User talk:Ajfweb

Replaceable fair use File:OnLive.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:OnLive.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Seraphimblade Talk to me 00:37, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

May 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Cuba has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. Favonian (talk) 09:58, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I unwisely let a friend use my wikipedia account, and he produced vandalism. This won't happen again, Ajfweb (talk) 15:29, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Evony_web_ads.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Evony_web_ads.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. feydey (talk) 10:44, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Evony web ads.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Evony web ads.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:30, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Evony web ads.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Evony web ads.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  03:21, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Jenny Lives with Eric and Martin‎
Thanks for the infobox on Jenny Lives with Eric and Martin‎. I note you say that the cover is the 2012 edition; this puzzles me, because I uploaded that image in 2004. Is it unchanged in the current edition? Marnanel (talk) 00:00, 9 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Marnanel, I didn't originally put that text there, I just copied it from the source (it wasn't showing up, but was there, before). You can remove it if you like. AJF (talk) 16:53, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Webs (web hosting), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CGI (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:42, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Fixed. AJF (talk) 15:04, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Apple-logo.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Apple-logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:16, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Apple-logo.svg)
Thanks for uploading File:Apple-logo.svg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:02, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Globalize tag for the Great Depression section of the Lesbian article
Hello, Ajfweb. Since you originally placed the globalize tag in the Great Depression section, but then moved it just a little above that, I take it that the tag still concerned that section. I reverted the addition of the tag because, as stated in my edit summary, it is "[n]ot clear that the Great Depression section primarily deals with the United States. It's a small section, only one line mentions the U.S., and the rest could be speaking of society in general; it even mentions Germany."

On a side note, you can specifically make it so that a globalize tag refers to the section you put it in. This is done by adding a section-field to the globalize template. Instead of the template referring to the whole article, as your tag did, by looking like, it can refer to that specific section by being altered to  , which will read like this:  And you have to make sure that it's in the section, not above it. Flyer22 (talk) 15:32, 7 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see. Thanks for taking the time to educate me! AJF (talk) 15:45, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem. Flyer22 (talk) 16:48, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Unity (game engine), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page IDE (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:21, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited HTC Windows Phone 8S, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WVGA (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:56, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

December 2012
Hello, I'm DMacks. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Toilet paper orientation, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. DMacks (talk) 20:26, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Please stop adding unsourced content. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. DMacks (talk) 02:59, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Unstructured Supplementary Service Data, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pay as you go (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 13:24, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

AMS is MMP
Hi,

As the head of the article on Mixed-member proportional representation states, AMS is a form of MMP. Actually the two articles should be merged because both are going to talk about the Italian case, which has its own name (Legge Mattarella).

This is why I dared to revert your edits from the 14th of May.

Kahlores (talk) 21:58, 18 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Kahlores, your changes seem ill-advised. Until/unless the articles are merged, please don't cause such needless duplication between the articles and keep MMP in MMP and AMS in AMS. I have reverted them. - AJF (talk) 22:04, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * And if you were asked, would you raise any problem not to merge both? The political scientist who combs the various electoral methods will be looking for examples. It is important to satisfy him with the immediate list of assemblies elected through the algorithm, notwithstanding the various names by which it is known. To take a different example, Australia uses Alternative vote to elect all of its Lower House and Ireland elects their President by what they awkwardly name Single Transferable Vote, but both methods are known globally as instant-runoff voting (IRV) and see how useful it is when Wikipedia leaves out the branding. Kahlores (talk) 22:19, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * AMS and MMP aren't exactly the same, however. MMP is fully proportional, AMS isn't. Even so, I'm not arguing that they aren't similar (they are). Thing is, the two articles aren't merged just now, and so it would be inappropriate to make both deviate from their own subject matter, especially selectively where MMP features AMS but not the reverse. Request them to be merged, but don't try to force a merger. - AJF (talk) 23:05, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Chelsea Manning
Nope. Might as well refer to him as Breanna then (his first female identity.) His desire to be called Chelsea is not a decision made of sound mind and has no merit until it is accompanied by tangible action. Therefore Wiki standards on gender identity do not apply. If he wanted to be called Santa Clause, Wikipedia would not change his page title to Santa Clause. Wanting to be called Chelsea is about as serious of a statement as requesting to be called Saint Nick. -iFreedom1212 — Preceding unsigned comment added by IFreedom1212 (talk • contribs) 17:54, 22 August 2013 (UTC)


 * " His desire to be called Chelsea is not a decision made of sound mind and has no merit until it is accompanied by tangible action. Therefore Wiki standards on gender identity do not apply." - The wiki standards apply whether or not you like that. That's how it is. Sorry. - AJF (talk) 14:04, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Bradley Manning/October 2013 move request
Greetings. Because you participated in the August 2013 move request regarding this subject, you may be interested in participating in the current discussion. This notice is provided pursuant to Canvassing. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:26, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Scottish independence referendum, 2014
Hey, just wondering if you could explain why you reverted my edit to Scottish independence referendum, 2014? My changes seem completely reasonable to me. -Zcbeaton (talk) 19:25, 7 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I thought you had removed the thing about Iceland, but I see you'd actually moved it, so I've undid my undo. - AJF (talk) 19:27, 7 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks :) - Zcbeaton (talk) 21:09, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

See also links
Hello there! Regarding your recent on the USB 3.0 article, here's a quote from WP:ALSO, just for reference:
 * As a general rule, the 'See also' section should not repeat links that appear in the article's body or its navigation boxes.

Having that part of the Manual of Style in mind, repeating already linked articles is to be avoided in "See also" sections. Thank you. &mdash; Dsimic (talk | contribs) 23:57, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Reddit posts as source
While news source are of course preferred, using Reddit posts is actually not that bad IMO. As long as it can be made probably that it is actually the developer talking (which there is no reason to doubt in this case). In most cases, I would argue that a direct comment from a PHP developer is preferable to a news article, since journalists often have no idea what they are talking about when they are trying to make what the developers say understandable for laypeople. There is the point about reddit comments being editable, but since we are not talking about controversial cloak-and-dagger stuff here, that doesn't seem like a huge problem in this specific case. It is certainly much better than adding an unsourced statement, such as what you reverted my edit to. Thue (talk) 18:29, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
 * There's a specific email on the mailing list I think would be a better reference, I'll find it in a moment. AJF (talk) 18:30, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Youtube Partner listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Youtube Partner. Since you had some involvement with the Youtube Partner redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. TheChampionMan1234 02:35, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

108.73.113.184
He's not just an "elaborate troll". He's an elaborate IP-hopping banned editor. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 16:14, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Even worse. :/ AJF (talk) 16:22, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:European Commission Logo English.gif
 Thanks for uploading File:European Commission Logo English.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 10:18, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for saying thanks!
--Soulparadox (talk) 02:18, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Reverting for no reason
Reverting without bothering to leave a reason is highly disruptive. Perhaps you can give the reason now for this. 200.104.240.11 (talk) 11:17, 7 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I felt you removed too much info, so I reverted it and slimmed it down myself. - AJF (talk) 11:22, 7 November 2014 (UTC)


 * So why didn't you explain what you were doing? And why not simply edit the article to make the changes you wanted to make? A reversion is a complete rejection of the work of another editor and if the reversion is not adequately supported then the reverted editor may find it difficult to assume good faith. 200.104.240.11 (talk) 13:46, 7 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Because the edit would then be a stealth revert. Sorry, I screwed up this time, I usually have a long explanation for why I reverted something. - AJF (talk) 14:02, 7 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your apology and for taking the time to respond. You are probably aware that most people don't consider anonymous editors worth engaging with so I appreciate it.  Your edit restored a couple of things which I regard as problematic to the article and I'd invite you to have another look.
 * the Zend Engine is freely available under the Zend Engine License (some parts under the PHP License) since 2001 - there's little practical difference between "freely available" and "available" here, unless you were going to link "free" to free software. In addition, it's not correct to say "under the Zend Engine License" if some parts are not available under that license.  Ideally it should be explained which parts are under which license, but merely mentioning the other license as an aside can't be right.  In addition, the tense is not correct and the sentence should say "has been... since 2001" if the year of its release is important enough to mention.
 * The link to php.net is not appropriate because a) it's not a citation, and b) if it was it should be formatted as a reference and not as an inline link, see Citing_sources.
 * Thanks again. 200.104.240.11 (talk) 20:42, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't consider "freely available" a problem. I slightly reworded the "some parts". I changed it to use "has been", and removed the link. - AJF (talk) 02:16, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Leading the Way (corporate song) listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Leading the Way (corporate song). Since you had some involvement with the Leading the Way (corporate song) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 00:50, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

on PHP License
Thanks for your explanations about the PHP License model, I think that you are right when you said that it's 'Free Software' license, by the fact that it's part of the GPL-incompatible free software licenses as published by the FSF, there https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses,

the thing which makes me prefering to consider it as Open Source license instead is the fact that it was permissive and non-copyleft and its incompatibility with the GNU GPL, but now it's ok for saying that it's a free software license.

but bear in mind that this license is not recommended for people who are interrested by the software freedom, and GNU GPL is the best to use in your software that should be Free as in Freedom, see https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/pragmatic.html and https://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html.

Thanks. Kbensalah (talk) 11:30, December 11, 2014 (UTC)

Silk Road/Roberts/Ulbricht
Sorry to interrupt the merge discussion. It was that that I started to contribute to, supporting the merge, but after taking a closer look I just couldn't see how either article could stand. One is as clear a violation of WP:BLPCRIME as it gets, and the other not far away (it wasn't about the pseudonymous person, Ulbricht's name was throughout the article). I'm going to bring it up at WP:BLPN FYI, asking for others to weigh in. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 00:47, 30 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I understand your reasoning. Initially I reverted somewhat kneejerk, but then I remembered how seriously Wikipedia takes BLP violations, and you're probably right that, unless he's convicted, he doesn't need his own article, nor does DPR. I'm copying over some of the info from the now-defunct DPR/Ulbricht articles into the Silk Road article in the section about Ulbricht's arrest. &mdash;ajf (talk) 00:51, 30 January 2015 (UTC)


 * FYI Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive216 if you care to weigh in. I'm also concerned about Ulbricht's inclusion in the Silk Road article itself. It seems less egregious than having an article about him, but still probably a WP:BLPCRIME issue. I don't intend to jump in and do it myself, though, until there's been a discussion. &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 01:04, 30 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Yeah, it might be an issue, though I'm not super-familiar with Wikipedia's policies on this area, to be honest. Thanks for pointing me towards that discussion. :) &mdash;ajf (talk) 01:15, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Do-ocracy


A tag has been placed on Do-ocracy requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about something invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally, and it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. SD0001 (talk) 14:27, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Note about music sections
Music infoboxes make more sense to be used on pages that deal exclusively with Music. Such as artist or standalone soundtrack pages. On main articles that are about other topics, one music box is enough since they unnecessarily bloat the page. —KirtZ Message 21:24, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Perhaps that is the case, but you should either have both or neither. Including only the first soundtrack, yet omitting any information on the second soundtrack, makes no sense. Personally, I'd suggest making them go side-by-side somehow. &mdash;ajf (talk) 21:28, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Music boxes cannot be merged. Leaving one was my compromise. They only exist for optional aesthetic purposes and hence only one is needed on a main article. Hypothetically, there were six albums, adding 6 boxes would just be plain ridiculous now wouldn't it? Especially since they extend beyond the end of the page. I refuse to edit war with you. —KirtZ Message 21:40, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * They aren't just aesthetics, they contain useful information, which you removed when you removed the box. They can't be merged directly, perhaps, but there may still be some other solution. &mdash;ajf (talk) 21:57, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * You mean useful information that can be easily expressed in prose when not used in a header? Sigh. My previous arguments hold. I won't be replying further. I left your edit alone so please drop the stick. —KirtZ Message 22:14, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

DO do do DO do DO do
You're welcome!

In other news, was just editing a page on an Andreeva but not sure you'd want to visit, given the economy went to hell after the Russians closed the slave market. Plus, Chechnya. — Llywelyn II   20:12, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Sprinkles
An article that you have been involved in editing, Sprinkles, has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Objectivesea (talk) 23:49, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Neutrois
Wikipedia's notability rules are very clear. If "neutrois" has been the subject of multiple works by multiple independent reliable sources, it can be in Wikipedia. If not, it's what Wikipedia's policies call a "non-notable neologism", and it can't be included. See WP:NEO. So, if you want to get it into Wikipedia, I'd suggest that you get it noticed. and commented on as a topic, by the mainstream media and/or peer-reviewed academic literature first. -- The Anome (talk) 23:21, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
 * This was resolved ages ago. Are you mistakenly beating a dead horse? &mdash;ajf (talk) 01:57, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * So, I thought it was weird when you deleted the page, because I was pretty sure it had been merge-redirected after an AfD discussion (which I was involved in), and it wasn't a stub article any more. Sure enough, there was: Articles_for_deletion/Agender. It was decided then that both pages should be merged to Genderqueer. But nobody seemed to think they were so non-notable that they shouldn't have redirects. They just don't need their own articles. This just seems odd to me, to suddenly delete a redirect with no discussion... a redirect AfD previously decided to create. Citing the 2006 decision is strange, too because there was a 2nd nomination as well. I'm confused. &mdash;ajf (talk) 02:18, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * So, I thought it was weird when you deleted the page, because I was pretty sure it had been merge-redirected after an AfD discussion (which I was involved in), and it wasn't a stub article any more. Sure enough, there was: Articles_for_deletion/Agender. It was decided then that both pages should be merged to Genderqueer. But nobody seemed to think they were so non-notable that they shouldn't have redirects. They just don't need their own articles. This just seems odd to me, to suddenly delete a redirect with no discussion... a redirect AfD previously decided to create. Citing the 2006 decision is strange, too because there was a 2nd nomination as well. I'm confused. &mdash;ajf (talk) 02:18, 1 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Agender was merge-redirected, neutrois was simply deleted. Please provide some references to reliable sources that either has the term as its principal subject, defines it, or uses the word "neutrois" to describe someone, and I'd be happy to restore it. I've tried to find some, and come up blank. "Agender", however, easily passes this test:, , -- The Anome (talk) 09:42, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 29 July
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * On the Elvis operator page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=673698312 your edit] caused an unsupported parameter error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F673698312%7CElvis operator%5D%5D Ask for help])


 * Okay, I fixed it (although I didn't cause it originally, I think). Thanks, bot! &mdash;ajf (talk) 00:26, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Self-proclaimed psychic listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Self-proclaimed psychic. Since you had some involvement with the Self-proclaimed psychic redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. —Ruud 23:01, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Category:People known by their middle name
Category:People known by their middle name, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:21, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Reverting "cross-platform" assertion
Hello.

I see that you have reverted two of my edits (involving removal of the word "cross-platform") each time by telling two lies. I responded by telling two other lies in return, i.e. "cross-platform" being explicitly listed as a weasel word and MOS:COMPUTING forbidding it.

Whenever you decided that it is best if both of us were honest, you can put "cross-platform" back after citing a source; one that clarifies which of the three meanings of cross-platform is intended. Otherwise, content without source are challenged or deleted.

Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 14:49, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I am rather upset you immediately jump to the conclusion I am acting in bad faith. I have not made any statements I know to be false. I'm not sure it's possible to have a productive discussion if you operate under this assumption. &mdash;ajf (talk) 15:00, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I didn't assume bad faith. You are not a vandal; hence you are acting in good faith. This is correct both ways.


 * Only I am very angry today; people are being mean to me. And I am tired that people put in "cross-platform" when the item is "platform independent" or the question of the platform is irrelevant, or simply to fill the field. In this case, the articles are about programming languages; operating system and platform are for IDE articles only.


 * Still, even though I am mad and tired, I don't assume bad faith. I am sure it is impossible for a non-vandal to act in bad faith.


 * Best regards,
 * Codename Lisa (talk) 15:10, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Ah, okay, I was just reacting to you using the word "lies". I can understand your frustration.


 * As you may have noticed, Platform independent just redirects to Cross platform, so it's not a great improvement. Still, I've changed both articles to use it. &mdash;ajf (talk) 15:13, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * You understand my frustration? How sweet of you. { It has been a long time since anyone understood my frustration. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 16:44, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Signature changing
Could you please see bottom of those pages:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:McGeddon#Changing_signatures

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Courtesy_vanishing#Problems_with_old_signatures_after_vanishing_accounts — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.223.130.175 (talk) 14:56, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Windows NT 4.0.png
Hello.

I've been looking at your little dispute with in File:Windows NT 4.0.png. Apparently, you think the version uploaded by Koman90 is what Windows NT 4.0 looks right after installation. Well, I am afraid that is not quite true. The uploader has written this edit summary: "uploaded a new version of 'File:Windows NT 4.0.png': Lower resolution, default icons, Service Pack 6a And other major updates" The screenshot has Scheduled Tasks, Connection Wizard and Windows Media Player 6. None of these appear in an out-of-box Windows NT 4 SP6a.

Also, when FleetCommand said "No, it does not! I don't even know where to get IE6! It's 2015 after all!" the "No, it does not!" part is definitely wrong. He may have installed IE6 without knowing. I am 100% sure he himself installed it because the About dialog box reads "This product is licensed to: ... Wikipetan ... Home". It is quite obvious that FC himself installed it. The only people who use "Wikipetan" in the screenshots are FleetCommand, Mabdul and I.

Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 02:49, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, no. I obfuscated the original owner's name before taking the screenshot. It is rather easy. But I uploaded a new version. I installed this new one myself. I was forced to install Q299444i after SP6, otherwise I got a BSOD after pressing PrtScr, or doing pretty much anything else. (Sometimes I didn't even have a working mouse before Q299444i.) Fleet Command (talk) 04:31, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * You're right, of course. I know what NT4 looks like out-of-the-box, I've installed it myself. I had reverted the change because that one at least looks closer to an OOTB install. The new image is much better, though, although I'm still wondering about the high-colour Plus! icons (see talk page). &mdash;ajf (talk) 19:09, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

November 2015
Your recent editing history at Denmark Place fire‎ shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Keri (talk) 18:54, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Merger of Additional Member System and Mixed-member proportional representation
Hello Ajfweb,

On both the Talk:Additional Member System and Talk:Mixed-member proportional representation proposed mergers have been discussed at great detail. On the AMS talk page, this is in: 4. Moving this article?, 8. Proposed Merger, 10. Proposed Move, and 11. AMS vs MMP. On the MMP talk page it is discussed in 4. Proposed Merger, 15 AMS vs MMP, and 19. Merge proposal with Additional Member System. Parallel voting and Mixed Member Majoritarian share a single WP page. Likewise, Instant-runoff voting (IRV), alternative vote (AV), transferable vote, ranked choice voting, and preferential voting share a WP page. There is no need to have separate articles for voting systems which differ in name only depending on location. For instance, in the UK, MMP is referred to as AMS. "Additional Member System (AMS) can also be known as Mixed Member Proportional (MMP)" Ontario Teacher BFA BEd (talk) 19:46, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Regardless of whether or not they should be separate pages, you didn't point to a single specific merger discussion, you amalgamated a bunch of them, including ones from several years ago. You even credited me with agreeing, despite the fact I've objected to a merger more than once. If we're going to do a merger, we should have a proper, public discussion with the usual templates on both pages. &mdash;ajf (talk) 19:48, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello Ajfweb,

You seem to be under the impression that AMS and MMP are not synonyms. In reality, AMS is the UK term for MMP. "Mixed-member proportional representation goes by a variety of other names, including "the additional member system," "compensatory PR," the "two vote system," and "the German system." "Additional Member System (AMS) can also be known as Mixed Member Proportional (MMP)." "The Additional Member System (AMS, or Mixed-Member Proportional (MMP) as it is known in much of the world) has been used since 1999 in elections for the devolved Scottish Parliament and National Assembly for Wales." Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) System: This is a  kind  of Mixed  Electoral  system that  tends to  combine  features  of  the majoritarian(ie  First  Past  The  Post,  Two  round  systems)  and  the  Proportional Representation systems. It is also referred to as Additional Member System (AMS) or Top Up System. Please undo your reversion on the Additional Member System article. This reversion includes 3 paragraphs of unsourced dubious content that I have disproved through four sources. Ontario Teacher BFA BEd (talk) 19:47, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * This is not a contention unique to me and is part of an ongoing discussion, and throwing the same list of sources at everyone who disagrees with you is not going to change anything. Please continue existing talk page discussions. &mdash;ajf (talk) 19:50, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello Ajfweb,


 * I have provided many sources which prove that AMS and MMP are the same thing. AMS is simply the term used for MMP in the United Kingdom. Please take the time to read through these sources in detail. I have quoted the sources. They are not misrepresented. What scholarly sources did you read that claim AMS and MMP are not the same thing?


 * You must provide scholarly sources which support your opinion PRIOR to reverting. While I am waiting for sources which support your opinion, as part of the BRD cycle, this text must be omitted until scholarly sources are provided and consensus is reached. The text cannot be included until sources prove its accuracy; especially as multiple sources have already proven it to be false. Ontario Teacher BFA BEd (talk) 21:07, 1 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello Ajfweb,


 * I'm not sure why you believe that AMS is not another name (used in the United Kingdom) for MMP. Here are two new reliable sources which prove that MMP is known as AMS in the UK.


 * On New Zealand's government website, it states: " What are other names for Mixed Member Proportional (MMP)? In the United Kingdom, MMP is sometimes known as AMS (which stands for Additional Member System)."


 * A prominent British newspaper also states: "AMS is a hybrid voting system, part First Past The Post and part closed party list, the party list element added on to make the result more proportional. Outside the UK it is more commonly referred to as Mixed Member Proportional (MMP)."


 * Please read these sources in full and answer the following two questions:
 * Are these reliable sources?
 * Are the sources misrepresented?


 * If the answers to these questions are: The sources are reliable and properly represented, you must stop reverting immediately. Ontario Teacher BFA BEd (talk) 12:30, 25 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello Ajfweb,


 * You are at risk of Edit Warring. Please follow "The three-revert rule". More importantly, please respond to the sources and discuss the sources on the talk page. Do you believe they are reliable? Do you believe they have been misrepresented? Ontario Teacher BFA BEd (talk) 13:15, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Usage of Mixed-Member Proportional (List of nations)
Hello Ajfweb,

You have recently removed several nations from a list of countries which currently use/have used/or proposed to have used MMP. These nations have sources which list them as MMP. I'm not sure why you remove these nations. Please explain on the talk page specifically which nation/region you believe should be removed, and why you feel the sources have been misrepresented, and we can remove it.

For instance, if the article was about Canadian provinces (not including territories), and it listed: B.C., Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, P.I.E., Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Newfoundland & Labrador, and New York; you could point out that New York should not be on the list, and we could remove it. Removing all but 3 provinces would be a very questionable edit and might be considered vandalism.Ontario Teacher BFA BEd (talk) 03:47, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Revert
See here Can you explain this? Per WP:SORTKEY: "Use a space as the sort key for a key article for the category." Why would you do this? Please use Ping if you respond here. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:17, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. It looked like a strange edit and there was no justification in the edit message. I wasn't aware of the conventions here. &mdash;ajf (talk) 14:47, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Good deal Thanks for your swift response. Have a nice day. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:48, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Tables on "Qt (software)"
Hi, Your edits on Qt (software) removes improvements on the tables of the page. Could you pleas merge your spelling corrections with the improvements on the tables? Thanks. --Qtguy00 (talk) 18:21, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, sorry about that, I didn't see the other edits you made. Done. &mdash;ajf (talk) 18:34, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vaporwave, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Muzak. 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) 09:54, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Block Notice
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Mike V • Talk 15:48, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Gang Garrison
Hi Afjweb,

I'm on my phone right now, so I hope this works: Gang Garrison is a video game, right? That's why I changed the infobox from to. Kind regards, soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 19:41, 14 May 2016 (UTC) soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 19:41, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, sure, it is a video game. But there's fields on Infobox software that Infobox video game doesn't have. &mdash;ajf (talk) 21:16, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * So what are the benefits of using the software infobox? soetermans . ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 23:03, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * That it has fields that the video game infobox lacks. The current version and licensing model, for example. &mdash;ajf (talk) 13:02, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
 * The version field has long been removed from the video game infobox, as it doesn't provide the reader with any substantial information. I don't see why the licensing for Gang Garrison is important enough to have it in the infobox either. It can't be mentioned in prose? I mean, there's a reason why the video game infobox is different from the software infobox after all. soetermans . ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 13:09, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Fair point, it could go in the text, I suppose. I guess I like having the version because it reflects that the game is continuously updated. &mdash;ajf (talk) 13:11, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Macbook (Retina)
Hi,

Despite saying that its "PCIe 3.0 x2", the source seem to be unsure of this data. From the source "...new drive is most likely PCIe 3.0, but we're not sure if it is still x4, or if something else has changed. We are asking about this!" So, I am uncertain whether the source is reliable at all.

Guysayshi (talk) 14:39, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I noticed that also. If we don't find a better source, maybe we should remove that detail entirely? &mdash;ajf (talk) 14:49, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Scottish Adjacent Waters Boundaries Order 1999, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Berwick. 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) 11:26, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Trump
Hi

Ajfweb

My closure of Talk:Trump_(playing_card) was very clear that no move would be made for 3 days after the closure.

I see that you have gone ahead and made the moves. Please revert. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:26, 18 November 2016 (UTC)


 * You don't appear to be online at the moment, so I have done the reverts. There's no urgency to the move, so please wait to see whether a move review is opened. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:54, 18 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Ah, my apologies, I missed that part. Sorry for the hassle. &mdash;ajf (talk) 22:37, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thinking about it again, my note was down at the bottom of a long rationale, so maybe not as clear as I'd assumed.
 * Sorry for being a little snappy, and thanks for being so nice about it. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:26, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Newspaper montage
Hi Ajfweb,

The image was discussed at In the news/Candidates, and as pointed out, the montage version fails the Non-free content criteria - "Minimal number of items. Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information." In this case, the Daily Mail version is the most quoted. Including the other three newspapers is redundant. Smurrayinchester 16:44, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. That's a shame, but it makes sense. &mdash;ajf (talk) 16:45, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I kind of wish we could have had all four too. If only someone had a photo of the newspapers on a rank at the newsagents. Smurrayinchester 08:26, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:2016-11-04 UK newspaper covers re Article 50 prerogative case.png
 Thanks for uploading File:2016-11-04 UK newspaper covers re Article 50 prerogative case.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:03, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

National 3 redirect
Hi, Some years ago you created the redirect National 3 to the page Curriculum for Excellence. I just wanted to check on whether this is still relevant. The reason being, one of the French football leagues Championnat de France Amateur 2 is going to be renamed National 3 over the summer, and I was planning to move the page in the next month or so. I have no knowledge of the education sector so wanted to canvas your opinion before taking any action. Cheers, Gricehead (talk) 08:57, 9 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi there! It would still be relevant, yes. “National 3” is a level of secondary school qualification in Scotland, alongside National 4, National 5, and also National 1 and National 2 (e.g. this site). If you want to redirect the page to the French football league, that's fine. You could add a Template:Redirect at the top of the article if it seems worth it, but I don't really have any strong feelings on it either way. &mdash;ajf (talk) 15:29, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

dril
First of all, thank you so much for your contributions to the article so far. They have all been very good and helpful. Second, and even more so, thank you a lot for your very kind shouts-out on Twitter. I knew when I started writing the article that it would have to be as absolutely robust as possible to prevent any challenges from people who haven't heard of dril or don't "get it". Like you, I esteem dril as highly as Shakespeare, so I wanted to round up every shred of writing under a "reliable" source by Wikipedia's standard that I could find. The only thing worse than no dril article would have been a shitty dril article.

Your upload of dril's avatar also inspired me to look into the genesis of dril's profile picture, something I don't want to admit how many hours I spent working to get to (not quite) the bottom of. I think having the avatar there is honestly much better than the free "replacement". The 😎 was funny, but like you said you can't really hear the voice of dril unless you're imagining it coming from that picture. As with any of this, I want the justification to scan as legitimate and bulletproof to any casual, skeptical scanner of Wikipedia content. —BLZ · talk 01:09, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * You're very much welcome! As you may have surmised, uploading the avatar was motivated by trying to get the right “voice”. The tweets in the article didn't, er, “sound” right otherwise. I do appreciate the ingenuity of the 😎, though! &mdash;ajf (talk) 01:15, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Weiß Schwarz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Schwarz ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Wei%C3%9F_Schwarz check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Wei%C3%9F_Schwarz?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Foreigners in Japan in 2000 by citizenship.svg


The file File:Foreigners in Japan in 2000 by citizenship.svg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Orphaned map."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ~ Rob 13 Talk 17:32, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Dril.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Dril.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:39, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Dril.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Dril.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:08, 23 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Hey Ajfweb! Just messaging to let you know I provided a (pretty thorough) response to the deletion nomination above of Dril.jpg. It'd be helpful if you weigh in as the uploader. You're the one who convinced me, after my initial sorry attempt to use 😎 for the avatar (lol remember that), that using the avatar itself was actually necessary to convey dril's voice, and that using the image that way fits squarely into Wikipedia fair use policy. Imo, that was one of the single biggest improvements to the article. In any cases, the discussion could use a few more voices. —BLZ · talk 21:25, 27 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Wow. Like your other work, that's really quite impressive by itself. I appreciate you stepping in to defend it, I'll try to say something! &mdash;ajf (talk) 21:43, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Dril.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Dril.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Notre-Dame de Paris
Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  18:23, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of No Deal for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article No Deal 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/No Deal until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Widefox ; talk 20:23, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Strong customer authentication, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stripe ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Strong_customer_authentication check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Strong_customer_authentication?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 07:27, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

27 Club
Could you please edit the 27 Club page to add Khagendra Thapa Magar? Sorry to bother you, but the page is protected. He actually died aged 27 so he should be added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.3.51.112 (talk) 21:20, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't know about that person, I would suggest you make your own account for that. &mdash;ajf (talk) 21:26, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Bob Ross thanks you
The Bill Alexander article had a surprising amount of misleading information. Thank you for adding that bit about Ross thanking him in the very first episode of his PBS series. I thought that was the case but didn't double-check it because I thought I must be wrong and it was the first episode of season 2. This makes it clear that Ross wasn't trying to hide where he learned his stuff. 2601:647:CB03:5930:F18D:207C:1C19:59AB (talk) 19:43, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! I just happened to be watching that episode, heard him mention Bill, looked him up on Wikipedia, and thought it was worth mentioning. &mdash;ajf (talk) 19:44, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Reverted edit on Bush hid the facts
If there's going to be a politically oriented hatnote in the article at all, I don't think it should be referring to specific versions of events that happened. The actual presidency of George W. Bush is barely relevant to a Notepad bug which happens to include his name -- 9/11 conspiracy theories are even less so. { $\mathbb{JPG}$ } 09:04, 20 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Be that as it may, it's not an excuse for writing "Bush's actual hiding of the facts" on a WP:NPOV site. &mdash;ajf (talk) 09:06, 20 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Well, how about the current version? { $\mathbb{JPG}$ } 09:08, 20 September 2020 (UTC)


 * If I strongly objected to the new one I would have reverted it. It's fine, though the edit seems to make the assumption that "Bush hid the facts" being connected to conspiracy theories is a politicised thing, but that's not the case, it's conspiracy theorists who think it is an actual message from Microsoft. &mdash;ajf (talk) 09:16, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Alternative for Sweden


The article Alternative for Sweden has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Not notable per lack of WP:ORGDEPTH. The footnotes are numerous, but if we ignore the plentiful references to AFS's own material (which is not a reliable source, nor independent), the other references are trivial mentions which do not go to establishing notability. Sources such as Svenska Dagbladet, Expressen, Sveriges Radio and MediaMatters are indeed independent, reliable, and secondary, but the references to them are not significant. They lack WP:ORGDEPTH, whereby 'deep or significant coverage provides an overview, description, commentary, survey, study, discussion, analysis, or evaluation of the product, company, or organization'. Nyheter24 and Fria Tider, also purvey only trivial mentions, as well as, in those cases, being of dubious reliability. Expo (magazine) is the exception, as it's both reliable and provides significant coverage (describing AFS as 'A right-wing extremist party characterized by anti-Muslim propaganda and ethnonationalism... and [with] clear points of contact with the Swedish white power environment (per Google Translate)). But that's just one source."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bishonen &#124; tålk 20:16, 12 September 2021 (UTC)


 * I regret creating that article so I won't object. &mdash;ajf (talk) 20:17, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Cool, thanks. Bishonen &#124; tålk 11:41, 13 September 2021 (UTC).
 * this type of proposed article deletion are for non-controversial deletions only, how could deleting swedens 10th largest party article be uncontroversial? Gooduserdude (talk) 16:03, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Alternative for Sweden for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alternative for Sweden 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/Alternative for Sweden until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Bishonen &#124; tålk 17:00, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

File:Zend Engine logo.png listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Zend Engine logo.png, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. weeklyd3 (message me | my contributions) 03:06, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)