User talk:Jo-Jo Eumerus/Archive 13

Indian Defence Estates Service
@Jo-Jo Eumerus: A large part of information has been used from the link which is displayed on the template. However, the information is in public domain as it has been voluntarily shared by the government on site www.dgde.gov.in under Section 4 of Right To Information Act, 2005 of India. I would like to bring to your notice that I am an officer of the same organisation and created this page in order to highlight my organisation working for which is a highly sought after job in India. I have constantly been adding references, but it still shows its not enough. Kindly guide me through as 3 days are left for the automatic deletion of the page. Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rsmalan (talk • contribs) 15:08, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
 * A PROD template (that's the text that begins with "Proposed deletion/dated" and is wrapped in 🇦🇩) can be declined by anyone; just feel free to edit it out - you seem to be working at rectifying the issue anyway. Now, if you are editing on behalf of the group you need to read the somewhat lengthy WP:COI page and disclose your association with the group. Now, for the copyright issue. Freedom of information does not always include the right of freely copying, modifying and selling the text in question; I believe that the US state of California has a freedom of information kind of law that has that effect but I am not sure if the Indian law has; may want to note this on Copyright problems/2016 August 11 though so that it can be assessed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:17, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: I have tried my best to fulfill all the clauses of WP:COI page and disclose. I have tried to give maximum number of references to my page, all of them being authentic. I have also edited the ENTIRE ARTICLE so that it does not remain a copy-paste job. I have removed all the objection templates after enriching my page. Kindly tell me if i need to improve upon in any other way. This is my first article on wikipedia and would like to contribute in the future too. thank you... :)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rsmalan (talk • contribs)
 * Um, where did you disclose this? Also, please don't remove copyright violation templates on a whim. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:47, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: I am sorry but it said that the article will be automatically removed on 17th August if not approved. I wasnt sure if anybody would be able to review and approve it that fast. So I had to do it. In my defence I removed the copyright violation template only after complete editing of the article. Please help me out here. Review my article. Let me know what else is to be done at my end. I have more explicitly declared my COI on the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rsmalan (talk • contribs)
 * Ah. I've moved the disclosure notice to the talk page. As for deletion, such content is not typically deleted after exactly one week, let alone when there has been new material added. But I understand the confusion here. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:42, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 August 2016
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:40, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Image help
Hi. From what I can see you are working with images and I need help. I have come across User:Ninjakick121 who has been adding images that I thought was copyrighted. For example is found in a quick google search at player profile at UEFA and this image is found here. After talking to the editor at User talk:Ninjakick121 it seems like it most likely is their own images, but could you please have a look? Thank you. Qed237&#160;(talk) 19:01, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Seen, shall comment. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:21, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Administrator issue?
Hi Jo-Jo, this is Dunks (talk) 04:37, 19 August 2016 (UTC). sorry for the long delay in responding, but I only just discovered that you posted a notice to my talk page in July regarding an Administrator discussion about an issue I might have been involved in? Could you please provide further information about what this pertains to? Was perchance about my censored contributions to the Metropolitan Museum article concerning revelations about the museum's status as a key beneficiary of the trade in stolen antiquities? I am unable to find anything obvious that refers to me on the page you linked to in your message - sorry.

Many thanks, Dunks (talk) 04:37, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * The thread was archived. The concern was that you had added text from your website to Wikipedia but we don't have evidence that it's in fact your website. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:23, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

MonteCristo DRV
A well-considered close. Thank you. -- RoySmith (talk) 12:54, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I thought is was a worthwhile close as well. And, seeing as on this occasion and I had different (possibly opposing?) points of view, this was an even more remarkable achievement! Thincat (talk) 13:27, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Dracula's_Daughter_patrons.jpg
Can you please undelete this file? I had the permission of the author to upload it, and will be happy to provide a statement from them proving this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DJ Eclipse (talk • contribs) 01:33, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. Please remember that as the original uploader, you are not permitted to remove the deletion tag. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:26, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Royal Yacht Brokers
Hello Jo-Jo Eumerus, Can you please not delete the article for Royal Yacht Brokers since the company is enhancing very good reputation thanks to one of its owners Tommaso Chiabra? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amili1313 (talk • contribs) 10:36, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Greetings. We don't do articles written like advertisements (see WP:PROMO) and the article did not explain at any point why the company should be important or significant (see WP:CSD). There was just standard marketing fluff. You perhaps ought to use WP:AFC rather than pasting the article directly into mainspace - remember though that we can't have articles on companies that don't meet WP:NCORP. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:40, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Gary A. Rendsburg
Dear Jo-Jo,

You sent me a message concerning the photo of Gary A. Rendsburg at his Wikipedia entry. The photo was removed because of the permission issue. In the meantime, Prof. Rendsburg has emailed the relevant address at permissions-en@wikimedia.org, with the information from photographer Shelley Kusnetz, granting him and Wikipedia permission to use the photo at the website, as follows:

Kindly see the email below, or the pdf file attached herewith. Shelley Kusnetz has granted me permission to use the photo at the Wikipedia entry, "Gary A. Rendsburg." I in turn have forwarded the photo to devorahanna for uploading.

- Gary Rendsburg

Forwarded Message

Subject: Permission for usage Date:    Mon, 25 Jul 2016 14:25:03 +0000 From:    Shelley Kusnetz  To:      Gary Rendsburg 

This is to notify Wikipedia that I am allowing usage of my image of Gary Rendsburg. I would like a photo credit of this image if Wikipedia includes it. Any other information needed by me can be answered via email or phone.

Thank you, Shelley

Shelley Kusnetz Photography 47 Claremont Avenue Bloomfield, NJ 07003 Phone: 973 338-1575  Cell:  973 477-8038 www.shelleykusnetzphotography.com

A pdf version of the same email was attached in his email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, though I do not see a way to attach that file herewith.

In any case, in light of this information, with expressed permission to use the photo, can you please 'undo' the removal of the photo and reinstate it to its proper place at the Gary A. Rendsburg entry, with the permission line, etc., which reads as follows:

Photo September 2008. Used with kind permission granted by Shelley Kusnetz. www.shelleykusnetzphotography.com

Thank you for your attention.

Devorahanna (talk) 12:04, 22 August 2016 (UTC) devorahanna
 * Greetings, . I am seeing your text but I am concerned that the permission statement is too narrow in scope - "for Wikipedia use only" is not ok here. Has that email been forwarded to permissions-en@wikimedia.org? Also, did you have permission to publish the phone number here? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:56, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-34
 Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes
 * The ORES review tool is now available on Special:Contributions as a beta feature. It can make it easier to find contributions that are probably damaging the wikis. The ORES review tool is available on Wikidata and Persian, Polish, Portuguese, Dutch, Turkish and Russian Wikipedia.
 * Octicons-tools.svg The  and   functions have been updated to make it easier to write abuse filters. This also affects the TitleBlacklist extension. You don't have to transform "I" and "L" to "1", "O" to "0" and "S" to "5" anymore.
 * Octicons-tools.svg The old pageview data in the "pagecounts-raw" and "pagecounts-all-sites" files is no longer being updated. You can find the new pageview data here. This happened on August 5.

Problems
 * Some big image files could not be thumbnailed. This has now been fixed.
 * When you moved a page over a redirect it would delete the redirect without saving it in the logs. This has now been fixed.

Changes this week
 * Octicons-sync.svg The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 23 August. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 24 August. It will be on all wikis from 25 August (calendar).

Meetings
 * Octicons-sync.svg You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 23 August at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes
 * Sometimes when you mention another user they don't get a notification. You will be able to get a notification when you successfully sent out a mention to someone or be told if they did not get a notification. This will be opt-in. You can test this on the test wiki.
 * How you add text after an edit conflict might work in a different way in the future. You can test the prototype.

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.  21:18, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Munich Forum for Islam AfD decision
I am surprised that you closed this AfD [] after only two opinions given. It seems overly quick, especially since the proposer's delete argument that notability is temporary is more than flawed, it goes completely against Wikipedia guidelines. Notability is not temporary and cannot just "cease to exist". The proposer's statement that it is just an unrealized building was also incorrect, it is an organization with specific views and members that was advocating the proposed building (a quick glance at the available sources indicates this). Would you undelete the article and relist, so that more opinions can be gathered. Based on the cache still available on Google, the article did have serious problems - it looks like a gushing press release for the organization - but content issues are not a reason to delete. Numerous sources exist which were omitted from the article and it was open to considerable improvement. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 15:08, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Technically speaking, there were three opinions given none of which in support of the article's existence, plus a relist. It's a bit unclear from the article whether it was an architectonic structure or an initative. That said, if more sources than these discussed are available then a reassessment is in order. Since the article was indeed overly promotionally written, I'd suggest that it be restored it to User:Tiptoethrutheminefield/sandbox which is something I can do ... it should probably be cleaned and expanded with this new material before putting it back into mainspace. Does this work? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:26, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * It seems to be the name of the group that created the initiative that was arguing for the proposed building, that would have administered it, and that the proposed building would have the same name as that group. So it is neither just a proposed unbuilt structure or just an initiative. I was browsing the AfD discussions recent history and this delete decision seemed out of place to me because of the limited number of respondents and the strange assertion by the proposer that notability is temporary and can suddenly vanish, given complete with a link to the Wikipedia policy page that actually explains that notability on Wikipedia is not temporary! I don't read German, and don't have a great knowledge of current events in Germany, so I would not be confident of creating anything more than a short article out of it (once all of the more obvious Mission Statement stuff taken from the group's website is deleted) based on whatever English-language sources I can find. If that would not be sufficient to get it back on mainspace I don't think there would be much point in giving it to me to work on. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 16:11, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that mention of NOTTEMPORARY was shoddy but the later concerns were more convincing. I've restored the article at User:Tiptoethrutheminefield/sandbox - if you want to get rid of it just add  somewhere on the page. As for German language sources, I know German but I don't typically edit articles on these subjects. I dunno about articles that simultaneously talk about a group and a building being a good idea, may want to focus the article on one specific subject. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:20, 20 August 2016 (UTC)


 * "Munich Forum for Islam" (MFI) is the name of an initiative which had wanted to built a mosque complex of the same name. Since the notability of the group had only ever been based on their building project, their notability ceased to exist with the failure of this project. The second paragraph of WP:NOTTEMPORARY explicitly allows "a reassessment of the evidence of notability" anytime and this is what has been done. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 21:26, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Qal'eh Hasan Ali
— Maile (talk) 00:02, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

File:FSCG.png
Hi Jo-Jo Eumerous. Thank you for your help at AN regarding "Rebel Legion" and your comment about "non-free architectural work" at WT:NFCC. Perhaps you remember the discussion about File:FSCG.png at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions/Archive/2016/August? It seems that the consensus was that the file is not public domain. Anyway, an IP just made this edit, this edit and this edit to convert the file's licensing to PD and add the file to an article. The file was also added by another editor to some other articles here, here and here. I'm not sure if the two accounts are the same, but the IP could be IP 46.161.92.247 based upon this or even IP 85.94.121.246 based upon this. I'm not suggesting a SPI be started on these accounts (unless you deem it necessary), but am wondering if you wouldn't mind watching this file and the edited articles a bit to see if the IPs, etc. come back. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:48, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't think that socking is very likely under such circumstances - might well be a coincidence and the edits are somewhat different. Maybe you want to talk to these editors first, if that doesn't work ask for help at WP:ANI. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:17, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I did previously leave a message on the user talk of 46.161.92.247, but will do the same for 109.228.115.222 and Fklovcen if the edit sums I left turn out to be insufficient. Thanks for taking a look. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:38, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Bazman
Gatoclass (talk) 15:22, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:56, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Gary Rendsburg photo - follow-up
Dear Jo-Jo,

The text under the photo, including the phone numbers, was provided by the photographer, Shelly Kusnetz. If you feel the phone numbers should not be included, fine -- though I think we owe it to her to include her website address.

Ms. Kusnetz has given Prof Rendsburg permission to use the photo at his website, here: http://jewishstudies.rutgers.edu/faculty/core-faculty-information/gary-a-rendsburg

And whenever he requires a publicity photo, for example, when he serves as a guest lecturer elsewhere, as here: https://www.facebook.com/Official-UCLA-Center-for-the-Study-of-Religion-150067765081863/ (scroll down a bit) http://judaicstudies.ou.edu/Websites/judaicstudies/images/JuSt_OU_2014.pdf (see p. 11) http://www.jewish-explorations.com/the-bible-in-its-land-biblical-archaeology-in-israel/

If none of this suffices, can you please tell me what steps are required for the photo to be used at the Wikipedia entry.

thanks,

Devorahanna (talk) 22:33, 25 August 2016 (UTC) devorahanna
 * , being on the point of falling asleep so I am not sure how helpful this is. Donating copyrighted materials indicates the best procedure for donating media, so I'd recommend Shelly Kusnetz to send the image and permission that way from some official email address. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 23:00, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Deleted file AMPS mug.jpg
Hi, you deleted my file AMPS mug.jpg on Aug 18. I took that photo. I also oversaw creation of the logo and mug itself. I think it's fair use. What do I need to do to get it put back? Thank you. DMorpheus2 (talk) 17:20, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Greetings, . It is not likely that the photo will be allowed on Wikipedia anywhere (because of WP:NFCC - is there a page on Wikipedia where the photo significantly increases the understanding of the topic, and where not having the photo would decrease said understanding), but did you create the logo? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:45, 26 August 2016 (UTC)


 * It is part of the Armor Modeling and Preservation Society page. The logo and mug was created while I was president. Since it illustrates part of what AMPS does and certainly did no one any harm, I cannot understand why it would be removed. I also don't think that policy applies at all since this is not unfree content. It's used with the permission of the club. Several club members maintain that page. DMorpheus2 (talk) 19:45, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * The highly restrictive policy named WP:NFCC mandates this - we cannot justify having the same non-free logo twice on the same page. The policy in turn exists because Wikipedia is supposed to be free content without being shackled by restraints of fair use laws - or for that matter, permissions that extend only to Wikipedia. We need a free license for the logo in question, see commons:COM:L for what the term "free license" entails and commons:COM:OTRS for one way to verify that the logo is indeed free. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:49, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

AFD
I have never warned anybody for personal attacks against myself. I have warned users for vandalism. Actually, I am also not a very experienced editor. I nominated her auto-biography for deletion, which prompted her to make that comment. -- Marvellous Spider</b> -Man 09:24, 27 August 2016 (UTC)


 * And now she blanked my comments at the AFD with another round of personal attack -- <b style="color:Aqua">Marvellous</b> <b style="color:LawnGreen">Spider</b> -Man 09:26, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I've reverted the blanking of the AfD, at any rate. I see you already warned them, let's see if they behave now. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:32, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
 * She is blocked for 72 hours by Widr. After calling me joker, stupid, idiot. The last two comments on my talk page is too much. <b style="color:Aqua">Marvellous</b> <b style="color:LawnGreen">Spider</b> -Man 09:49, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi . Just for reference, writing an autobiography is not specifically prohibited by Wikipedia; it's just something that's very strongly discouraged for the reasons given in WP:AUTOBIO. Also, in this particular case, Kamalikachanda actually posted here on your user talk that they are not writing an autobio so for now we should take them at their word. I haven't looked through all the sources cited in the article, but hopefully you did per WP:BEFORE and just didn't nominate the article for AfD because you thought it was an autobio. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:23, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes I am aware of WP:BEFORE and I searched for sources. The sources which mention her in detail are unreliable sources. Some reliable sources has brief mention about her. <b style="color:Aqua">Marvellous</b> <b style="color:LawnGreen">Spider</b> -Man 10:26, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I apologize if it seemed like I was accusing you something. AfD discusisons can get heated sometimes and often the first thing some people bring up is BEFORE. Anyway, now that the article's at AfD, it's possible someone may find better sourcing per WP:NEXIST. Often AfD'd articles actually get improvedand come out in a much better state than they were going in. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:51, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Undeletion request
Hello Jo-jo you deleted a page for Daryl Lokuku Ngambomo this afternoon. Can I have the page undeleted temporarily/access the source data just so I can continue editing in my sandbox. Once complete I'll submit it for review of references etc before putting it online. Thank you SynergisticT (talk) 09:16, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I've moved it to User:SynergisticT/Daryl Lokuku Ngambomo. Please remember to use reliable sources and to comply with WP:BLP. If you don't need the draft anymore add  somewhere on the page. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:30, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata Descriptions
There is a discussion you might be interested in at Verifiability policy on English Wikipedia. I think it's crucial to get the Reading team to comprehend what the problem is before this gets implemented. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:38, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I wonder if this needs to be publicized more widely, on both enWikipedia and Wikidata. Ideas? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:49, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I think it needs to, but I don't know how to best go about it. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:01, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I believe d:Wikidata:Project chat, d:Wikidata talk:What Wikidata is not (maybe? It's the only place there where I can see a verifiability policy), Village pump (policy), Wikipedia talk:Verifiability and Village pump (proposals) would be the place. Also,, rumour on User talk:Iridescent is that they understand Wikidata subject matters. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:11, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I did talk to Wikidata folks over IRC a while ago. The way they see it is that Wikidata is a new project and we need to cut some slack for them. The way I see it is that Wikidata and Wikipedia have verifiability policies that are incompatible (Wikidata's proposal for V: Verifiability), ours being a whole lot more refined and "stricter". WMF-led teams seem to not pay a great deal of attention to the policies of its flagship project (us) and they rush to develop these features with a more or less exclusively technological focus. This happened with the Reading team's Related Pages feature and they had to tone it down. For this Descriptions feature, it isn't even possible fix the problem we have identified (identifying what needs a ref, whether it's already verified elsewhere in the article, and if needed adding a ref fundamentally needs editor interference). Worse still, the Reading team seems to have difficulties understanding what the problem is, because their feature doesn't "add" any content. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:22, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Descriptions, being unverifiable, are unsuitable for importing into Wikipedia. Period. Other statements from Wikipedia are capable of being filtered if desired to leave out statements that are not sourced or sourced to Wikipedia. You can paste the following into a section of your favourite article and see what information Wikidata has on it, along with the state of the references for each statement:
 * As an example of filtering, here are the Wikidata claims for Richard Burton's occupations:
 * and for his occupations that have a source other than a Wikipedia:
 * If we filter we will have a lot less information available to import, if we don't then we need to encourage editors to add references to Wikidata. --RexxS (talk) 22:31, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * , then we need to find out a way to tell WMF's Reading team "no, we can't have your Descriptions feature because it's against our policies." – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:14, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Partly because of this I did propose an alternative approach in mw:Topic:T9ir4r6mkbdnoujk (also to handle pages with no Wikidata item), but the length concerns mentioned by would need to be addressed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 23:39, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Call an RfC at Village pump to confirm that en-wp is not willing to accept unsourceable information to be inserted into the mobile view of the English Wikipedia. I've made a compromise suggestion at mw:Talk:Reading/web/Projects/Wikidata Descriptions:
 * The simplest solution to all these concerns is to create a template on each Wikipedia that wants it. It would then be placed at the top of any article to provide a location for article editors to create a mobile subtitle that is compliant with each Wikipedia's verifiability policy. That subtitle would override anything pulled from Wikidata in that Wikipedia's mobile view.
 * Such a solution would allow articles that have uncontroversial descriptions to stay, while giving local editors the ability to fix problems locally. It hands the responsibility for policing each Wiki's verifiability policy back to the local editors.
 * Does that sound like a possibility? --RexxS (talk) 23:48, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Call an RfC at Village pump to confirm that en-wp is not willing to accept unsourceable information to be inserted into the mobile view of the English Wikipedia. I've made a compromise suggestion at mw:Talk:Reading/web/Projects/Wikidata Descriptions:
 * The simplest solution to all these concerns is to create a template on each Wikipedia that wants it. It would then be placed at the top of any article to provide a location for article editors to create a mobile subtitle that is compliant with each Wikipedia's verifiability policy. That subtitle would override anything pulled from Wikidata in that Wikipedia's mobile view.
 * Such a solution would allow articles that have uncontroversial descriptions to stay, while giving local editors the ability to fix problems locally. It hands the responsibility for policing each Wiki's verifiability policy back to the local editors.
 * Does that sound like a possibility? --RexxS (talk) 23:48, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Does that sound like a possibility? --RexxS (talk) 23:48, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Maybe. An additional option would be to make the "Show Wikidata edits" preferences option an opt-out rather than an opt-in. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:26, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Deskera
Hi Jo-Jo Eumerus, I'm writing to you regarding recreation/reinstatement of the page "Deskera" that was deleted because G4 and G11 - and I believe this should be reinstated with proper wiki guidelines. The page would be needed as there are competitive products that are listed, and the product listing pages would require to link to a proper wiki page. As to keep it neutral, and include independent referencible sources, I'd be glad to provide. Please help enlist what needs to be done to recreate the page. Sansthapna (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:10, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Articles for deletion/Deskera (2nd nomination) to me indicates that the topic does not meet the notability guidelines that all articles here have to satisfy and that its inclusion was further pushed hard by promotional editors. The page would be needed as there are competitive products that are listed, and the product listing pages would require to link to a proper wiki page. does not override these requirements. What kind of "independent referencible sources" do you have? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:15, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

File:This is the logo of Liwa Thuwwar al-Raqqa.png
Hi Jo-Jo Eumerus. Do you think File:This is the logo of Liwa Thuwwar al-Raqqa.png is a good candidate for a name shortening to "Logo of Liwa Thuwwar al-Raqqa.png"? The "This is the" in the name seems unnecessary, even though it technically may not be a "bad" file name per WP:FMV/W. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:22, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Greetings. Pretty marginal that one - while the excessive text is probably something to get rid of, it's indeed more of a cosmetic change. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:34, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Understand. Thanks for taking a peek. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:12, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks! I'll admit that Special:ReadMind has been discussed before, though. I don't think that it will be enabled on Wikimedia projects even if/when it becomes technically possible - far too many privacy concerns. But it sure would make it much easier to handle user conduct evaluation such as RfA or the administrators' noticeboards. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:03, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Inquiry
Why did you delete the page Belock Recording Studio - good knowledge of English? speak! DarlingDavid (talk) 10:21, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Because at Articles for deletion/Belock Recording Studio folks were in agreement that the page couldn't be kept as is, because the article was considered to be more akin to an essay with insufficient sources. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:28, 29 August 2016 (UTC)