, I'll hopefully have the bulk of them done by tomorrow. Some however may be un-deorphanable unfortunately. Thanks. Connormah (talk) 04:47, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Request to adapt template

Thanks for your help at the Teahouse :) Would you mind if I adapt your talk page template (the "This user is in school and can't be bothered" box -- nice coding btw)? I know that its technically CC BY-SS, but considering the work you put into it, I thought it proper to ask you first. Let me know what you decide. Denny1213 (talk) 09:55, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Never mind, I was able to code my own. Denny1213 (talk) 13:18, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for helping me out with my first major edit. Denny1213 (talk) 15:34, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Yummy! . No problem, come back if you need help with anything else! EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 15:40, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Teahouse answers

I've noticed a couple of your answers contain the inference that the WMF doesn't have a lot of money. Actually, the WMF is basically sitting on piles of cash thanks to very successful fundraisers. Whether it spends that money wisely is another issue. Last time I checked, the WMF had a $50 million USD reserve fund. This is the latest financial report if you're interested. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:55, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

@NeilN: First it was only one answer I mentioned it and two how much money they have doesn't change the face they are a not for profit, and three that was just an odd question lets be honest... EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 21:14, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi

You welcomed me to Wikipedia, may I ask why? I already have two and I know all that stuff about copyright. Commons is where I get all these pictures, I don't upload. Thanks. -DangerousJXD (talk) 21:28, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

@DangerousJXD: Very sorry, that was done automatically from the Teahouse on my part because the other user had mentioned about copyvios. I misinterpreted your post and thought you could do with some links to image guidelines. Oh well no harm done, Happy Contributing! EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 21:32, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

@EoRdE6:, also you didn't do it properly, it caused an issue. Luckily I fixed it. It's fine now. -DangerousJXD (talk) 03:12, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Re: Sock puppet Investigation

I have removed your personal information warning because if you look more clearly at my request and the IP's, you will notice they are possible proxy addresses or related to the linked Facebook post, not the accounts IP address. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 14:59, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Please read WP:OUTING. If you link to any undisclosed, off-wiki personal information again, including social media sites, you may be blocked without further warning. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:26, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

@DoRD: I'm sorry but I still don't understand. I haven't linked to any Wikipedia users off wiki information and once again if you read the SPI you would understand this. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 15:38, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

ATinySilver speculated that a Wikipedia account may be operated by a particular person, regardless whether that person is the subject of the SPI. You then provided a specific link to a post by that person. Since that Wikipedia account holder has not identified themselves on this site, neither action is allowed per WP:OUTING. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:50, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bitcoin

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Bitcoin. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Samsung Gear Fit

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Draft:Samsung Gear Fit, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Samsung Gear 2. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 01:16, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Resolved

 – Haha just took the infobox and took out most of the information, but kept the producer and release date. Good bot tho! EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 01:18, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Sione Tongia

Please AGF and don't prod a page with an underconstruction tag. I'm working on it as we speak :) Mattlore (talk) 02:14, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

@Mattlore: It's a BLPPROD for a reason. All you have to do it add a reference within the next week. All BLP's must be tagged quickly as they can be sensitive. Don't worry it can't be deleted till a minimum of 7 days, all you have to do is add a ref and remove the tag. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 02:17, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I know the process, thanks. It just creates and edit conflict as I'm currently working on the article, which is why it was tagged with the under construction tag. Mattlore (talk) 02:18, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I've just found this, I'll use that from now on. Mattlore (talk) 02:25, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

@Mattlore: But I quote directly "Note: This template should not be used on biographies of living persons."... Why not build your articles in the draft namespace and move them (with the move tab) when ready? EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 02:41, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Good spotting, I missed that. I could do it in namespace, but I don't think 20-30 minutes of editing in the mainspace is really too much to ask. Mattlore (talk) 03:30, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mimi Kirkland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Safe Haven. 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) 08:55, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Creation of Article: Angelópolis Mall

Hi! Thanks for being interested in the article. I live in Puebla, Mexico and I create or edit articles that are related with the city of Puebla, the State of Puebla or even the ones that are related with Mexico. My interest is to create an article that talk about the mall called Angelópolis. Is one of the most modern in Mexico and it´s known by many people. There are other articles of Shopping Malls in Mexico that need to be deleted or edited, many of them are written in a publicity way. Please, DO NOT delete this page. It´s very important for many people the existence of this article. Many people here in Puebla read Wikipedia, needs Wikipedia, but they do not know how to write Wikipedia or they don´t care about that. I try to give information, to give references, it is very difficult to me because this article was written 2 times before me and when I entered into Wikipedia I notices that there was no information about one of the most important shopping malls here in Mexico. Would you please tell me what can I do to avoid the deletion of this article? I'll appreciate it so much. Thank you and greetings! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alonso marquina (talk • contribs) 04:06, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

The best thing you can do is voice your opinion at the deletion discussion The Deletion Discussion. I will copy this comment there for you. Good luck! EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 04:11, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

The Phone Call

Firstly, nothing in the protection policy limits semi-protection to coordinated attacks by a swarm of IPs; persistent reinsertion of inappropriate content by a single anonymous IP also justifies the use of semi. And furthermore, I only applied a 24-hour semi, not an indefinite one — and I'd be happy to take it off even sooner than 24 hours too, since the nonsense doesn't appear to have simply reemerged under an alternate IP number (which is always a possibility that has to be accounted for.)

And given that the IP was adding the exact same tendentious POV rant about a completely irrelevant issue to not just The Phone Call but also J. K. Simmons and an article about a recent film festival — basically splattering it absolutely anywhere at all that he thought somebody would see it — it's not an "abuse" of admin powers to go straight to a short-term editblock, when experience repeatedly shows that IPs who are behaving in that way historically never pay any attention to polite "warnings". Bearcat (talk) 04:13, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

@Bearcat: I see you don't WP:Assume good faith like you are supposed to? And yes the semi rules specify where it should and should not be used, see the second link in my post on your TP. Also my editnotice apparently means nothing to you as I said I prefer to keep discussions where they started, ie at your to. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 04:16, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

MATE

Can you re look at your speedy tags on Sanford E. Reisenbach? I cleaned it up a bit. Nohomersryan (talk) 20:16, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Sure, I'll head there now. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 20:17, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Train derailment

Are you still going to expand the article 2015 Mount Carbon train derailment? Thanks for all your help on Wikipedia!Juneau Mike (talk) 00:09, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Michaelh2001 (talk · contribs) going to give it a shot now as it definitely needs it. No guarantees but I'll try. You're welcome to assist EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 00:33, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

My edits so far have been of the house keeping variety, but it looks a lot better now! Thanks, you are wonderful!Juneau Mike (talk) 03:43, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Great pic - much better than the old distant shot with the AP story. - 173.16.85.205 (talk) 04:23, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Whoops, I thought you took the photograph, but you didn't. It was taken by (Chris Tilley/AP) and appeared on an AP member's website. I don't know who could get in trouble due to your boosting the picture - you, wikipedia or both. AP term #6 includes "Requests for permission to archive, retain, or republish any part of the Materials may be submitted to Copyright, The Associated Press, 450 W. 33rd Street, New York, New York 10001 or by fax to (212) 621-5456" which I sort of doubt you did. Check out terms at http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/terms - Columbian is not the copyright owner. Rather than violating policy, you could just provide a link in the article to the images at The Columbian. -173.16.85.205 (talk) 04:57, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

If there are any issues here, it would be the Colombian for not crediting the image. But for now it stands till we can find a better replacement :) EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 05:13, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

In their online story The Columbian credited the image to Chris Tilley/AP. The image's metadata credits Chris Tilley and in the extended portion states that the originator is AP. It could be that the Associated Press has no objection to your factually incorrect fair use argument. Would you care to find out about that? It's pretty easy to do - just email info@ap.org and tell them what you did. - 173.16.85.205 (talk) 18:38, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree. Its called fair use for a reason. By fair use Wikipedia means it is copyrighted, but is needed for Wikipedia so it is uploaded for a single purpose and no other. I'll go update the accreditation if it pleases you. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 19:07, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Since you won't, I will tell AP what you did. Let them figure it. - 173.16.85.205 (talk) 04:05, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Good luck and thanks for the WP:THREAT. Since it is used under WP:FAIR USE I rather doubt they will care. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 04:32, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

No, I am not threatening. Wikipedia:No_legal_threats#What_is_not_a_legal_threat You just won't listen. - 173.16.85.205 (talk) 04:47, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Non-free content#Images 2, item #7 for explanation about using material from a press agency. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:43, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

I took File:Mount_Carbon_Derailment.jpg to {{Non-free review}}, which seems to be a cluttered unattended place. - 173.16.85.205 (talk) 00:00, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User:117.213.185.14/Salaam Centre Bangalore

Hello EoRdE6. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:117.213.185.14/Salaam Centre Bangalore, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: not six months yet - edited 20 Oct 14. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 22:57, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

...and the same for User:121.244.174.3/sandbox. JohnCD (talk) 22:59, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

@JohnCD: OOPS. For some odd reason I got the requirements mixed up in my head and thought it was three months.... Sorry there may have been a few more... EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 23:23, 26 February 2015 (UTC)