User talk:Finnusertop/Archive/2016

Your GA nomination of On the Art of the Cinema
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article On the Art of the Cinema you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Viriditas -- Viriditas (talk) 07:41, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, . Feel free to ask for additional information if you need it; I know it's an obscure topic. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:22, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Jehovah's Witness
Hey are you a witness? Just curious Rileyschneider (talk) 02:28, 2 February 2016 (UTC) Oh nice! Well good for you
 * No, I am not, . I edit articles that align with topics I am interested in. Looking at my contributions, you will see that recently that has included many articles related to religion, including Jehovah's Witnesses (specifically, ). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 02:36, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

City of Stonnignton logo
thanks for your help with city of stonnignton logo! Trierdenise (talk) 06:25, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You are welcome! – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 07:04, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Zimmber logo.png listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Zimmber 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:56, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Let's Trim column changed back to "Genre" after being marked as "Intended Genre"
Marking Let's Trim's designation as "Education" instead of "Comedy" as "Intended Genre" is not culturally insensitive. Let's Trim is television. Who cares what country it's from? If What Not To Wear wound up on PBS and someone inferred its genre were Education, shouldn't we say its genre is also intended?110.55.2.76 (talk) 07:55, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Let me be clear about this: I am not treating television differently based on its nationality. I don't have access to Template:Infobox_television, but "genre" should be "intended genre", no matter where the TV program is coming from.110.55.2.76 (talk) 08:02, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Your edit has been since reverted again by another editor. I think "genre" is taken to be sufficient per community consensus. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:11, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Every time I made that edit, it was almost entirely without the comment of those that reverted it. I marked it as "Intended Genre" the first time, without finding at that time any comment why it should be "Genre" instead. You claimed my edit was culturally insensitive and that I was treating television differently depending on where it's from. As you can see above, I replied. Not getting an answer for about 20 hours, I changed it under the premise that I had just won the debate. The other editor, Emijrp, changed it back. I'd commented on his page, and without getting a reply for about 16 hours, I'd again made my edit under the premise that I'd won the debate. Wikimedia is open source, Creative Commons licensed material. Therefore, if there is a controversy, you can't just pull rank, you are supposed to debate. In a controversy, you can't just call someone culturally insensitive and after they've denied it, you'd just ignore them. What is so important to you about the lack of debate? Have I tripped on some sort of taboo topic?110.55.1.207 (talk) 08:38, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * It's good to discuss this, I agree and have started a discussion on the article talk page: Talk:List of North Korean television series. Please note that the absence of a timely response doesn't mean that one has "won" a debate on Wikipedia. Community consensus is built over time and there are no timelines. On the same note, it was okay of you to implement the edits when you received no such reply, but further reverts were probably expected because these editors disagreed with you to begin with. After a few reverts back and forth it's good to discuss further, and that's where we stand now.


 * By the way, Template:Infobox television only supports a "Genre" parameter and the phraseology is hard coded. But the article we are discussing doesn't use that infobox. Instead, we are talking about a wikitable. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:09, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

how the logo of world scout scout movement could be a non-free image?
i am a member of WOSM ,i have earned this patch/badge And this logo is used mostly in every services of scouting.it's a movement and organization not a commercial institution :1 Promise-Animator,Scout &#38; Participant in Olympiads (talk) 11:41, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The copyright to the logo is owned by the WOSM. Only they have the right to decide where it is published. You may have a right to wear or display the badge as a member, but this does not mean that they have licensed the logo for your (or, ours, as in Wikipedia) use. Putting it on your userpage here is publishing without permission, and not allowed.


 * Wikipedia makes only limited exceptions (and never in userspace) based on the fair-use doctrine of copyright law in conformity with our non-free content policy. You can see that the image description page specifies that exception (File:World Organization of the Scout Movement flag.svg): This file may only be used on the article World Organization of the Scout Movement.


 * Both commercial and non-commercial works have the same copyright and organizations often retain these rights for a reason. If you are not happy about it, contact WOSM and ask them to license out this logo under a free license. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 11:47, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks :),I didn't know about these Promise-Animator,Scout &#38; Participant in Olympiads (talk) 11:52, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

User:Lawrencedepe userbox
Hi Finnusertop. I saw that commented out some non-free images from the userpage/userboxes of User:Lawrencedepe. For some reason it seems that the File:FC Barcelona (crest).svg is still showing up in one of the userboxes. I tried to remove it per WP:UP and NFCC#9, but can't find it anywhere in User:Lawrencedepe/userbox so I'm not sure why it's still visible and showing up in the file's "File usage". I thought about removing the userbox entirely, but that seemed a bit drastic at the moment. Any ideas as to what is going on here? Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:41, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I see it too. Refreshing the pages with purge got rid of it in the userbox:, , but I can still see it in File usage. Purging the file page didn't help: . I don't know why it still shows up in File usage. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:39, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking. Perhaps its just a glitch that will take a little time to work itself out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:23, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Finnish translation assistance
Hello Finnusertop. I saw your name in Category:Translators_fi-en and your user page says that you like to translate Finnish to English. I have a question for you. I am trying to find the earliest we can find that this painting (which may be misnamed on Wikipedia?) was publicly displayed... I found a book snippet here. Text snippet follows: Akseli Gallen-Kallela Aallottaria (Vellamon neidot) 1909 Kaari Raivio, Helsinki Neljä suomalaista taiteilijaa osallistui vuoden 1909 Panisin syyssalonkiin: Antti Faven (kolme muotokuvaa). Akseli Gallen-Kallela (Aallottaria, Hiihtäjät, From what I can see and what Google Translate tells me, it looks like the painting was publicly displayed the same year it was painted (1909). Is that what the snippet says? many thanks!  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 16:19, 12 February 2016 (UTC)


 * that is correct. I'm going to go ahead and translate the snippet for you:

"Akseli Gallen-Kallela's Aallottaria (Vellamon neidot) 1909 Kaari Raivio, Helsinki. Four Finnish artists participated in the Autumn Salon of Paris in 1909: Antti Faven (three portraits), Akseli Gallen-Kallela (Aallottaria, Hiihtäjät [...]"
 * The first part of the snippet appears to be an image caption, or similar; Kaari Raivio (b. 1936) is the granddaughter of Gallen-Kallela so she had probably supplied the image. "Autumn Salon of Paris" I believe refers to Salon (Paris). But concerning your question specifically, it says the painting was publicly displayed in 1909 in Paris. And yes, the file is misnamed on Commons; its name is Aallottaria (the official English translation being Oceanides, according to the National Library catalogue). I'm happy to help if you need more translations or Finnish sources. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:47, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hey that's perfect, thanks!... and BTW, User:Sgvrfjs is working on a series of articles about the works of Sibelius (just look at Sgvrfjs's user page!)... I'll pass your name along to Sgvrfjs, who may need help in the future.Thanks again!  Lingzhi &diams; (talk) 16:57, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the follow-up on Moran, Finnusertop! I'm am kinda sorta mostly more or less busy at the moment, but may have time... possibly later today, possibly tomorrow... to email Chicago & ask about provenance... thanks again! Lingzhi &diams; (talk) 06:03, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Non-free image
Thanks for pointing out the image i had used in in my sandbox work for the East Riding FA County Cup was not free to use. I had copied it from the East Riding FA page in good faith. You may wish to take action their too. I shall check more closely in future.Rimmer1993 (talk) 14:54, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, and thank you for understanding. While non-free images are never allowed on user pages, they are sometimes allowed in articles. You can check the image description page at File:East Riding County Logo FA.png for a list of articles this image is okay for. Currently it's just East Riding County Football Association, for the reasons given on that image description page. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:59, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Other suspected POV case
Could you please review my this and this edit as well. I believe these edits I undid are all by that one and the same user. For the Finland article case I opened a discussion on talk page, since I find some of the content marginally acceptable but it has the same undue weight problem as the Police of Finland edits, but the Capital punishment in Finland edits I find just absurdly POV. --hydrox (talk) 21:08, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I think your reverts in those cases were justified. The "Military" section of Finland would have been slanted heavily toward recent and even on-going events whose significance it's too early to tell yet. If the motion to call up reserves without delay for refresher training (kertausharjoitus) eventually passes, it should probably be mentioned. Right now it's just speculation.


 * The edits to Capital punishment in Finland were, as you put it, little more than absurd. Though the fact that more than just one MP (Hakkarainen) have called for reinstalling capital punishment is probably something that could be discussed in the article - in a NPOV way of course. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:24, 15 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the feedback. Yes, the MP and other True Finns calling for the re-establishment of capital punishment are of course significant in the short term, but I highly doubt any one will give them any serious weight in not-that-distant future, especially since those comments were met with total disapproval by all other parliamentary parties. --hydrox (talk) 21:31, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

knock knock
Hey Finnusertop,

May I call you Finn? Please do call me Ling, BTW. Hey I noticed that you made several posts recently that seem knowledgeable about image licensing issues. Do you have experience editing in that area, or were you researching on the fly? Either way, the FAC process and User:Nikkimaria could sure use another editor involved in image reviews. Does that sound interesting? later  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 17:18, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi (yes you can call me Finn). I do have some experience in file licensing issues; mainly at WP:FFD and WP:FFU, but also on Commons. I regard applying non-free content criteria my specialty, but deal with freely licensed files (on Commons) as well. Oftentimes, the real skill is to tell which files are free and which are non-free in the first place (as in that FoP case regarding Madetoja). I'm aware that ensuring that images are licensed correctly (and licenses are respected) is an important part of the Featured article criteria. So yeah, I'd be interested in participating in this aspect of Featured article reviews. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:28, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I strongly encourage you to "Just Do It". :-) Your help would surely be appreciated. And I am trying to learn these things as well, so I may ask questions. Lingzhi &diams; (talk) 17:45, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Sandbox
Hi, I noticed you edited my sandbox? Please refrain from editing it as it is my little space on Wikipedia to play around with things Thanks so much! 14:05, 18 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnimeMagic2112 (talk • contribs)
 * Hello, . Quoting WP:UNOT (which I linked from my edit summary): – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:11, 18 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Yeah Hi, your obviously not an admin so stay off my userpage please tyvfm 17:37, 18 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnimeMagic2112 (talk • contribs)
 * No,, I am not an admin, but this is not a task that requires any admin privileges. Please read the Non-free images and Ownership and editing of user pages sections of the userpage policy. You don't "own" your userpage and others (including non-admins) can edit your userpage if it contains policy violations. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:49, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah I do own my fucking userpage; I contribute a ton of shit to this Wiki and a ton of others and never have I had some asshole fuck with my page who cares what I post on my page it's mine stay off — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnimeMagic2112 (talk • contribs) 03:15, 21 February 2016

Orphaned non-free image File:Song Hye-rim portrait.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Song Hye-rim portrait.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:46, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Non free image
Hello, the image you removed from my user page was owned and created by me. If it was removed it's probably because I didn't understand how to set a license for the image or whatever the notice on my uploaded file told me to do. Is it ok if I reupload it? I know one thing for sure it is my original work. It has not been stolen or used without permission. Xenohs (talk) 05:30, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, . In principle, yes, you can upload it again and use the correct license tag this time. But I have a concern that User:Xenohs/DDoS Attack is not in line with the user page policy in any case. User pages are not for promoting (your) album or for storing articles that are unlikely to be ever eligible for main space. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:03, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Alright, then I guess I'll find a way to handle things in my user page. Thanks for the heads-up. Xenohs (talk) 18:13, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Non free image 2
You removed an image from Natzweiler-Struthof. It is that grim photo of a person killed at that same concentration camp for the skeleton project, and then brought to the university in Strasbourg, where it was discovered when that area was liberated. I picked the image up from Wikipedia, and did not see, still do not see that it is non free. You seem to know more about this. I do not know how to write a non free image justification, which is why I wondered if you could do that? I have tried to write one for past photo needs, but somehow I do not grasp what is wanted on that form. The reason to use it is the same reason as for its use in the article titled Jewish skeleton collection. The Natzweiler-Struthof article was recently expanded to include a fuller description of its history, as well as its present use as a museum and memorial. If you insist I do it, could you give me some hints of how to prepare the form required and how to post it where it needs to be posted? I think the photo adds much to the article, especially as the article discusses the recent (21st century) discovery of the names of all the victims in that project, previously a list of numbers, now published in book form and on line. Thanks! --Prairieplant (talk) 21:11, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, and thank you for taking your time to consider the issue. We first have to consider, can such a rationale be written in the first place (ie. are all 10 non-free content criteria met). Usually, and in this case as well, it's WP:NFCC that's problematic.


 * This can mean one of two things (WP:NFC): The image has to be so intrinsically about the article topic that it is used to identify it (ie. a cover of a book is used to identify the topic of the article about that book, or a picture of a painting is used to identify it in the article about that painting). This is not the case here since the topic is Natzweiler-Struthof, not Menachem Taffel, and we already have another image to identify the camp. The second case is that the image itself has to be critically discussed. This means that the appearance of the image has to be referenced in such a way that without displaying the image the reader would be at loss about what is being discussed. This article makes the following claim: "For many years only a single victim, Menachem Taffel (prisoner no. 107969), a Polish born Jew who had been living in Berlin, was positively identified through the efforts of Serge and Beate Klarsfeld." I don't think this claim needs an image for the reader to understand what is being said. I'm afraid the image is equally irrelevant (as illustration) to the claim that more names have been since discovered.


 * My opinion is that a rationale can not be written. You can have a go at it (copy the existing non-free rationale at File:Menachem taffel.jpg and paste it after it and change the details of relevant fields like "article" and "purpose"), but it might be challenged. You could also ask at WP:FFD, though it's usually where (non-free) images are nominated to be removed, not added.


 * One more thing: you could dig deeper into the history of this photograph and find out who owns the copyright and if they no longer do (making it public domain). But it appears to me that this is not a very easy thing to do; see Public domain. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:38, 23 February 2016 (UTC)


 * How you surprise me. I copied that photo because it was what got me to understand what was happening in that gruesome skeleton project, how the people were selected, then brought to Natzweiler to be gassed by the head of the camp personally, or in one case, shot, and then their dead bodies moved to the university for studies that were never completed. In short, the photo made the real story clear to me, so it brought the context. Not because of that man's name, but because it was a corpse preserved and not cremated, to leave no trace as the Nazis thought they were doing, rather incorrectly. How differently human minds work, it is always amazing. By they way, thanks for explaining how you see this in such clear terms. The text initially in the Natzweiler article confused me, perhaps because it was so gruesome a project, and because all the movement of the prisoners was unclear -- why is the topic of this collection in this article? When I went over to the Jewish skeleton collection article and saw the photo, it began falling into place. Natzweiler had the small scale gas chamber for such a project, not the big rooms called showers, that did not dispense water but fatal gases. The Nazis chose the people from Auschwitz, took them to Natzweiler and killed them one by one. It changes the notion of that camp, the reason for the small scale gas chamber, and adds a dimension of cruelty beyond the rest of the people, the most of them killed by work and insufficient food. One other group was singled out when Natzweiler was shutting down before liberation, the resistance fighters who were executed by gunshot. So, does this mean the article needs another revision? As you might imagine, it is a tough subject for research and revision -- not for lack of sources but for how difficult the topic is, and to keep the mind focussed on clear presentation of what really happened, as opposed to what happened. The museum's web site is loaded with information, as are current articles written for 70-years-ago ceremonies. I tried just now, re-read that section, and realized I need my mind to be ready to organize that text again. Another editor was working at the same time I did. He had met people who had all that in their own life story, his motivation to be sure the story in Wikipedia was correct and clear. Recent analysis shows something like half the people in that camp or its sub camps (all labor camps) died (22 K out of 51K). On first reading, it was not clear why Nataweiler was a concentration camp with death as its purpose, when it lacked those large gas chambers and the mostly Jewish prisoners. I think the article makes it clear now why it was not simply a transit camp, but truly the only concentration camp on French soil during the German occupation and the war. Oh you have startled me! In a few days, I will try that section again, describing the photo more clearly. I can do that whether it is in the article or not, as it is elsewhere on Wikipedia already linked to that section of the N-S article. For me, the picture was worth a thousand words, so I have to put some more of those words down. I will follow the steps you describe to try a justification after I give the text a few changes. Then see if you still think it is not at all linked to the context, the essence of the article, the essence of the place and the events that took place there. The commandant Kramer's photo is in that section for his role in the skeleton project. He was tried and hanged before 1945 ended, in part for his role in killing those people one by one. Now to get my mind on more peaceful topics for a bit! --Prairieplant (talk) 01:10, 24 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your detailed message and thoughts, . It is a fascinating yet gruesome story. I remember seeing a documentary film about it once. I can't remember which one; apparently there's at least a French and a Norwegian one. I'll make sure I revisit the article if I ever stumble upon that again. With regards to the image: yes, it's possible to introduce better writing to the text of the article so as to make the image more contextually significant. In this case, it may or may not work; I wouldn't know. But a word of warning: editorial choices regarding the text shouldn't of course be led solely by the desire to incorporate an image. This article isn't about Menachem Taffel nor even about the skeleton collection, which has its own article. Keeping the right balance here is key. Good and due writing about the article topic is most important. Nevertheless, your message gives some pointers regarding what the image could illustrate in this context. Perhaps the method of preservation of bodies would be something like that. Or maybe identification regarding the serial number tattooed on the victim's arm. In any case, I wish you all the best with this and any other topics! – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:19, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your welcome
Thank you for your welcomeLuke de paul (talk) 08:17, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

something is weird about commons.wiki
whenever I use my picture(https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Promise.jpg) with code in my userpage I don't see my picture.Wiki displays me a mature content,I am 14 this hurt me,gives me mental depression.Please solve this issue — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prompri (talk • contribs) 07:50, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

now,requested to move the file,waiting for the approvalI.I guess wiki isn't safe place for me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prompri (talk • contribs) 07:59, 25 February 2016 (UTC) finallyy removed that file to File:A boy scout in math olympiad.jpg, Prompri (talk) 14:56, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm glad this was resolved. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:58, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

California
You removed a bunch of images from California-related articles that appear to be public domain. This is a heads up that I'm reverting these, and discussion should take place if there's any further issue. --Golbez (talk) 14:47, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi . These were all marked as non-free files; see each file's description page. If you think some of them are PD, please provide the correct PD tag and evidence on file description pages. We are talking about recent photographs (and sometimes paintings) of deceased persons. It's a special case of acceptable fair-use when it's concluded that PD alternatives do not exist (WP:NFCC per WP:NFCI#10). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:05, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * At least one I looked at was also reasonably marked as PD, so either the PD designator is wrong, or the non-free designator is wrong. Either way, I think removal was premature without also making sure the tags are correct. --Golbez (talk) 19:29, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * the image description pages still contain either conflicting license tags (File:CulbertOlson.jpg, File:FriendRichardson.jpg, File:GoodwinKnight.jpg) or in the case of File:Frederick F. Houser.gif are marked non-free altogether. If you want to keep using these in the articles that are not covered by the non-free use rationales, please mark them with a free license and provide evidence of that license. One thing to consider is that even if California has PD for government workers, the persons who painted / took the pictures are necessarily not government employees; specifically: "Works produced under a commission from the U.S. [state] government by a contractor are most likely copyrighted. [...] This also applies to works authored by independent contractors or freelance writers or artists, even when their works are commissioned by some U.S. [state government]." (Public domain) If no evidence is provided, we have no option but to keep it safe an go for limited fair use. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 00:58, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Scott Walker image
You say that you believe my image is not in respect with the first criteria of Non-free content criteria. I'm confused, what do you mean by this? Are you telling me that you have found a free equivalent. If so, provide it to me. Thanks. Oneclicklogin (talk) 05:02, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, . I'm saying that a free equivalent can be made. Scott Walker is alive and is a public person making public appearances, so a free photograph of him can be taken. The standard of WP:NFCC is that one can be made, not that one has been made already. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 05:06, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi. While that is true, Walker is quite the recluse and modern media appearances are close to none with no concerts being held. I'm still inexperienced, but are you saying that because he is alive and that there is a very, very small chance that free content could be created by a Wikipedian then, according to Wikipedia guidelines, we are not allowed to use non-free content in place until that free media is created? Thanks. Oneclicklogin (talk) 05:51, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Correct. The only exceptions we make for living people (by consensus derived from precedents) is living people who are incarcerated, fugitive or recluse. And by recluse we mean they live in the woods somewhere and won't leave their property. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 06:03, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for filling me in. How can I go about deleting the image? Oneclicklogin (talk) 06:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I tagged it for deletion upon notifying you. Expect it to be deleted by an admin in a few days. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 06:12, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

All 4 logo
hello I would like to put the Channel Four Television Corporation logo in my Template:United Kingdom Radiotelevision Broadcasting, but it says that it is not a free image, what does this mean? There is a way so that I can put it on my article, but if it's impossible to put that image in my article, then could you show me a new one to put there, please I'm a beginner, I need help. SignedLuke de paul (talk) 08:23, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * It means that the use of this image is restricted to those cases that meet all 10 non-free content criteria, . One of the criteria, WP:NFCC, says that non-free images can only be used in articles, given that they meet the remaining nine criteria, of course. NFCC#9 dictates that non-free images cannot be used outside of articles, and this includes templates. You'll have to look for another image if you want to use one. Be sure to check the image's description page to see its license. But it's my opinion that navboxes like that don't usually need images at all. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:08, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Could you show me another image then, pleaseLuke de paul (talk) 10:25, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Any free image, . See eg. c:Category:Channel 4. For example, File:Channel 4 logo 2015.svg is something you could use, though admittedly it's the logo of the main channel of Channel Four Television Corporation rather than the corporation itself. But what I said above stands: the navbox does not necessarily need any image at all. In any case, make your edits to Template:Channel Four Television Corporation, not the duplicate Template:Channel Four Television that should be deleted. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:31, 26 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello, it's me again, now this time i've put on a free image, if you keep removing my edits....User:Luke de paul|Luke de paul]] (talk)
 * Thanks. The image File:Channel 4 logo 2015.svg is okay. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:23, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * , please don't create duplicates of the template Template:Channel Four Television Corporation, as you did in Template:Channel Four Television and Template:Channel Four. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:31, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * All right, i'll not do it anymore, but there is a way so that the All 4 logo image can become a free image?Luke de paul (talk) 17:24, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * , either contact the copyright holder (which is the Channel Four Television Corporation, or the artist they hired to design the logo) and ask them to license it under a free license (here's how), or you can wait for the logo to enter into public domain (70 years after the designer has died, or if we don't know the designer, 95 years after the logo was first published). Usually, there is nothing we can do about images being non-free and we just have to respect their copyright and our non-free use policy.


 * In case you are wondering why File:Channel 4 logo 2015.svg is free, it's because it's too simple. The Channel Four Television Corporation logo on the other hand is well above the threshold of originality (both in UK and in the United States). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:28, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Removal of Michael Smith image on Nobel prize page
I was just wondering if you could explain your rational a little more clearly. I'm not really familiar with the rules around fair use. I was under the impression that if an image was considered fair use on the biography page it was also fair use anywhere linking to the page. Is this not the case or are there special circumstances where it is allowed only? Thanks Elec junto (talk) 06:13, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, (sorry for messing up the link in the edit summary; WP:NFCC). Uses are considered fair use vis-a-vis a fair use rationale, and you must write "a separate, specific non-free use rationale for each use of the item" for each article. By the way, I think in this case on cannot be written because it fails WP:NFCC because of WP:NFLISTS. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 06:20, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick reply. That makes sense. I'll be sure to refer to those policies in the future Elec junto (talk) 05:35, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

help
i wanna make an article but i need pictures that i dont have i need 1 of a snowman 1 of a double rain bow 1 of a cheesecake and 1 of a sapphire necklace--Poseyrdhnkbhgvfhbk (talk) 02:14, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * This person is trolling. They wrote some weird stuff on my humor subpage and have made zero useful edits. White Arabian Filly  Neigh 02:26, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Removal of movie poster from The Champions documentary draft
You removed the movie poster from my draft of Draft:The Champions (documentary) draft. Can you please tell me why it's not allowed under fair use? There are plenty of movie posters that have been used on film pages, check out Cartel Land, The Cove (film), blackfish (film), etc.--Jonddunn (talk) 14:02, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Posters are allowed as fair use in film articles, but they are never allowed in drafts (WP:NFCC). Please add the image only after your draft has been moved to the article namespace. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:06, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thanks for your assistance in getting the Cirrus Logic logo updated.

Regards, @maczter — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.131.2.3 (talk) 16:52, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * You are welcome, @maczter. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:59, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Dab
Removing a link because you personally can't identify the disambiguating term is a little odd, no? You can always either ask, leave it alone, or tag it. But thanks for, er, indirectly pointing it out. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:13, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * my bad this time; I checked Paraboloid for what "hyperbolic" means in that context but that article provided no link to the relevant concept. The disambiguation page Hyperbolic (disambiguation) however gives "Hyperbolic paraboloid" (a redirect to Paraboloid). I should have disambiguated this as Hyperbolic paraboloid. (Not all ambiguous links are possible to be resolved. This sort of was.) – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:22, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for the investigation and the reply. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:28, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Re move of Denali Federal Credit Union
Finnusertop, when you move an article title during an open Requested move discussion, please close the RM per WP:RMCI. Leaving the RM open causes some confusion for regular closers. Thanks --Mike Cline (talk) 09:51, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * My bad, . I performed it as an uncontroversial move to match the name given in the lead; I hadn't checked the talk page (I should have). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 09:55, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes
Yes I want Wikichef to be in my userpage. Bianca Levine (talk) 13:06, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Is this what you wanted? It's your user page and you can add all kinds of information about your Wikipedia participation there. Here are some tips: User page design center. For more boxes like the Wikichef one, see Userboxes. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:14, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Images
But what if the images were made by me? Do I choose free work instead of non free work?

--Pachisu124 (talk) 23:36, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * If an image is made entirely by you – from star to finish, and is not a derivative work of an existing copyrighted work – you can license it under a free license and upload it to Wikimedia Commons. Using a non free work by you is rather theoretical and impracticable so I will not answer that. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:42, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of On the Art of the Cinema 2
The article On the Art of the Cinema you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:On the Art of the Cinema for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MPJ-DK -- MPJ-DK (talk) 11:21, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Eric Cable TP
Yes I am aware. But please see the previous removal, correctly interpreting WP:POLEMIC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.68.139.189 (talk) 12:58, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * As far as I know, that removal referred to . I see nothing to the effect of a personal attack in of the talk page you altered. Also, assuming bad faith in not very civil; something which you did in your edit summary. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:06, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for keeping an eye on things Finnusertop. Eric Cable  !  Talk  13:30, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of On the Art of the Cinema 3
The article On the Art of the Cinema you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:On the Art of the Cinema for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MPJ-DK -- MPJ-DK (talk) 01:21, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Sandbox 3
hey, I'm sorry but that's my sandbox, this does not give you the right to edit my sandbox without my permission, the sandbox rules say that it's not an encyclopedia page, so please, at least send me a message.Roger Delacroix (talk) 09:20, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * WP:UNOT, which I cited in my edit summary so you should have read it by now, says: This is what I did. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 11:11, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah I do own my userpage; I contribute a lot to this Wiki and a ton of others and never have I had someone editing with my page who cares what I post on my page it's mine stay offRoger Delacroix (talk) 13:17, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * If you are under such impression, you should really read WP:USERPAGE. It says explicitly that: . It's a Wikipedia policy – and one of the most important ones – that no one "owns" the content they contribute, including user pages. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:40, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

User talk:Luke de paul listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect User talk:Luke de paul. Since you had some involvement with the User talk:Luke de paul redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:36, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Finnusertop. Just notifying you of this RfD as a courtesy since you have posted on User talk:Roger Delacroix. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:37, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Marie Banu
That was an edit conflict. These occasionally happen at AFC, although usually it is that one reviewer declines the article while another is declining it. Maybe the other reviewer didn't notice that the article is an autobiography, or has the view that reviewers, being neutral, may accept autobiographies. I don't plan to nominate the article for deletion. If you do, I will decide how to !vote. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:29, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Following discussion, I did nominate the article for deletion. It appears that it isn't an autobiography, or at least that the editor using her name says that they are not her, so I have reported the username as a misleading username.  I don't think that WP:AN is the right forum for discussing whether an article should have been in article space, although it is a valid forum for discussing sockpuppetry.  The place to discuss whether an article should be in article space is, in my opinion, AFD.  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:00, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree, and it was not me who took this to AN. This article seems to have many problems. I'll take a look at the AfD later and determine if I think they are surmountable or not. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:13, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Robert and Finnusertop. The reason I first posted about this at AN is because I have seen administrators in the past spot articles like this one and simply move them back to draft space, especially if they are prematurely accepted AfC submissions. I was trying to avoid an AfD, because they can be embarrassing for the subject, who in this case does not appear to have had anything to do with creating the article. I'm going to check with a couple of administrators who frequently deal with these sorts of articles to see if I've got the wrong end of the stick. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:09, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Braves Field pic
I gave up the "fair use" fight long ago. Delete it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:26, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * thanks for your message. I already tagged it for deletion per the criteria disclosed. Up to an admin to make the call. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:32, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * As usual, those tagging things with the allegation that a free image could be found to replace it, will do nothing to try to find such alleged free image. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:37, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * As you are probably aware of, it is not required of them. It's also not necessarily alleged that such a free image exists, but that one could be created. I note that Commons has no aerial shots (and I also checked Flickr and Google Images) of this particular stadium and, regrettably, I do not own a helicopter. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:48, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * That built-in arrogance in the rules is one of the reasons I gave up on fair use work. And by the way, the ballpark was demolished about 60 years ago, so your helicopter would need a time-traveling feature. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 13:53, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Just to make this clear: I do not dispute the irreplaceability of the image of the demolished Braves Field in the picture File:Braves Field and Nickerson Field.JPG. I dispute the irreplaceability of the image of Nickerson Field in that picture, as that ballpark still exists today. Per WP:FREER non-free images should be the "freest" possible, and in terms of this picture it means that a free image should be used for that other half of the picture. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:17, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * What is the copyright status of pictures from Google Maps? (As if I had to ask.) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:30, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Google Maps/Earth draws satellite images from various sources. The copyright is indicated at the bottom of the screen. The source differs depending on zoom level even when looking at the same location. Some satellite images from Google Maps are free, such as those by NASA/USGS's Landsat. Google is not very verbose about what material the listed copyrights pertain to, so care needs to be taken. It is a good idea to use Google Maps only for surveying and get the images directly from the provider to get the full resolution and confirm the license. Unfortunately, the free ones tend to be taken from an altitude and are only useful for areal overviews rather than illustrating specific targets. Close ups tend to be by commercial aerial photography firms. If you mean maps rather than satellite photography, OpenStreetMap is a good free alternative.


 * Another course of action that can be taken regards this picture is to crop out the image of Nickerson Field. New rationale(s) should be written of course, because the image would no longer serve the same purpose as it did when it was a comparison shot (not that the current rationale spells that out clearly). In this case, I think a valid rationale would be possible for the article Braves Field but not for the article Nickerson Field. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:22, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Sandbox 2
That logo easily falls into the definition of an image which does not meet the threshold of originality for copyright protection. The fact it is uploaded under a fair-use template is unnecessary.  Spartan7W  &sect;   00:47, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Not without a doubt, but probably. If you think it's below the threshold of originality, please amend the templates on the image description page File:Bush2000.png to avoid it from being caught in non-free maintenance categories. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 11:11, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * If you still think this is PD-logo, please change the license. I'm not going to do it because I don't agree. If the license is not changed, I will remove the image from your sandbox again (in a day or two). Here is some interesting reading on a recent PD-logo case: c:Commons:Office actions/DMCA notices. WMF Legal concluded that this logo is above the threshold of originality. They decided to keep the file as PD-textlogo only because the takedown request was withdrawn. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:27, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ Uploaded to commons under said tag. I think it is on the border, but the flag motif is so simple and general, I think it flies.   Spartan7W   &sect;   23:37, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

WP:NFCC
Since you seem to be helping out with WP:NFCC violations, maybe you can help figuring out to do with some complex ones?
 * File:DelcarVanBrochure1.jpg: The three files shown on this page, which are obviously part of the same set, are tagged as non-free. Since all of them are from the same set, they all have the same copyright status, but what is the correct copyright status? I can't see any copyright notice on the pictures, but are the pictures complete?
 * File:State cover1.jpg: This is a redirect page which is currently broken by an RfD template so that the file displays. Do we change the redirect so that the file doesn't display there, or do we just leave it for now? --Stefan2 (talk) 20:55, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * There is some minimal cropping, but I'd assume these are more or less the whole images. I'd say this is free.
 * Adding : before File suppresses the display. I tested and image redirects should work even with that in the target name, so it won't be broken if it's kept. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:06, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, I thought that redirects didn't work with a colon. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:08, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Source Page Daniel Patrik Krister Nilsson
Hi Finnusertop, I hope you could help me like few days ago. I wrote the page Daniel Patrik Krister Nilsson with my friend's help who is close to Daniel Nilsson. This friend of mine gave me a text as Daniel's biography; looking for more sources to add to that page, I found Daniel's official webpage that contains the same text my friend gave me and I wrote on Wikipedia: that's a violation of copyrights for Wikipedia, isn't it? Even if does Daniel Nilsson agree? Have I to delete the page and rewrote it or can I edit the current existing page with a different text? Thank you in advance. --Deugemo (talk) 15:36, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello again, . Your general impression is correct: it's almost never allowed to use text copied from elsewhere on a Wikipedia article (There are some exceptions, but since they don't apply here, I'm not going to explain them).


 * Using Nilsson's website is very bad idea in any case: Wikipedia articles are supposed to be written on the basis of reliable sources that are independent of the subjects. This ensures that our articles are useful for people who want to read us to gain access to neutral knowledge on the topic. Even using Nilsson's website as a source and writing its information on Wikipedia in your own words is a bad idea because of this. Directly copying text from it is even worse because – as you correctly assumed – it's a copyright violation. Because of what I explained about neutrality, we would be uninterested in securing Nilsson's permission to using his text in the article, so that isn't the way to fix this issue.


 * But don't worry; copyright violations happen on Wikipedia – sometimes inadvertently – and there are established ways to fix them. Unfortunately for this article, you added problematic content in the very first edit that created the page. Because of this, it will be deleted, but you can start again. Be careful this time, and only use sources that are reliable and independent and be sure that you write their information in your own words. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:50, 10 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you, you've been very helpful. --Deugemo (talk) 15:42, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

North Korea linkrot references.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2643582 and http://www.who.int/gho/countries/prk.pdf are shown in the references of the North Korea article.--DThomsen8 (talk) 00:09, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Granted, but they are also accompanied with their titles, authors and other metadata. Consequentially they are not bare URLs. Yes, it's bad formatting in terms of the lack of citation templates, but the bare URL template is supposed to indicate another, more serious problem. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 00:14, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * My colleague User:Derek R Bullamore is taking a Wikivacation, but he has fixed the references of the North Korea article.--DThomsen8 (talk) 00:11, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

St Patrick's Day
Hi, I took out the prose tag you added to the Saint Patrick's Day article because that maintenance tag actually makes it ineligible to be included on the Main Page. If you think it's really necessary, please add it back tomorrow. Thanks. — howcheng  {chat} 17:13, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey

 * I notice you've been busy in real life. I hope things are going well. Please insert a Finnish proverb about "Best wishes to you" right here. :-) Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 18:05, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

ref A, as cited in ref B
I learned to write citations "ref A, as cited in ref B" in a wikipedia guideline from years ago. Where, might I ask, is the source for the style which you are upholding in some of your recent contributions? --Ancheta Wis   (talk  &#124; contribs) 20:38, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, . I've moved uncited references to Further reading sections, recently. I always check if they are indeed cited in any way, but sometimes I make mistakes. Whether this is about one of those edits, or something else, can you point out the specific articles or contribution(s)? – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:15, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I see the problem now. I was going to change the link in "as cited in (Lindberg 2007)" to point to the full reference rather than the article about the author (which I've linked in the full bibliographical reference instead), to bring it to the same functionality and style as "as cited in (Smith 2001)". I got distracted and ended up just breaking the brackets. I've fixed it now (and moved the uncited references back to Further reading, which did not cause the problem anyway), please see the result. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:22, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

What should i do?
What should i do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moscowamerican (talk • contribs) 1:41, 18 April 2016
 * This question was answered here. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:05, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Image deletion
You recently deleted two images from an article (Debate chamber, citing they were not fair use photos. I appreciate your keeping on top of things.  I linked to these images that were on the Wikimedia Commons, thinking they were legitimate to use.  Did you find these images on Wikimedia Commons were not legit even for there, or is there some other criteria I should be looking for when adding images from the Commons to an article.  (i.e. might they be valid on the Commons but not for use in a Wikipedia article)?  I look forward to your insights and help.  Thanks. Architectsea (talk) 15:00, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, . If you click on those images (File:House of Commons.jpg, File:Lords Chamber (landscape).jpg), you will find that they are not on Wikimedia Commons. While you can use any image on Wikimedia Commons in any way you like, some images that are only hosted locally here on Wikipedia have restricted uses. We employ fair use to images that can not be hosted on Wikimedia Commons, because they are not free images, but are still useful for illustrating some articles. A typical example of this is company logos, book covers, some historical photos, and photos of deceased persons: in other words images that no free alternative exists or can be created. The case with these parliament photos is a bit atypical. Click on the links to read the description page, and you will find that photography is not allowed inside neither Chamber, so we have to used somebody else's photos. The image description page also lists the articles where these images are cleared for use. Only topics these photos have high contextual significance are okay, so as to minimize the use of these non-free photos. I removed the image from the article Debate chamber, because it's not listed there. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:07, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Architectsea (talk) 19:05, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Impostor
That wasn't me. That was an impostor account User:Linguist1111, who was forging my signature. Linguist 111 talk 23:17, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know, take it easy . – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:20, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

How to contact those who know Finnish ?
Moi, jätin viestin tänne Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Finland mutta en tiedä lukeeko sitä kukaan. Onko muuta paikkaa jossa mainostaisi projektin pohjatyötä ? Catalonian ja Galician challengeissa osallistujat on valittaneet englanninkielisten artikkelien lähteettömyyttä tai kokonaan puuttumista. Siksi minusta olisi hyvä laittaa en-wikin artikkelit edes jonkinlaiseen kuntoon. Terveisin Tappinen (talk) 07:50, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Hei, . WikiProject Finland ei ole mitenkään erityisen aktiivinen, mutta vielä vähemmän aktiivisia ovat porukat käännösprojekteissa. Uskoisin että parhaiten asiasta kiinnostuneita voi aktivoida fi.wikipedia:n puolella. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:55, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, kiitos ! --Tappinen (talk) 05:22, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

DPRK
On that note, you might like my creation of 28 December 2005‎, Vyatskoye, Khabarovsk Krai, or my more recent (29 March 2016‎) Pothong River. --Bejnar (talk) 18:36, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Venus figurines
If you want to enforce Wikipedia policy, start with the one against edit-warring. J. D. Crutchfield &#124; Talk 19:46, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, . I have reverted you once. We can discuss the content issue on the article Talk page per WP:BRD. The reason why I haven't so far, is because my initial edit was called "unexplained" – I had forgotten to add an edit summary – but my second edit contained the explanation. If you disagree with the reason given in the summary, let's talk about in on the article Talk page. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:19, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Reverting a reversion without discussion is edit-warring. I really don't want to get into a controversy with you about some pictures.  I think it's interesting and informative to have pictures of the various Venus figurines along with the article.  The rule you cited says that you should improve the gallery or move it to Commons, not simply delete the gallery.  If you're going to enforce the law, don't just do the easy bits.  J. D. Crutchfield &#124; Talk 21:31, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

May 2016
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=722123534 your edit] to Korean Demilitarized Zone may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:03, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
 * jpg|thumb|upright=1.36|A South Korean checkpoint in the DMZ, viewed from the North Korean side ]]

Internet in North Korea
This edit contain manny changes in fact withou giving citation, for instance changing 43 site to 13 site or changing since 2013 to since 2016, may you help review and revert any unjustified change in that edit? C933103 (talk) 22:09, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, . Looks like it has been taken care of by somebody else: . Is there any bad content left? – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:45, 30 May 2016 (UTC)


 * The other editor have done a nice job on it and it look like everything are fine now :)C933103 (talk) 23:19, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey
The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.
 * Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Jesus Christ Edit War
Hello, this is to inform you to seek consensus on the talk page of the Jesus Christ Article before adding a racially distorted picture. -Adasegogisdi (talk) 18:08, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for pointing out the discussion to me, though it appears that the consensus is in favor of the picture you had replaced. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:26, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks
Dear Finnusertop

i am very grateful for your help regarding infobox of Kohat city.

best wishes and kind regards.

Aftab Banoori (Talk) 16:54, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:00, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Username
It is my own. You don't comply with life mate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2015-16 FIFA Premier League (talk • contribs) 13:01, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Storks (film) poster.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Storks (film) poster.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:54, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

COI Report
Hi Finnusertop, thank you for your contributions to the article on the COI Report, both on the article page and the talk page. I saw you initially rated it as C-class. I wonder if we could review that assessment. The summary for what a C-class article is:
 * The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains much irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant problems or require substantial cleanup..

I had been working with the aim of making the article worthy of a GA - Good article rating. To get there, I think first the article must meet the B-Rating requirements: I think these are met:
 * 1) The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations.
 * 2) The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.
 * 3) The article has a defined structure.
 * 4) The article is reasonably well-written
 * 5) The article contains supporting materials where appropriate.
 * 6) The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way.
 * 1) There are about 80 references, with 200+ in-line citations.
 * 2) I believe the topic is thoroughly covered; not only is the report itself summarized with two levels of detail, but also the article provides the context of events preceding and following the publication of the report.
 * 3) It is divided into many subsection in a logical fashion
 * 4) I believe it is well written
 * 5) There are several images to illustrate topics (to the extent that images are available)
 * 6) The language used is meant to be clear and understandable to non-experts in NK issues

Then, from B-class to GA, the article should be Well written; Verifiable with no original research; Broad in its coverage; Neutral; Stable; and Illustrated, if possible, by images. I would tend to think that those criteria are also met.

I wonder if upon a second review, you would agree with this assessment. Thank you for your help. (talk) user:Al83tito 3:17, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi and thanks for dropping by. I did not rate the article; I added the project templates and left the rating parameters empty. The C rating was given by  in . With regards to a GA rating, you're on the right track. It's a good idea to try to reach a B-class rating first. The problem with low-level ratings (from stub to B) is that there is no formal review process and you usually don't get to know what criteria wasn't met. In this case, it's a good idea to directly ask the person who gave the rating (which is exactly what you did here - though the actual reviewer was ). I've notified Piotrus of this discussion; maybe he can tell you which B-class criteria needs some more work. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:42, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't much care about differences between C and B; until GA they are all pretty much opinions of one editor. I did not give it a B because "Summary of report findings" section is missing inline citations. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:17, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, thank you for your reply. You are right in that I had not included inline citation in the summary. That was because I thought that when a summary is written about a publication that is the subject of the article, Wikipedia policies allowed for two things: to use the publication itself as the source to prepare a summary (making it one of the exceptions of when a primary source can be used), and, that that since it is evident that the source for the summary of the publication, is the publication itself, that no in-line citations are necessary. For example, I looked at the summary of To Kill a Mockingbird, which is FA-Class article, and I could confirm how there are no in-line citations for that section. That is also the case for Moby-Dick (Class-B). However, as it is often the case in Wikipedia, sometimes there are different approaches to the same issue... And some articles I believe do include inline citations in summaries. How necessary do you think it is in this case? Thank you. (talk) user:Al83tito  3:38, 05 March  2016 (UTC)
 * Hi a while back I sent you the message above, about in-line citations and C-rating vs B-rating. Could you please comment? The article I think could be reclassified as B-rating. Thank you. (talk) user:Al83tito  22:14, 19 June  2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I must have missed the ping somehow. The article is certainly B class now, and I'd encourage you to list it at WP:GAN for the next step! Good job! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:18, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cho Ki-chon
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cho Ki-chon you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 06:21, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cho Ki-chon 2
The article Cho Ki-chon you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cho Ki-chon for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 05:41, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Whisky Party has been accepted
 Whisky Party, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Tseung Kwan O (talk) 23:35, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Whisky_Party help desk] .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

DYK for Cho Ki-chon
— Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:21, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks For Your Work on 'St. Mary’s Church, Bridport, Dorset'

 * My pleasure, . Go ahead and ask if you have anything more you want for this or some other article. In particular, they should have references. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:22, 22 July 2016 (UTC)


 * I will, I just found out about references, their External links right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MajesticEli (talk • contribs) 22:27, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
 * They can be links to websites, details of books, magazines, newspapers, documentaries – anything that is reliable and published and corroborates the information you have written in the article. It's helpful to list them under a heading called References, to separate them from links that are provided for readers' convenience to navigate to websites that provide more information. Take some time to read this: Help:Referencing for beginners, it should teach you all you need to know, . – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:34, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello
I am trying to figure out whether your tracking me, I'm stepping on your toes (by doing reviews that you had been considering), or whether we coincidentally find ourselves on the same article. In any of the above cases, nice to meet you, seeing as I keep running into you. Also thanks for your comments on both articles, they were in both cases, useful. Mr rnddude (talk) 07:43, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, . I'm not tracking you, I'm watching Good article nominations, to which Legobot adds links to GA reviews in edit summaries. And no, you are not getting in my way either (and I hope I'm not getting in yours). I don't plan to do full GA reviews. I just like to take the opportunity to address certain persistent issues when the articles are receiving due attention. Most of these issues aren't strictly speaking part of the GA criteria, but I imagine a GA review is as good a time to fix them as any. Certainly, things like referencing errors are best dealt with whenever those who have written the article are attentive. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 08:05, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
 * That is fine, I have no problem with you leaving comments on article reviews, I might have missed the emphasis on weasel words in the article for example and am now cracking down more harshly on it. There are quite a few instances of it, some are borderline, others pretty blatant. I just thought that perhaps I was stepping on your toes or that you thought my reviews were lacking in certain areas. Feel free to leave comments wherever you see fit. Cheers and have a good day, Mr rnddude (talk) 08:14, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

In Need Of Major Help
Hey again, I'm here to know if you can help me, back on July 31 this year I created a page title 'The Sanders Institute', however today I realized that the actual name for the organization is called 'Our Revolution', do you know how to change the title to Our Revolution? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MajesticEli (talk • contribs) 12:37, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, . Yes, and I've done this for you. Normally, moving a page is easy, but this time the target, Our Revolution, has a redirect that has to be removed first. I've asked an administrator to do this and complete the move. It should be done shortly. Happy to help you! – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:49, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you!

Kiitos
Thank you for enforcing Wikipedia:NFC by reverting my 13 August 2016 edit on Interfaith_dialogue. I failed to either paraphrase or place quotation marks around the quotation from the Huffington Post that I knew I should have done. I’ll redo the edit. Vejlefjord (talk) 21:21, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for understanding. You do that and it'll be fine. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:24, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Welcome ...
... to the cabal of the outcasts ;) - and thank you for fighting WP going backwards! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:54, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, . I've been paying attention to the Featured articles cleanup listing lately. I also watch Good article nominations and do some rogue commenting on those while they are receiving due attention. Finally, part of the cabal... – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:02, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Great! We may have to change the label, with a Wikipedian of the Year one of us, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:07, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Would you have time to look at the FAC of Komm, du süße Todesstunde, BWV 161? - I always think of you when I bold the redirect to a BWV number without a link ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:52, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Susumu Kurobe
Very well then, delete it as you wish.

Zero stylinx (talk) 07:16, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Translation help
Hello, again, after a long hiatus! I was hopeful that, if I reached out, you might be able to come back on board the Leevi Madetoja project for a brief spell, as I still need translation help on the Salmenhaara (1987) book. I obtained my own copy of the book, hoping to use Google translate, but it was an epic fail. Manually typing the Finnish sentences into the machine translator is time consuming and the output is regrettably a mess. But, now that I have the index of the book, I can more clearly tell what pages and passages I need. Thanks! Sgvrfjs (talk) 19:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure thing, ! I'll go borrow the book again tomorrow so that I can help you with it. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:38, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks!! In general, I'm looking for information on the following six compositions, each of which now/or will soon have its own page:
 * Elegia (Madetoja), as well as the Symphony Suite Op. 4 that it is a part of
 * Symphony No. 1 (Madetoja)
 * Symphony No. 2 (Madetoja)
 * Symphony No. 3 (Madetoja)
 * Symphony No. 4 (Madetoja) --- CRITICAL!!
 * Kullervo (Madetoja)
 * Questions of interest:
 * What other works were on the program?
 * How did the critics receive the work?
 * How was Madetoja's composition process?
 * Does Salmenhaara discuss any of the work's musical qualities? Is there analysis of the movements and motifs?


 * Next, there seems to be some disagreement over the purported violin concerto. The index shows it's discussed on pg. 298, 399; I have translated the second page to read: "Mihinkään laajempiin sävellyssuunnitelmiin vuoden 1946 päiväkirja ei kuitenkaan viittaa -- Leevi ei esimerkiksi kommentoi mitenkään sitä, että hän säveltäisi viulukonserton. Väinö Sola kävi keskustelemassa Juhan tanssikohtauksen muokkaamisesta, mutta tähänkään Leevi ei näytä syventyneen." > "However, any broader compositional plans for the 1946 diary does not refer to - for example, Levi does not comment in any way that he would compose a violin concerto. Väinö Sola held to discuss Juhan dance scene editing, but this does not seem to even Levi deepened." So is this correct? Is Salmenhaara saying that Madetoja never left any evidence that he was planning a violin concerto? I also see remarks with respect to a requiem (pg. 298, 322, 351) and a Finnish Parsifal (pg. 277, 322-323, 332)...anything of note here about these two works?


 * Finally, still looking for information on his relationships with various notable figures (in order of importance), which I understand could be a lot to read through:
 * Onerva -- CRITICAL!!! (marriage, collaboration, lack of children, time in mental hospital, affairs with Eino leino)
 * Sibelius -- Necessary, but already have a lot of good stuff from the Tawaststjerna Sibelius biography. Would be nice though to have something from the Madetoja bio perspective.
 * Kajanus
 * Kuula -- friendship? rivalry? Madetoja completing his Stabat Matar and a few other compositions?
 * Anna and Yjro Madetoja... all I have really is mentioned in the childhood. Anything else of note?
 * References to the influences of C. Franck, C. Debussy, V. d'Indy, P. Tchaikovsky
 * Other Finnish composers (Melartin, A. Merkanto, Palmgren, V. Raitio, H. Klemetti, I. Krohn, Armas Jarnefelt


 * I know this is a lot, but hopefully we can make some dents in this! :) Sgvrfjs (talk) 22:17, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

, now that I've got the book (only today; library hours caught me by surprise), I have a procedural question: do you mind if I edit the articles directly and add this information myself? Another option is that I give you either summaries in my own words that you can copy and paste to the articles, if relevant. A third option is that I give you verbatim translation excerpts, that you'll need to put into your words.

In any case, I avail myself to answering the questions specific to pages: Of the violin concerto, p. 297 says Madetoja applied for a stipend of 20,000 mk for certain compositions. P. 298 contains a quotation from that application (my trans: I am planning certain larger instrumental pieces, such as a fourth symphony, two orchestral series and a violin concert and in the area of vocal music a Requiem-mass) Salmenhaara says this is the first mention of the violin concerto in Madetoja's writings (N.B. Madetoja uses the words "a violin concert", but Salmenhaara identifies this as "the violin concerto"). I'll give you a better translation by me of p. 339 as well: "No larger plans for compositions [pp. 338-339 discuss individual songs] are implicated in the diary of 1946 – For instance, Leevi makes no remark of the fact that violinist Kaj Kajanus telephoned him in early December hoping that he'd compose a violin concerto. Väinö Sola dropped by to discuss making changes to the dance act in Juha, but Leevi does not seem to have delved into this either."

On the Requiem: p. 298 says that, along with the violin concerto, the above mentioned stipend application is the first mention of the Requiem in Madetoja's writings. P. 322 says: "As Spring progressed, Leevi began to have plans of compositions, even if his strength was not enough to realise them. He would have wanted to begin to compose a requiem, and asked Turunen to send him the text to [a/the] requiem. Turunen delivered him text[s] used by both Mozart as well as Verdi." P. 351 quotes an obituary by Sulho Ranta, who writes that: The musical arts of Finland could not have afforded to let Madetoja depart so soon. Many of his works were left unfinished. And sometimes he talked about them. 'Requiem' and a poem by Aleksis Kivi 'Ikävyys' were among those.

On Finnish Parsifal: p. 277 say: "In the capital, the greatest operatic event was Parsifal conducted by Järnefelt. Leevi probably saw the performance, as he a thought of a 'Finnish Parsifal' later consumed his mind for quite some time." Pp. 322–323 quotes a letter to Koskenniemi: As of late I have again – as I have at sometime before – considered a possibility of a kind of Finnish Parsifal in the form of a musical play. How is it – a subject like that wouldn't get You excited about arranging a poem I suppose. It would be a Finnish (Ostrobothnian) equivalent of Wagner's work, although the musical basis of it would be anything but Wagnerian. – Ut valeas! [Take care!]' Koskenniemi replied, that the subject and cooperating with Leevi did excite him, and if [he] 'was in high 'spirit', he would be glad to start working on it. In a reply to the above mentioned letter by Haapanen [p. 321], Leevi wrote in addition to Parsifal another grand and old plan: 'If Lady Fortuna would once more take me by the hand, my pen may produce 'Nummisuutarit' before I die, as well as a Finnish (Ostrobothnian) Parzifal-equivalent, whose text Koskenniemi has partly agreed to start working on. [...] Salmenaara adds that "Leevi was serious about his plans regarding Parsifal, because in Autumn he reapplied for a stipend of the Kordel fund, this time for 25,000 mk, 'for a musical play about the history of the city of Oulu', a Finnish equivalent of Parsifal. The application was again unsuccessful."

According to p. 331, Madetoja was interviewed for the magazine Musiikkitieto, in which (p.332): "On Parsifal, Leevi told, that 'so far because of the current conditions and also my poor health, this plan has not progressed any further.

I'm really happy to help you with this, since it's obvious that language skills are very important for a topic like this. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:13, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

, thanks for your help thus far! I am so very pleased to hear that you're willing to be on board the ship of Madetoja for a few weeks. Please allow me to detail first what my plans for the project are. First, and as you can see, I have expanded the Leevi Madetoja bio from stub status to a, probably C or B class article presently at ~ 55,000 bytes. In doing so, I have had to rely on English language sources only, primarily the CD liner notes of the various Madetoja CDs I have been able to obtain. While these are great resources, they are admittedly an abridged and truncated report; the Salmenhaara book in Finnish is, as you correctly note, very important to this topic, because there are holes that only his longer and more detailed contribution can fill in for us. At present here is my rating of the various sections of the biography:
 * 1) Lede: I consider this to be finished and am quite pleased with it.
 * 2) Childhood There were some good details in the liner notes for the first volume of the Volmer recording project, but this could be a good place for you to personally add details from Salmenhaara and to make sure the information from the liner notes is sound.
 * 3) Student years Same as above (note: the lessons with Sibelius are in their own section). Does Salmenhaara have any details about the studies with d'Indy and Fuchs? English sources mention these two, but provide no details.
 * 4) Conductor posts I think I got this pretty good too, although you might find a few details that are interesting about his conductorships in Helsinki and Viiprui. I had to assume that he was let go by Kajanus in Helsinki because of the merger of the orchestra with Schneevoigt's (per. the Sibelius biography by Tawaststjerna). Very little information on his Viipuri days in the liner notes except for the story about having to arrange music and the composition of the first symphony.
 * 5) Finnish symphonist Pretty sure this is finished, but you might add details about the Finnish Civil War if you think Salmenhaara has anything else of note. One issue is that if was really, really difficult to piece together from English and Finnish sources his standing in and role in the various clubs and groups, so this paragraph could be checked and have Salmenhaara cites added.
 * 6) Finnish opera Section on the Ostrobothnians which is already longer and more detailed than the opera's own article! The Third symphony also feels done-ish, but needs cites added.
 * 7) Okon Fuoko Section was written by your earlier research and is now an unfinished section in my Madetoja sandbox.
 * 8) Later years: Declining fortunes To be written; will include Juha and Fourth Symphony and apparent loss of inspiration (all three of which I need information on)
 * 9) Later years: Death You already researched this a lot; I sought to add it to my own research, resulting in this section. Feel free to add more details!
 * 10) Personal Life THE ONERVA SECTION! You wrote a draft on Onerva (I think translated from her Finnish wikipedia article), and if you'd like to research this in Salmenhaara too, please feel free to take charge on this section. I hate writing it...haha. Also, we need to find out if the rumors about a proposal to his student are correct. And the rumors about his locking Onerva up in a mental hospital in order to work.
 * 11) Madetoja and Sibelius I really like this section and will resist editors who want to move it into its own article space. However, the information here is basically all from Sibelius biographies. It would be nice for you to see if Salmenhaara has anything to add.
 * 12) Musical Style The big missing section. I have some cites and the lede already has the distilled version. This is the biggest hurdle to getting up to A class.
 * 13) Reception Again, pretty finished but could use any interesting Salmenhaara stuff.
 * 14) Memorials A lot of this is my own research based off of Google maps and Google searching. It was hard because all these sources (which I cite) are in Finnish. I did my best, but you might double check my understanding.

You'll also see that I have created articles for a few of his individual compositions, as can be found in the new navbox. Obviously, there is a lot of information on these 7 compositions in the CD liner notes (save perhaps for the Fourth Symphony), but I really do want to see what Salmenhaara has to say. Thus, here, I would prefer translations of the actual Finnish text, although the next best procedure would be text from Salmenhaara in your own words. The reason being, I have already some notes of my own and I would like to either personally combine my sources with Salmenhaara's quotes or with your paraphrases of him.

Finally, I should add that I don't really know many people in the wikiproject Finland. But if you know anyone who likes Finnish opera and would want to write the articles on Madetoja's two operas, that would be a big help. They are not in my personal plans. Eventually, I will also write articles on Kullervo and on Symphony No. 4. And then, I hope, that's it!! Sgvrfjs (talk) 18:24, 23 July 2016 (UTC)


 * , I try to reply to one topic at a time, so as to not be overwhelmed. Here is everything that Salmenhaara has to say about the fourth symphony.


 * On the Fourth Symphony, Salmenhaara writes that Madetoja gave an interview to the magazine Karjala in Spring 1930 (p. 263). Salmenhaara writes (p. 263; I'll give direct quotations from Salmenhaara in green):


 * On p. 298, the fourth symphony is discussed very briefly in connection to a stipend application (translated in my earlier message above).


 * On p. 302 Salmenhaara writes:


 * On p. 305 Salmenhaara writes that Madetoja was on sick leave between March and May 1938, and after perhaps receiving some medical attention in Finland, by March 10 he had traveled to Nice, France. Salmenhaara writes:


 * On p. 320 Salmenhaara writes about Madetoja in late 1941:


 * On p. 321 Salmenhaara writes that both Leevi and Onerva were hospitalized in January 1942 because of a bout of alcoholism: Onerva to Nikkilä and Leevi to Ylänne. There, Leevi spent his time reading old issues of Musiikkitieto and corresponding with Lydecken. Reading old issues, Leevi did not remember many things that were written about him and what he had done. Salmenhaara writes:


 * On p. 322 Salmenhaara writes about a radio interview given by Madetoja in 1945 that reviewed his work and career (according to Salmenhaara, almost anticipating that he would die soon). It was made in both Finnish and Swedish, and the Swedish version concluded with Leevi's reply to one of the questions:

That's all on the fourth symphony. P.S., my experience with WikiProject Finland is that it is not very active, so I'm afraid you'll have to rely on me for now. I try to answer the rest of the questions, given that I have the time and energy to do so. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:46, 27 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much for your research assistance! You are really a key part of this project now! Haha. I wrote up the Fourth Symphony (take a look: here.); I have decided not to make a separate article on this composition because all of its information would come from one source, which I understand to be against Wikipedia's policies. Hope to get more information at your convenience! Are you planning on writing yourself in the Madetoja article? Sgvrfjs (talk) 19:18, 28 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Knock, knock...have I lost you again or might you still be in my corner? Sorry to be a bother, and thank you, again, for the assistance you have provided already. Hope you're well! Sgvrfjs (talk) 21:35, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm here,, just had been preoccupied with other interest. I still have the book and I'm willing to help, just give me something specific to work on. E.g. if you look at the index, roughly 2/3 of the book talks about Onerva. There is no way I'm translating all of that for you. The more specific questions you can give me, the better. Let's start working again! – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:44, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

, Okay. I have been doing some thinking about how to best utilize your translation skills and your willingness to help. I have decided that what I really need from Salmenhaara is the information he has on the individual compositions for which I plan to write (or have already begun to write) their own articles. Ideally, I would like to know what he has to say each time he mentions the work, kind of like you did for the Fourth Symphony, which I thought was really so very helpful. You also did something similar when you wrote a draft basically on Okon Fuoko (but titled Poul Knudsen). I have learned that Salmenhaara's book just has so much more detail on these individual compositions, and honestly, I just feel odd writing Wikipedia entries on them without consulting the master tome. Here are the compositions I'd like:
 * Shakkipelli (Chess Games)
 * p. 64: – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:53, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Symphonic Suite (mainly the Elegia)
 * Kullervo
 * Pohjalaisia (The Ostrobothnains), opera and suite
 * Juha, opera and the two independent numbers (I can't find any info on the two numbers)
 * Okon Fuoko Suite (Why did Madetoja only make the one, when he had plans for three total?; could really use reviews from critics of the Suite and Ballet here.)
 * Symphony No. 1
 * Symphony No. 2
 * Symphony No. 3
 * Garden of Death, piano suite (also hard to find info on)
 * Dance Vision
 * Questions of interest:
 * Premiere date, location, orchestra, conductor, and soloists?
 * What other works were on the premiere program?
 * How did the critics receive the work?
 * How was Madetoja's composition process?
 * Does Salmenhaara discuss any of the work's musical qualities? Is there analysis of the movements and motifs?
 * What/when/where were the important revivals (of operas and symphonies) both domestically and internationally?

Finally, I also need a bit of info on Onerva, and here I'm going to ask specific questions that hopefully you can answer:
 * When and where did they meet?
 * Why did she divorce her first husband?
 * Details on marriage date (they seem to have told people 1913, but weren't formally married until 1918)?
 * Honeymoon location (I read the went to Turku for Madetoja's business)?
 * Onerva's battles with alcohol? As well as Madetoja's? Cites really needed here.
 * Did Madetoja have an affair with his student (I read he proposed to her)?
 * Did Madetoja and his doctor friend conspire to keep Onerva in the recovery ward longer than needed, so that he could get his work done?
 * Any information on martial problems and fighting (I have read it was a rocky marriage)?

Okay, thanks...I hope this is targeted enough! I definitely don't want you to feel like you have to translate half the book on Onerva... I understand the request about the individual compositions is somewhat onerous, but it'd be a big help. Some of them, like Chess Games or the Juha Suite, are just impossible to find detailed English language summaries on (i.e., ones longer than a few sentences). :) Sgvrfjs (talk) 06:32, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Translations for Chess Game above. I'm deliberately translating this rather crudely. I go almost word-by-word and preserve Salmenhaara's typographic conventions and (sometimes) even punctuation. That makes it easier for you to locate the relevant parts in the text if you need to revisit them. I also hope that it allows you to better make your own conclusions by minimizing ambiguity that a more flowing translation might introduce, but preserving any ambiguities in the original text. If you want to quote Salmenhaara, (or someone that he quotes), or just clarification, you can ask me to give a more dynamic translation for those bits. With regards to what I translated last time, I think you have to reword the bit on the Paris railway station a bit. Salmenhaara's wording isn't crystal clear on this, but he doesn't say Madetoja stopped in Paris on the way to Nice. I find it more likely that this rather happened on his way back, because he had the score with him, the one he supposedly had worked on in Nice. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:53, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:LeadGenius logo.png
 Thanks for uploading File:LeadGenius logo.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) 17:38, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

publishing a draft
I was wondering how my draft gets published as a wikipedia page. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidmonn (talk • contribs) 03:45, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, . You are probably talking about: Draft:David Monn. I've added a submitting template at the top of that page. Press the blue "Submit your draft for review!" button when you're ready. Someone will then review the draft and see if it's suitable as an article.


 * Remember that all articles must meet our notability criteria. This usually means that there is significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. You are expected to cite such sources for everything you say in your article. Currently there are many facts that you have not attributed to any source. For example, the Philantrophy section has no source whatsoever. You need to tell where this information is from. You should probably fix such problems before you submit the draft. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:55, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Interstate 74
I didn't see what you removed before you removed it, but I think I can find a source for the information. If I use the sources I have already used, it won't be anytime soon, because the library where I have access to the information is one I don't go to that often. Another library was paying for the resource until they realized no one was using it (except me, but I don't count).

I contacted someone who might be able to help me with some of the other information, and I might be able to get a source for what you removed.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  20:45, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Here's what I : There is still some dispute over which routes will connect the existing stretches of I-74. Ohio has proposed that the stretch should run through the city of Cincinnati and from there either along State Route 32 or U.S. Route 52; while Kentucky officials want the road to begin in the west as part of a greater Cincinnati / Northern Kentucky bypass, then running along the AA Highway from near Brooksville, Kentucky, until it joins I-64 near Ashland, Kentucky. Feel free to return it when you've found a source. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:52, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I meant I didn't see it in time to go ahead and use the sources I found. I might not have access to them again before November 11. Anyway, I saw some headlines that look similar to what you removed, but I didn't want to get into that. Had I known it was on Wikipedia already and unsourced, I might have tried.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  15:16, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Good news. The Cincinnati Post is available at the library where I am now.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  17:55, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Bad news. I found one article about a possible route through Kentucky. I could use that, but it would mean changing the text that was there.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  18:08, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and changed the wording based on the sources I could find. It's strange there wasn't more about this.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  18:22, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

National symbols of Korea listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect National symbols of Korea. Since you had some involvement with the National symbols of Korea redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 00:14, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
Regerchor-International 2016.jpg

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:17, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Article with Finnish references
Hello! I saw you at the Teahouse vetting a topic with mostly Finnish-language sources. Do you mind taking a look at Risto Rekola? Do the external links verify any of the content? Do you think he's notable? Thanks! ʍw 17:37, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't think he's notable. I managed to find very meager sources: an interview in Ilkka, and this article (behind paywall) in Etelä-Suomen Sanomat, which judging by the title is not exclusively about him. I'd say AfD is in order here. Of the sources in the article: these are library records. His book is available in ebook form from libraries, but other than that they say nothing. One is a listing of e-books in Finnish libraries by "most popular" in poetry and aphorisms. There's no way to infer what this really means; but it's certainly not relevant to notability. He seems to have a more famous namesake who is a diplomat and ambassador (suurlähettiläs), so don't be fooled by Google results. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:01, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I started Articles for deletion/Risto Rekola. ʍw 02:10, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Hei! Pari kysymystä: löydätkö mistään kirjoja, joissa on enemmmän palindromeja kuin näissä kahdessa ja löydätkö ketään toista, joka on suosituin kahdessa eri luokassa eKirjastossa? Ikävää, väki? on pitänyt sijaa hallussaan viime lokakuusta ja Naaraan maaliskuusta. Toki Holman kirjaa on lainattu enemmän, joten suosituimmuus laskettaneen lainaus per kirja -periaatteella. Antin menestys perustunee muihin kuin kirjallisiin ansioihin. Risto hot sir (talk) 09:09, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * , ei ole väliä lötyykö sellaisia. Kumpikaan noista (eniten palindromeja per kirja, tai eniten lainauksia luokassa eKirjastossa) ei riitä ylittämään englanninkielisen Wikipedian merkittävyyskynnystä. Voit lukea millä ehdoin kirjailijalle voi luoda oman artikkelin täältä: WP:AUTHOR. Vertasin myös aihetta yleiseen merkittävyyskriteeriin (WP:GNG), joka perustuu aiheen käsittelyn laajuuteen ulkopuolisissa lähteissä. En yksikertaisesti löytänyt lainkaan aihetta syvällisesti käsitteleviä lähteitä Ilkassa ilmestyneen haastattelun lisäksi. Antti Holman osalta taas on selvää että näyttelijöiden merkittävyyskriteerit (WP:NACTOR) täyttyvät, ja Holmaa käsitteleviä lähteitäkin on olemassa lukuisia. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:38, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Missään muussa lajissa kuin palindromeissa Suomi ei ole yhtä ylivoimainen. Kyllä Wikipedian mielestäni pitää tarjota harvinaisistakin aiheista luettavaa. Syvällisiä lähteitä ei juurikaaan vuodessa ehdi kertyä. Nuo kirjat sisältävät paljon englanninkielisiäkin palindromeja. Englantilaisella "Risto Rekola" -sivulla on vierailtu 90 päivässä 1410 kertaa (vrt. Pasi Heikura 132 ja Antti Holma 306, jotka tietääkseni kirjoittavat vain suomeksi). Kriteerit kuulostavat hienoilta mutta rajoittavat tiedon etsimistä. Risto hot sir (talk) 18:24, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia tarjoaa luettavaa niistä aiheista, jotka ylittävät merkittävyyskynnyksen. Kriteerien tehtävä on rajoittaa aiheet sellaisiin, joista ylipäätään voi kirjoittaa tietosanakirjamateriaalia: Wikipediaan kirjoitetun tiedon pitää perustua ulkopuolisiin lähteisiin, joten mitä edes kirjoittaa jos aiheelle ei ole lähteitä? Ei lähteitä, ei artikkelia.


 * Sitä paitsi tämän artikkelin aihe oli Risto Rekola, ei "palindromit suomen kielessä". Huomaa että merkittävyyskriteerit määrittävät vain, mille aiheelle voi aloittaa oman artikkelin. Ne eivät rajoita sitä, voitko kirjoittaa noista aiheista tietoa jo olemassaoleviin artikkeleihin. Meillä on artikkeli Palindrome, jonne voit vaikka lisätä tietoa suomenkielisistä palindromeista ja palindromikirjailijoista (myös Rekolasta), sikäli kun löydät tietosi luotettavista lähteistä. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:54, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Olen kyllä palindrome-artikkeliin tietoa tarjonnut monta kertaa, mutta rautalangallakaan ei brittejä saa tajuamaan fonemaattisuuden periaatetta (että sanat kannattaisi kirjoittaa kuten lausutaan). Latinahan on selkeä kieli, mutta luki-häiriöiset Ranskan hallitsijat veivät kirjoittamisen yli tuhat vuotta taaksepäin. Yhä peräänkuulutan tietoa siitä kuka palindromisti on saavuttanut enemmän. Esim. Bookyssa painetut kirjat ovat noin 20 myydyimmän joukossa luokissaan. Taasko hoksaat! -kirjasta muuten löytyy arvostelu viime syksyltä Elämäntarina -lehdestä. Ei näy valitettavasti netissä. Sen kirjoitti Liisa Enwald, kirjallisuuden tohtori (kun kerran tittelit ovat niin tärkeitä). "Unnotable"-sanaa voi käyttää mistä tahansa mikä ei itseä hetkauta. Risto hot sir (talk) 20:28, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * voit vapaasti lisätä tietoa artikkeliin Palindrome kunhan esität luotettavan lähteen tiedollesi. Omiin havaintoihin perustuvat tiedot eivät kuulu Wikipediaan. En tiedä kuka on menystynein palindromisti; mieleeni tulevat lähinnä Alivaltiosihteerin tyypit, ja heistä on kirjoitettu paljon lähteitä. Mutta kuten jo yllä sanoin, se että on Suomen tai vaikka maailman menestynein palindromisti ei itsessään ole sellainen seikka joka riittäisi nostamaan aiheen merkittävyyskynnyksen yli. Merkittävyys-policy on selkeä siitä, mitä se tarkoittaa merkittävyydellä. Enwaldin teksti on varmasti hyvä lähde ja voit käyttää sitä minkä tahansa aiheeseen littyvän artikkelin parantamiseen (lähteiden ei tarvitse olla englanniksi, netissä, tai ilmaisia). Jos se kertoo kirjasta eikä niinkään kirjailijasta, se ei silti auta lisäämään kirjailijan merkittävyyttä. Laitoin keskustelusivullesi Wikipedian tervetuloviestin, jossa on linkkejä Wikipedian sääntöihin. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:20, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Kiitokset vinkeistä! Lisäsin Enwald-lähteen Taasko hoksaat! -artikkeliin. Fonemaattisuudesta vielä: saksankielinen tyyppi ei huomannut eroa sanojen "Retsinakanister" ja "Reliefpfeiler" kirjoittamistavassa. Ensinmainittu sanotaan kuten kirjoitetaan, mutta jälkimmäinen äännetään "Reliifpfailer" (ei ole enää palindromi). Ja useimmat englannin palindromit perustuvat sille, ettei tiedetty miten äänteet pitäisi kirjoittaa (esim. "eye"/"ai"; kaikki kirjaimet "väärin"). Risto hot sir (talk) 10:57, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Moi! Poistokeskustelu jatkuu siis yhä. Vähänkin kun tutkii englanninkielistä Wikipediaa ei voi olla huomaamatta, että merkittävyyskynnysperiaatetta ei noudateta. Löytyy esim. artikkeli "Vihasoo" (Virossa). Sitä on luettu 90 päivän aikana 45 kertaa. Alivaltiosihteeri-artikkeli luotiin 12 vuotta sitten, ja vieläkin se on tynkä, eivätkä linkit johda mihinkään! Kannattaisiko unohtaa lakimiesjargon merkittävyydestä ja keskittyä vahtimaan tekstien ja lähteiden oikeellisuutta? Delete-debattia on seurannut 400 ihmistä, ja sinun lisäksesi ainoa kunnon haastaja on MW. Hänellä on sentään äidinkielietu. Muuten: jos käväiset vironkielisellä sivullani, huomaat että sieltä löytyy enemmän Viroon liittyviä palindromeja kuin he itse ovat kyenneet omalla kielellään luomaan kaikista maailman asioista. Risto hot sir (talk) 09:14, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Popular culture
Every single word about the Popular culture section in the MAcuahuitl article is the truth and every bit of info about it is relevant. Just because you don't like it does not give you the right to delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thebigs14 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I have started a discussion at Talk:Macuahuitl. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:11, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Moving Ernst Schneider (communist)
I am afraid this was an inappropriate move as there are a number of Ernst Schneiders on the Germany Wikipedia. :-) Leutha (talk) 12:55, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, . As this is the English Wikipedia, our policies apply, and articles and policies on the German Wikipedia do not. First, we have to establish which Ernst Schneider (if any) is the primary topic for the name "Ernst Schneider". That is to say, only the most important Ernst Schneider will be found in the article Ernst Schneider and others disambiguated with the qualifier in parenthesis. If no Ernst Schneider is significantly more important than the others, the page Ernst Schneider will be a disambiguation page listing them all (as it is on the German Wikipedia). Whether or not Ernst Schneider (the communist) is the primary topic here, I cannot say, but I'm assuming so. According to WP:ONEBLUELINKDAB it is rather rare to have a situation wherein the only existing topic is not the primary topic. In any case, what you say (there are many Ernst Schneiders on the German Wikipedia and many of them could probably have articleshere on the English one) does not in an of itself make that qualifier necessary. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:51, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I don't really know much about the policies on the German Wikipedia, so I haven't got clue as regards your comment about them. However, as there was an incoming link from Ernst-Schneider-Preis which alerted me to the need to create something a little bit different for Ernst Schneider (communist). of Course we also have cs:Ernst Schneider which list just the three, two of whom are not listed on German Wikipedia. No doubt someone with the inclination will update disambiguation pages in line with impact of Wikidata, but until then, I suppose we just have to plod on! Leutha (talk) 19:19, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Austin, Minnesota gallery cleanup
Thank you for leaving a cleanup tag in the gallery section for Austin, Minnesota. I have removed many of the images that were not encyclopedic in nature. I also added captions to most of those that remained, showing their relevance or importance. Please feel free to review and leave additional feedback. Thank you! Darb02 (talk) 21:38, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for dropping by, . To be quite honest, I'd like to see the entire gallery in this (and many other) articles removed. Unless it illustrates a theme that can only be pictured with several images (such as historical progression) or is a complete set (such as seven pictures of the Seven wonders of the world), the gallery is most likely just spurious. The only reason I chose to tag them instead of removing is that I was once told to comply with the utterly ridiculous guidance in the policy to copy those disorganized galleries onto Wikimedia Commons. This gallery suggests that a Zamboni has something to do with the Roosevelt Bridge, but does not help me understand what. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:51, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I understand and do appreciate that you didn't immediately delete the section. I completely removed several images and also was able to move a couple others to their (more-relevant) section within the article. I will take your advice and get rid of the section entirely.  I have spent a lot of time on this page - it's my first ever work on a page for a city or place and I want it to be strong and encyclopedic. Thank you! Darb02 (talk) 21:59, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, . Other than the Gallery section, it's a fine article. And there's a collage in the infobox, after all, and it gives a nice at-a-glance view of the city that no single image could provide. Keep up the good work! – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:05, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

List of banks in North Korea
Your edit turned the wikilink into an redlink. I suggest you revert it. Thanks. KhaasBanda (talk) 17:47, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the heads-up, . I have moved the target page to Foreign Trade Bank of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (with a straight apostrophe) where it belongs, per MOS:' and WP:TSC. The link should be working now. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:51, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

CU request
Would appreciate your thoughts on a check user request I have made at Sockpuppet investigations/Thedoubleunit given your comments at User talk:Thedoubleunit2016. Hiding T 13:56, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Phan_Thi_Kim_Phuc
Presumably you were out patrolling and accidentally hit this very famous picture? Didn't find any further explanation on the talk page, so I figure that might be it. I really appreciate patrollers much of the time; just wondering if you could give this case a 2nd glance, since it's a very famous war foto, and it's a bit funny not to have it in a relevant encyclopedia entry. --Kim Bruning (talk) 15:14, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

2016 in NK timeline article
Hi Finnusertop,

Thank you for your contributions to the timeline of NK events in 2015 and 2016 articles. I think this was long overdue, and I appreciate that you have contributed some good work. I am also interested in adding to the 2016 article, but I don't want to step on your toes. Were you planning on making significant additions in the coming weeks? If not, I may give a shot at expanding the info on the early months of 2016 (including adding numerous references).

Oh, and one more thing, I have a preference for segregating news in NK (i.e: nuclear test) from international news related to NK (i.e: UN resolution), for that, I think that one neat way to organize the info is with a two-column table:

I wonder if you would be ok with that layout, or what your thoughts are on this approach.

Thank you. (talk) user:Al83tito 8:46pm, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi . I think your idea makes perfect sense and improves the articles in question. Articles like this are often neglected and turn out to be not so very useful, but your idea might fix that. I don't have any plans with the 2016 article, so go ahead. I perhaps thought at the beginning of the year that I would update it regularly, but I haven't been very active in terms of that. Feel free to implement your idea in that and the other timeline articles. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:49, 11 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello again, Finnusertop, thank you for your earlier welcoming and encouraging message. I really wanted to contribute to expanding the 2016 timeline, but I have run out of time... So I wanted to write again to you to let you know that I am finally giving up my hopes to contribute towards that article in particular. Sorry about that, and thank you for your understanding. Thank you. (talk) user:Al83tito 5:08am, 20 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello, . All contributions are voluntary, so you don't need to update the article if you don't feel like it. But don't let the new year discourage you: you can also update the 2016 article in 2017 and beyond; there is no deadline. Perhaps you could also start 2017 in North Korea and try your ideas there. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 11:08, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

I don't see how this isn't good enough for you
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Legendary_kiss_V%E2%80%93J_day_in_Times_Square_Alfred_Eisenstaedt.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wlmg (talk • contribs) 17:49, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, . It's not good enough, because the existing rationale is for the article V-J Day in Times Square, not Greta Zimmer Friedman. It applies to the former article only and is specific to it. The policy says: "a non-free rationale is needed for each use of the image on Wikipedia. If the image is used in two separate articles, two separate rationales are needed, unique for both articles." (NFC) – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:55, 12 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Any ideas on how to rationalize it then? Wlmg (talk) 18:45, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The current version will do. It has to meet all 10 WP:NFCC, and the rationale needs to spell out why this is the case. There are optional templates like Non-free use rationale 2 that make sure you have considered all things. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:26, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

The 1000 Challenge (Nordic)
Hi. I was wondering if you would be interested in contributing articles to The 1000 Challenge (Nordic)? It needs contributors to increase diversity of content from different countries and bring about large scale improvements. The idea at some point will be to host a National Contest related to your country of interest. Thanks. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:15, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Hey You
Cagliostro will never die! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:837A:4C10:5C1B:AE00:8986:65DF (talk) 01:51, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Nice to meet you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:837A:4C10:5C1B:AE00:8986:65DF (talk) 03:15, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Popular culture 2
The reason I started the popular culture section was to highlight appearances.... But isn't that the point of ALL the other popular culture sections through out wikipedia???? I sure as hell can't think of something more relevant to "popular culture" than reading about the Polybius video game in an issue of GamePro and then seeing a Polybius arcade cabinet making an appearance in an episode of the Simpsons years later, but in the end that is all it is, an appearance. So please, don't discredit this section, Mortal Kombat X is part of one of the biggest video game franchises of all time, and it is also the first time a macuahuilt has made it's way into said franchise. If that is not worth some type of reference then please punch me in the face. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thebigs14 (talk • contribs) 08:57, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Answered at Talk:Macuahuitl – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 00:15, 25 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Why don't you go check the popular culture section on the Polybius (video game), or the American Shorthair pages, all it is is a list of appearances. But I am not gonna sit here and mention every such section on wikipedia, I just think you have nothing better to do, and you like to criticize information(regardless of accuracy or verility), and that is just sad. Why can't you accept the fact that the macuahuitl has gained sufficient notoriety in recent times to appear where it hasn't before? Isn't that relevant and noteworthy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thebigs14 (talk • contribs) 15:02, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Palindromit
Hei! Toivon, että arvioisit uudelleen englanninkielisen Risto Rekola -artikkelin merkittävyyden ja ryhtyisit sen perusteella toimeen sen palauttamiseksi. Sinun arviosi vuoksihan artikkeli poistettiin. Rekolan kirjat ovat edelleen suosituimmat kielitieteen sekä runojen ja aforismien luokissa eKirjastossa (noin 170 kirjan joukosta). Uutta arvioitavaa löydät Wikisitaateista. Jos ne palindromit eivät mielestäsi ole merkittäviä, haluaisin tietää mitkä ovat. Joku pedagogisen ulottuvuuden älynnyt käännätti koneella tekstin esperantoksi - mistä ei tietenkään tullut kovin hyvä - ja nyt versiota ei voi verrata alkuperäiseen (paitsi Wikipedia Republished'ssa). Mikäli artikkeli ei palaudu mun täytyy käynnistää keskustelu en-Wikissä, ja sen seurauksena käyttäjänimestä Finnusertop muodostuu varsin todennäköisesti sensuurin ja tosikkobyrokratian symboli. Sivuillahan on sentään vierailtu yli 5000 kertaa (englanti, suomi, viro). Miksi näin monet ihmiset haluavat lukea "ei-merkittäviä" sivuja? --Risto hot sir (talk) 19:38, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Hei taas, . Olin poistokeskustelun aloittajan lisäksi yksi niistä kolmesta käyttäjästä, jotka kannattivat artikkelin poistoa. Päätös ei suinkaan ollut yksin minun minun, ja poistopäätöksen vielä vahvisti keskustelun sulkenut ylläpitäjä. On totta että olin poistamisen kannalla olevista ainoa suomea puhuva käyttäjä, ja siksi lähdekatsauksellani oli vaikutusta. Et itsekään kyseenalaistanut lähdekatsaukseni tulosta, ja lähteissähän (ei suosiosta) merkittävyydessä on kyse, kuten sinulle keskustelussa selitettiin.


 * Kysymys merkittävyyden uudelleenarvioinnin kohdalta kuuluukin: onko Rekolasta julkaistu (tai oletko löytänyt) poistokeskustelun jälkeen juttuja (lehdissä, televisiossa, luotettavilla nettisivuilla yms)? Jos ei, niin merkittävyydessä ei ole tapahtunut muutosta. Jos taas on, niin merkittävyyttä voi arvioida uudelleen.


 * Wikisitaateilla on omat merkittävyyssääntönsä (wikiquote:Wikiquote:Wikiquote), jotka eivät päde Wikipediassa. Ei myöskään ole asiani tietää miksi ihmiset haluavat lukea jotakin tietosanakirjaan kuulumatonta. Kiinnostaahan ihmisiä lukea kavereidensa kuulumisista ja päivän säästäkin. Tällaista sisältöä varten on olemassa harrastesivustot, facebookit, blogit ynnä muut.


 * Tässä, kuten muissakin keskusteluissa, kannattaa muistaa kommentoida itse asiaa eikä muita käyttäjiä, ellei sitten kyse ole selvästä ja sääntöjenvastaisesta käytöshäiriöstä.


 * Joka tapauksessa, yhteisellä päätöksellä tehdyn poiston voi haastaa käyttäen Deletion review-prosessia. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:50, 24 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Moi! Palindrome-artikkelissa kuuluisi mainita tiettävästi laadukkaimpien palindromien tekijä. Laatua voi vertailla Wikisitaateista. Ja tekijästä pitäisi tietysti olla myös lyhyt selostus lähteineen, joita lienee riittävästi. Ei kirjailijaa jä hänen tekstejään voi erottaa toisistaan. Englanninkieliset palindromithan ovat lähinnä dyslektisiä, joten anglosaksien olisi hyvä tietää, että parempiakin löytyy, vaikka sisältöä eivät ymmärräkään. Laadukkaat esimerkit totta kai kuuluvat tietosanakirjaan niin kuin maalaukset kuvataiteilijoiden ollessa kyseessä. Risto hot sir (talk) 12:56, 25 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Hei, . Voit lisätä tietoa artikkeliin Palindrome vapaasti, kunhan käytät luotettavia lähteitä. Olen samaa mieltä että joitakin suomalaisia palindromien tekijöitä siellä voisi jopa mainita. Myös suomenkielisten tekstikatkelmien käyttämiseen siellä näyttäisi olevan hyväksyntä kun niitä siellä muutama onkin. Tuo "Non-English palindromes" osio olisikin hyvä laajennuskohde. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:03, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Kiitos, ryhryn toimehen! Risto hot sir (talk) 13:12, 25 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Hei, ei lisäämääni lausetta ainakaan heti poistettu! Oisko sulla muuten vaikutusvaltaa potkia persuksille Wikisitaateista vastaavia? Hävettää olla suomalainen kun etusivuakaan ei ole päivitetty maaliskuun jälkeen! Wikiquotesta löytyy 26000 artikkelia, Wikisitaateista vain 400! Ja kun tarkastelet muutoshistoriaa, huomaat että kirjoittaminen on jäänyt melkein pelkästään meitsin hommaksi. Palindromeista vielä: täytyyhän sun omin silmin huomata Rekolan laatu- ja määräylivoima esim. Alivaltiosihteeriin verrattuna. He luovat muutaman hyvän vuodessa, mutta ei niistä kokonaisuuksia kerry - poikkeuksena ehkä Tampere. Risto hot sir (talk) 12:49, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Pidän Wiksitaatteja (ja Wikiquotea) vähän rönsyinä ja hömppäprojekteina niin en juuri niitä muokkaa enkä liioin tunne niiden muokkaajia. Ne, kuten monet muutkin vähemmän käyteyt Wikimedian projektit, ovat melkolailla menetettyjä tapauksia. Niiden muokkaaminen jääköön niille jotka jaksavat niihin vielä uskoa; kaikki kunnia sinulle,, jos jaksat olla siellä aktiivinen. Palindromeista minulla ei ole muuta sanottavaa kuin että olen ennemmin Wikipedia-harrastaja enkä palindromiharrastaja. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:44, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Hyvä sitaatti voi sisältää enemmän ajatusta kuin kokonainen kirja, joten uskon projektiin. Tietenkin kirjoitan artikkeleihin vain omasta mielestäni oivallisia tekstejä. Kaikki haettuun sanaan liittyvät sitaatit löytyvät paljon nopeammin kuin esim. Suuresta sitaattisanakirjasta! Risto hot sir (talk) 09:03, 27 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Moido! Olemme lisänneet merkittävästi Suomi-tietoutta: kahtena viime päivänä Palindrome-artikkelia on katseltu yli 4000 kertaa (kun päiväkeskiarvo ylittää 2000 keskimäärin vain kerran kuukaudessa). Naaraan pitäisi varmaan numeroida lähteisiin, mutta en osaa sitä tehdä. Voisitko sinä? Lähteet löytyvät Suomi-wikistä. Länsislaavilaisia palindromeja joku on lisännyt, mutta eivätkö nekin kuuluisi muut kielet -osioon? Risto hot sir (talk) 07:41, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

A pie for you!

 * Why thank you, ! For a second I thought it was me who had left the BLP tag there, having that article in my watchlist and all. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 05:18, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Asian 10,000 Challenge invite
Hi. The WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland The 10,000 Challenge and WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 02:03, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Korean Central News Agency logo.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Korean Central News Agency logo.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) 17:27, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello.
Yes, would you please upload a photo to the cover to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trump_Revolution:_The_Donald%27s_Creative_Destruction_Deconstructed ?

Here's the Amazon link which has the cover https://www.amazon.com/Trump-Revolution-Creative-Destruction-Deconstructed/dp/0974103918?

Thanks a lot. Much appreciated.

23:49, 23 October 2016 (UTC)Kc229023:49, 23 October 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kc2290 (talk • contribs)
 * Hello, . I've done that now. See The Trump Revolution (I renamed the article to its short title, such names are preferred; see here. You can keep the complete title in the article text, though, and links to The Trump Revolution: The Donald's Creative Destruction Deconstructed will still take you to the article). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:53, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

{{SAFESUBST: #if:{{{nowelcome|}}}|== Proposed deletion of Al-Zebabist Nation of Ooog ==|{{SAFESUBST: Firstarticle if new|target={{{Al-Zebabist Nation of Ooog}}}|nothanks={ Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but for legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text—which means allowing other people to modify it—then you must include on the external site the statement: "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later, and under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribute Share-Alike".

You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question at the Help Desk. You can also leave a message on my talk page. }}}

Worldwide energy supply
I've changed the introduction section and I'd like to remove the Inadequate lead maintenance template. Do you agree? Rwbest (talk) 07:56, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * No, not in its current shape. The lead should summarize what the various sections of the article say. Saying "Lastly the outlook on energy use until 2040 and possible changes in energy policy are summarised" is not enough. That does not give me any extra information compared to the table of contents that tells me that there is a section called " Outlook until 2040". The lead section should contain the key findings of this and other sections. Similarly, don't say that lists of producers and consumers are found in the article, but summarize those lists instead (e.g. 'China is the leading producer...') – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:52, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * The introduction is now more a concise overview of the article (MOS:LEAD). Please have a look and advise me about citations. I've not included citations for the statistical data which are not likely to be challenged and the source (IEA) is reliable. Only the expectation of IEA in the last sentence is cited.
 * But since August The Banner is urging me to add sources, so I expect that he wants more citations in the introduction. I disagree with him. The given IEA source (Ref 4) is a user-friendly website which makes verification easy. See the article's Talk page. Rwbest (talk) 12:30, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
 * It's better, . I've already voiced my opinion with regards to the sources. I agree with that you should give more precise citations. If information you cite is found at a specific location (for websites, this means at a different URL), then give the specific location. That China produces 74% of its energy with coal is not found in this location. It is found here. China's total production (Mtoe) is found in neither location. Instead, it can be found here (which, by the way, does not check out: you say it's 2570 in 2013, the source says it's 2561). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 00:48, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Finnusertop, what's your estimate of the accuracy of China's energy production data? Worldwide energy supply is written for technical minded people familiar with statistics, quantities energy and power, units watthour and watt, prefixes giga and tera etc. These people understand that the 0.4 % difference between 2561 and 2570 is well within the error margin. They also have no problem to verify in the IEA reference China's production.
 * Please tell me why other articles like List of countries by energy consumption per capita which also have tables and few sources, are not degraded by the same maintenance templates? Rwbest (talk) 10:18, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Because that article does not so much like own research as your article does. And, as we have discussed before, other articles are not relevant as we only discuss the merits of your article. WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is clear that that is not an excuse. The Banner talk 11:51, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Own research is your POV about my article. Nonsense, I cannot possibly do the research of 200 IEA experts. Other similar articles are very relevant. In principle similar cases should be treated equally, without discrimination. Rwbest (talk) 09:30, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Own research is when you derive your own conclusions from info available. But by refusing the give exact references and sources, it stays unclear if you are deriving your own conclusions are that you are truthfully are echoing the sources. The Banner talk 10:11, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Then tell me why other .... templates. You are discriminating me. Rwbest (talk) 15:10, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Al-Zebabist Nation of Ooog
}}

Hey I did not add the delete tag to this article, but noticed it and thought you might want to know as I would like to see the article saved. The deletion tag was added yesterday as a result of an ongoing deletion debate for the One Love Party.

The article Al-Zebabist Nation of Ooog has been proposed for deletion

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 Al-Zebabist Nation of Ooog Talk Page.

Please consider improving the article 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. $\mathfrak{Stephen Nightingale}$ ($Talk$) June 29, 2024
 * Hello, . Wikipedia has a few different deletion processes, each with a different set of rules. Out of these, the Proposed deletion (PROD) used for this article is the lightest. As the deletion tag on the article says: "You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to deletion for any reason." Anyone may stop PROD deletion at any time for any reason, and this is quite frequently done. So, if you want to save the article, feel free to simply remove the deletion tag. Those who want to pursue deletion will then have to move on to the next step of deletion processes, usually Articles for deletion (AFD) which entails discussion about the merits of the article before a decision is made. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:05, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Hey yes I understand that. I would remove it too but if you follow the debate for One Love Party AfD you will see that if I did so it may not be as fruitful as having a third party involved. As I was attempting to debate keeping the One Love Party article and had mentioned the Ooog Party there which resulted in one of the editors who had voted for the deletion of One Love also apply this tag delete to Ooog. Sorry. $\mathfrak{Stephen Nightingale}$ ($Talk$) June 29, 2024

Sports seasons
Sports seasons should keep the two digit year format per MOS:DATERANGE and this RFC which states "Secondly, applications such as sports seasons, fiscal years, and consecutive years use the two-year date range convention without problems. These applications can continue to do so." This is due to the fact that sport seasons are most often pronounced "two thousand sixteen to seventeen season", for example, when spoken.Mjs32193 (talk) 17:46, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for informing me about this, . It would be useful if the outcome of this RfC was documented at MOS or some other guideline. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:17, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Palindrome
Moro! Kirjoitin juuri viimeisen tekstini (yhteenvedon) englanninkielen palindromikeskusteluun. Kovasti toivoisin sultakin kannanottoa! Samankaltainen debatti on käynnissä svenska-wikissä. Risto hot sir (talk) 09:21, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
 * tiivistä mitä luotettavat (Identifying reliable sources) lähteet sanovat aiheesta ja vältä lisäämästä artikkeleihin itse tekemääsi uutta tutkimusta (No original research), niin et voi mennä vikaan. Minulla ei ole mitään lisättävää artikkelin painotuksiin. Kohtuullisessa määrin muunkieliset palindromit ovat ok, etenkin jos löydät esittelemillesi fonetiikkajutuille lähteitä. Omaa tulkintaa on vältettävä tässä asiassa. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:22, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Joo, mutta on kyllä aika turhauttavaa etsiä luotettavia lähteitä. Jos väitän, että useimmilla ihmisillä on 10 sormea, niin pitääkö tämäkin todistaa? Wikipedian lukijat ja kirjoittajat tuntevat äidinkielensä varmasti keskimääräistä paremmin, joten mikseivät he voi verrata ääntämistä ja kirjoittamista keskenään ja tehdä ihan itse johtopäätöksiä? Jatkossa aion keskittyä muihin aiheisiin. Risto hot sir (talk) 13:09, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Mushroom9 articles
Hey there. Regarding your recent reversions of the CSD nominations to User:Mushroom9's articles: It's fine to keep the articles as long as you're willing to take responsibility for their contents. If you haven't already, please carefully check them over for copyright violations, as the original author is a notorious plagiarist. If you've confirmed that there is no infringing text, please make a note of this at the articles' entries at Contributor copyright investigations/Mushroom9. —Psychonaut (talk) 15:24, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
 * A good idea, . I went ahead and ran Earwig's Copyvio Detector on these. Dennis Rodman's Big Bang in Pyongyang comes up with no copyvios. Under the Sun (2015 film) is a bit of an edge case: there are a few quotations (properly attributed), but also a few parts of sentences that should be paraphrased. I the problem with the latter article is surmountable. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:35, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking! If you're willing to fix Under the Sun (2015 film), please do so.  Otherwise, please restore the speedy deletion tag, or else add a copyvio tag (and follow the instructions on the template that appears) so that others can sort out the problem.  For both articles, I would be much obliged if you could update their entries at Contributor copyright investigations/Mushroom9.  As you can see, there was (and still is) quite a lot of mess to clean up. :( —Psychonaut (talk) 15:54, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Done and done. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:17, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Holy Spirit
If you're inclined to revert a merge, it's probably best to revert all of it. Mannanan51 (talk) 19:50, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

"Unsourced" and excessive cite-tagging
In response to your flawed edit summary here, I think you should note that we have an entire article on it that includes all the sources you could possible want to shake a stick at. I don't think it's necessary to pull them across every time. If we have an article that wasn't created five minutes ago, it's clear that the thing exists. Clicking through is just as quick as clicking through to a source. We don't usually cite-tag disambiguation pages either, and the phrase inserted there is exactly of the kind that a dab page would carry. So please be precise in your edit summaries in future. Samsara 14:53, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for dropping by, . Each article must be independently verifiable (Summary style). If you want to cite a fact from article A in article B, you need to bring in sources with it. Disambiguation pages are specifically exempt from this because they are not articles (WP:DABREF). Even if it's a disambiguation-like claim, all challenged claims in article space need to be provided references for (WP:MINREF). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:10, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
 * There is a long-standing consensus that trivialities are not cite-worthy. A thing having a name that a link to it clearly indicates is its name is not a citeworthy fact. It's a triviality. Samsara 15:47, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Camilla Nylund
Don't be ridiculous. Special:WhatLinksHere/Camilla Nylund Sometimes stubs will just be stubs, just like in the olden days. — billinghurst  sDrewth  00:37, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
 * de:Camilla Nylund
 * es:Camilla Nylund
 * fi:Camilla Nylund

Europe 10,000 Challenge invite
Hi. The WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 06:08, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Pyongyang Sunan International Airport logo.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Pyongyang Sunan International Airport logo.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) 03:55, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks..
Hi, This is Jemmy here, thankyou for your advice! I hope can learn something from the things you suggested.Jemmy2006 (talk) 04:45, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikisitaatit
Ehtoota! Wikisitaateilla taitaa olla mahdollisuus menestyä: päivittäinen vierailijoiden määrä on noussut 150:stä noin viiteen tuhanteen - lähes puoleen Wikiquoten tasosta! --Risto hot sir (talk) 19:15, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Trump (comics)
Per your comments here, I wanted to let you know about this. Argento Surfer (talk) 18:53, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

User:Finnusertop
You have stated that Color reflects page views. Does the ordering of your created articles happens automatically in the box? Or you have arranged them manually? -- Marvellous Spider-Man  16:21, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I've done this manually. You can take a look at the syntax here: User:Finnusertop/sandbox/topic. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:53, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Just So Stories deletion
Hey. I saw you put File:JustSoStories.jpg for CSD. It's from the 1908 first edition though, so would it not be public domain? --Odie5533 (talk) 19:12, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * the cover, yes. The photo of the cover, no. The threshold of originality for photographs is very, very low. Anything that captures an object from more than one side is not a slavish reproduction. Instead, it necessarily contains originality in the form of choice of angle, lighting, etc. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:48, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Would a crop of the photograph to only include the cover, adjusted to be rectangular, be public domain as it only has PD content? --Odie5533 (talk) 01:43, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The safest bet would be to (make or) find a scan that originally involved only the front cover and none of the spine. That would be undoubtedly PD. Whether cropping is enough to get rid of the original elements, I do not know. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:47, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Read-Only Memory (publisher).svg
 Thanks for uploading File:Read-Only Memory (publisher).svg. 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) 04:11, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

You're AMAZING!!!
Thank you so much, the Wiki Page looks amazing!!! What is the next step to turning the draft until an actual Wiki Page that shows up in a google search? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theabbeyscott (talk • contribs) 02:56, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, . I could move it to the actual article space anytime I want; that is when they'll show up in Google searches as well. I just tend to work on them until I've got everything covered from sources I have access to. Since I understand that you know Saleet, I'd appreciate if you point out any obvious mistakes, omissions or outdated information. Other than that, I'll probably go through the sources once more to see what I've missed. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article in particular still has some more biographical information. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 09:48, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Han Sorya
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Han Sorya you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sagecandor -- Sagecandor (talk) 20:41, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Han Sorya 2
The article Han Sorya you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Han Sorya for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sagecandor -- Sagecandor (talk) 23:41, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Heckler & Koch MP5‎
I found the original reference from the archives for Heckler & Koch MP5‎, to address your tags.. I don't know how to make it sync up with the SFN template though. Could you take a look? Felsic2 (talk) 22:57, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, . I've made the short footnotes match with the reference that you re-added. I removed the tags. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:15, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Those are tricky little buggers. Felsic2 (talk) 23:22, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Battle of Björkösund
Hi, you undid my tag concerning reliable sources to the above article. The sources mentioned are all foreign language sources and difficult to verify as they are offline and hyper links are missing to these sources (I do know however that these sources are acceptable) the author could have made the effort to find and link English language sources (which exist) and as per WP:NOENG English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones where available. I did try and find references to this battle that supported the article and found some but owinng to a lack of time I could not finish the job hence my tag. With twinkle there is no way of adding a description to the edit so i should really have added a section to the talk page. --Domdeparis (talk) 13:43, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree, ; a talk section could have been used to present your concerns with more clarity. I don't think the refimprove tag is for marking the problem you describe (and even unreliable sources is a bit of a stretch). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:40, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Draft:Template:North Korea topics
Draft:Template:North Korea topics, a page which you created or substantially contributed to (or which is in your userspace), has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Template:North Korea topics and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Template:North Korea topics during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 00:45, 29 December 2016 (UTC)