User talk:After Midnight/Archive 24

Arthur Grumiaux
Hi AM. I've uploaded an image of Arthur Grumiaux, claiming fair use (Non-free biog-pic). I see you deleted something that likely was fairly similar back in 2010, so I thought I should give you a heads-up. Cheers, Bromley86 (talk) 22:05, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Kristi Addis for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kristi Addis is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Kristi Addis until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Atlanta United FC
Could you please intervene in an edit war I am currently having with User:Walter Görlitz over the use of colors in Atlanta United FC. Walter has a habit of changing team infoboxes to random colors that have zero relevance to a sports team's branding. These teams guard their brands tightly, and do not permit alterations whatsoever. Team pages should have accurate colors according to WP:Manual of Style/Trademarks. However, Walter an admin named User:BU Rob13 claim that these random colors are guarded by MOS:CONTRAST. Every sports team page uses the actual team colors for userboxes, where MOS:CONTRAST has never been an issue. To claim the discrimination as a way to trump copyright is, in my opinion, unethical. Jamesmiko (talk) 06:54, 17 October 2016 (UTC)


 * It's not a a habit, and they're not random colours.
 * What's unethical is
 * to claim that this anything but observing MOS:CONTRAST,
 * to not discuss on your own talk after I asked you to discuss the colour scheme there.
 * When you're ready to talk, you can do so on your talk page, where I laid-out the team colours with their actual colour contrast values, or on the team article's talk page. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:17, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins
Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

New deal for page patrollers
Hi ,

In order to better control the quality  of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers
Hi.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins) .MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:46, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Your inactive bot(s)
Hello After Midnight. We currently show that you are the operator on file for at least one  account that appears to be inactive. Please see the discussion and list of bots here: Bot owners' noticeboard. If you are no longer operating your bot, no action is required - your bot will be marked as retired and have the bot flag removed. Should your bot be retired and you wish to revive it in the future, please request bot authorization at WP:BRFA. If you are still in control of your bot (including knowing its hopefully strong password) and wish to maintain the bot flag, please sign the table on the linked discussion. Thank you, — xaosflux  Talk 14:41, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Heidi Voight for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Heidi Voight is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Heidi Voight until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:43, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Allison Brown for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Allison Brown is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Allison Brown until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:48, 30 December 2016 (UTC)