User talk:Marchjuly/Archives/2020/October

Everett McCorvey
Hello...you were very helpful to me in the summer while I was working on my draft biography of a living person, Everett McCorvey. I have followed and responded to suggestions by reviewers but nothing is happening with the page. Can you give me some guidance on what I can do to move it toward publishing or should I perhaps just give up? Thank you so much. Jacalyn Carfagno (talk) 15:19, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi . You’ve submitted Draft:Everett McCorvey for review a couple of times, but it has been declined each time. The AfC reviewer who declined the draft did leave comments at the top of the draft explaining why and suggesting what needs to be improved, but you don’t seem to have tried to do any of those things. You haven’t edited the draft since it was last declined and the concerns raised by the AFC reviewer aren’t going to address themselves. You can ask for further clarification on the AFC reviewer’s user talk page (User talk:Theroadislong) if you like or maybe even at WP:AFCHELP, but the first thing you should try to address is the reviewer’s concerns that you may be connected to McCorvey in some way. If you can sort that out, things might move a move a little faster. — Marchjuly (talk) 22:41, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I did respond to his questions about my relationship with Dr. McCorvey but haven't heard back. I was told not to work on the draft until that issue was resolved. I am very, very willing to do what is asked of me but am quite confused about the process. I will contact Theroadislong again. Jacalyn Carfagno (talk) 22:47, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Theroadislong is quite an experienced AFC reviewer and editor and they’ll probably be happy to clarify things for you. If you’ve previously discussed your connection to McCorvey somewhere on Wikipedia, then providing a link to that page (or even just the name of the page) might help to clear things up. Theroadislong may not be aware of such a discussion and they’re unlikely going to starting digging through page histories to find it unless they know what they’re supposed to be looking for.Finally, if you post on their user talk page or at AFCHELP, please add your signature to the ends of your posts, not the beginning like you’ve done here on my user talk page. Please also take a look at Wikipedia:Talkpage guidelines for some other ways to make your posts easier to read. — Marchjuly (talk) 23:03, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Putting images in an article
Hi I just wanted to ask how I would be able to add an image in the Womens rights in Jammu and Kashmir article I wanted to provide balance so needed to put a image of the 2019 protests attended by hundreds of women I have found one on an article could I use that image? Himachal78 (talk) 10:03, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi . You probably should take a look at Wikipedia:Image use policy for more details, but bascially there are two types of files that you'll see used on Wikipedia: free files and non-free files in accordance with their copyright status. "Free files" refers to public domain or freely-licensed content in accordance with c:Commons:Licensing and Wikipedia:Copyrights, while "non-free files" refer to non-free content. There are different restrictions placed on how each type of file can be used and it's much harder to use non-free content. Since the photo you linked to above comes from a news website, it's almost certainly going to be protected by copyright; in fact, if you look at the photo, you'll see "Reuters" in paranthesis at the end of the caption. This means that the photo was taken by a Reuters photographer and there's most likely no way to upload it under a free licensed that Wikipedia accepts without first getting the WP:CONSENT of Reuters or the person who actually took the photo. So, only "non-free content" is really an option in this case for that photo; however, Wikipedia's non-free content use policy is quite restrictive and I think it would quite hard to try and justify this type of non-free photos use in Women's rights in Jammu and Kashmir; so, I would say that file can't be uploaded and added to the article. That's my opinion, but you could try asking at WT:NFCC if you want to get feedback from others.I'm just going to add the newspapers, etc. often are able to use such photos because of the concepts of fair use and fair dealing; however, Wikipedia's image licensing policy regarding such content is much more restrictive because Wikipedia isn't a news organization and Wikipedia's content licensing policies are quite different from such organizations. Anyone can re-use the content they find on Wikipedia for pretty much any purpose as long as they say where it comes from, but news organizations do exert a much stricter form of copyright control over their content and place lots of limitations on if and how it may be re-used. In the article you linked to, scroll down to the middle of the page where there's a Tweet from TRT World and you'll see "This media has been disabled in a response to a report by the copyright holder". Most likely TRT World uploaded and tweeted some content that they got from somewhere else without getting explicit permission to do so, and they were "asked" to remove it when the copyright holder of the content complained. This is the kind of thing Wikipedia strives to avoid, which is why its image licensing policy tends to be quite restrictive.  -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:58, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi there thanks for that reply I appreciate the detail you provided it helped allot in understanding this complex policy I guess I will see if there any public domain photos on this subject of protests. Take care. Himachal78 (talk) 07:45, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Barbara Niven photo marked for deletion
In reference to: Barbara Niven headshot no.2 taken in 2015.jpg — Thank you for the note on my talk page. I have not uploaded a copyrighted image before. The photo in question was provided by photographer and copyright holder, Sue Melke, who is Barbara Niven’s media branding consultant responsible for the content of her web page. If the photo is not properly identified, please let me know what needs done or where to look for guidance (which I thought I had covered). I am unsure what specifically needs stated in this instance. I could not find a non-copyrighted image online, wrote to Crown Media (Hallmark) and Sue Melke for one to use, and was sent this one by Melke.

Thank you,  O ld B eeg  .. warble ·· 07:07, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Please see my post on 's user talk page at User talk:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz since that's really the only way this can be resolved. If you want other opinions, you can ask for them at WP:MCQ or WT:NFCC; if you disagree that this isn't replaceable non-free use, you can follow the instructions in the template I added to the file's page and use di-replaceable fair use disputed (and also furhter clarify at File talk:Barbara Niven headshot no.2 taken in 2015.jpg if necessary) to explain why you think this file meets WP:NFCC.Please note that non-free images of living persons are sometimes allowed per item 1 of WP:NFC, but almost only when the person in question is partly Wikipedia notable for reasons related to their visual appearance or something about their visual appearance has received critical commentary in reliable sources; simply not being able to currently find a freely-licensed photo available online is almost never considered a valid justification for using a non-free one of a living person. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:55, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your replies here and on Hillabaloo Wolfowitz’s pages. I am working to see what I can do to get a picture, as getting in touch with folks takes time. I do appreciate all your guidance!All my best,  O ld B eeg  .. warble ·· 16:04, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * If the copyright holder decides to send their CONSENT to Wikimedia OTRS, they should receive an automated reply saying that the email has been received and also containing an OTRS ticket number. OTRS emails are private in nature and OTRS volunteers aren't allowed to discuss them with anyone other than the emailer, but an OTRS volunteer should be able to verify that an email has been received if you ask at WP:OTRSN and provide the corresponding ticket number. If by chance the file is deleted before you can sort things out, don't worry because a deleted file is only hidden from public view and can be restored later per WP:REFUND as needed; just explain that OTRS has been emailed and you're waiting for it to be verified. The OTRS process is failry straightforward: an email is sent to OTRS and OTRS pending is added to the file's page; the email is checked by an OTRS volunteer and OTRS permission is added to the file's page if everything checks out; if there's a problem, the OTRS volunteer may add OTRS received to the file's page while they attempt to sort things out with the copyright holder. At some point the image will either be kept or deleted based upon the OTRS volunteer's assessement of the email. It might take some time for things to be sorted; so, you just need to be patient. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:30, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * If you can find an image (including a screenshot) of Niven that meets c:Commons:Licensing, then that should be OK. Be advised though that most screenshots are protected by copyright per c:Commons:Screenshots unless they are perhaps very very old per c:Commons:Hirtle or have been released under a free license acceptable to the Wikimedia Foundation. Be careful of sites hosting such content for the reasons given in WP:YOUTUBE and c:Commons:License laundering. Many people upload content of things they like to social media accounts, etc. regardless of whether they are the original copyright holder; sometimes, they may even claim it as their "own work" and say they are the original copyirght holder simply because they think physical possession somehow means copyirght ownership. In many cases, however, they're not and might only be able to get a way with such a thing because the site isn't very dilligent in checking for copyright violations or because nobody has complained. Sometimes such a thing might be allowed per fair use or fair dealing in certain contexts, but the Wikimedia Foundations's image licensing policy tends to require more than simply being fair use (see c:Commons:Fair use) and thus requires something be "more free" than fair use typically allows.If you can find an image online (photo, screenshot, or whatever) that is released under any of these licenses, then it should be fine as long as you comply with the terms of the original license; if you find images with no mention of a license given, then it's best to assume it's protected by copyright. Prior to March 1, 1989, a copyright notice was pretty much mandatory for something to be considered protected by copyright under US copyright law, but the law was amended in 1989 and now works originating in the US created on or after March 1, 1989, deemed eligible for copyright protection are automatically protected as such even if there's no such notice. I'm not sure what time period you're looking at, but any recent photo/screenshot of Niven would most certainly be protected even if it didn't clearly state "Copyrighted by ABC" or something similar somewhere on the website you find the image or on the actual image itself.Finally, one thing about people like Niven is that they sometimes appear at some event in which members of the public may participate. So, if someone snaps a photo of her at such an event, then that person would be the copyright holder of the photo. The event may have certain rules about the taking of photos, but these are normally non-copyright related restrictions that aren't really of a concern to Wikimedia Foundation. So, if you can find such a photo online and can get the WP:PERMISSION/WP:CONSENT of the copyright holder, then you probably could upload that to Commons. If you go to Google Images and search "Barbara Niven", you'll get lots of hits. Same thing if you go to Flickr and search her name as well. Some might be of a different Barbara Niven, but bascially you're looking for photos released under a free license that the Wikimedia Foundation accepts. Stay away from images which look like PR photos or which are watermarked by some photo agency like Getty Images since these are most likely never going to be allowed unless you can find one taken by someone like this guy who's a professional photgrapher who uploads versions of his work to Commons (he might even be a good guy to ask for input). Look for personal photos which were taken by a fan and perhaps uploaded by the fan to their personal social media account since you might have a better chance of getting that person to agree to give their consent or they might have already done so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:46, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the clarification on screenshots, and the several suggestions for avenues not yet tried. Thank you!  O ld B eeg  .. warble ·· 18:18, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Best of luck to you . First, two general things: (1) There's no really need to WP:PING anyone on their user talk page; most editors automatically receive a notification anytime anyone posts on their user talk page. (2) Notifications like hidden ping will only work as expected if the username is spelled correctly; even if a single character is wrong and the notification is processed, it will most likely end up notifying a different editor. There's no user account named User:Harchjuly; so, no harm no foul. Some usernames, however, are a bit similar so if you mix them up you might end up notifying the wrong person. Such mistakes are made by us all every now and then, but we still got to try and avoid them when we can.Next, image licensing is a very important part of image use on Wikipedia, and it's the first hurdle that needs to be cleared. There are, however, occasionally contextual disagreements over image use among editors even when licensing is not an issue, and these are going to be expected to be resolved just like any other content dispute. I highly doubt that anyone is going to find fault if you can find a freely-licensed image to use for primary identification purposes in the article about Niven. Strange things, however, can happen and such discussions can sometimes take some time to resolve like this one did only to see the agreed upon image replaced a few years later by another more recent one. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:21, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Apologies for the excessive tries at pinging. The Keegan image warring was an interesting look-at! There is one CC licensed picture of Niven in a large group, that when cropped and enlarged is fuzzy and a bit artifacted but recognizable. Hopefully a better image will show itself before I cave and place ‘fuzzy’ as a ‘place-holder’ picture. My sense is a page lacks a proper appearance without some likeness of the subject included. Thanks again!  O ld B eeg  .. warble ·· 02:23, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about the pings. It doesn't really bother me, but some editors don't like them at all.There are editors both at WP:GL/P and c:COM:GL/P who are quite skilled at cropping or otherwise cleaning up photos, etc. If the original photo can be uploaded, all you need to do is post a request and someone can try to clean things up. I understand what you're saying about the page lacking a proper appearance, but articles aren't required to have images and many WP:BLP articles don't. Finally, I think the use of place holder files in lieu of an actual images is sort of contentious, partiuclarly with respect to BLPs, but I can remember where I saw that being discussed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:44, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the links to the ‘in house’ graphics editors! May need to use them if I can’t create a reasonable one. The ‘place-holder’ would of course be a recognizable picture, if not as sharp as might be wished for.  O ld B eeg  .. warble ·· 13:36, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

That draft
Sorry I must have had my eyes closed when I moved that content into draft space lol. I'll nuke it at first opportunity. Zindor (talk) 03:54, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the message, but I don't think you did anything wrong per se; the content didn't belong on the template's page for obvious reasons, but moving it to the draft namespace seems OK unless it's a clear copyvio or is clearly a case of WP:TNT. The creator seems to be working on other drafts and as long as they don't try and move the drafts to the mainspace themselves, it should be OK. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:17, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, yeah. I ended up rejecting it at AfC: not the best look given my stated inclination above, but I'd already familiarised myself with the draft and im confident I was impartial in my decision. I also noticed after my review that some version of the draft got A7'd in mainspace yesterday. Regards, Zindor (talk) 20:11, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Casablanca Derby modifications
I apologize for not reading the messages you sent to me in the chat, because i don't check out the conversations page too much. But i wanna know which YouTube link you were talking about when you said that my YouTube links are broken. The problem I'm facing is that some Raja supporters are falsifying some facts, i have no problem when they add the 12th "botola" title they won , but when they change Wydad's number of titles from 20 to 15 i must correct that. Thats why i always change it to my last version. Sorry again for not reading your messages, and thanks to check what i said above. Elhaddad77 (talk) 16:40, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes you are right i just noticed the links you were talking about, sorry for the misunderstanding. Elhaddad77 (talk) 17:15, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the post . While I can understand your desire to want the content of the article to be as accurate as possible, you need to understand that disagreements over article content are expected to be resolved through article tall page discussion and not edit warring. If you continue to simply revert other editors (even IP editors) because you disagree with them as you've been doing at Casablanca derby, you're going to eventually end up being WP:BLOCKed by an administrator. No matter how right you believe you are, you're going to need to stop reverting others everytime you think they're wrong. The best thing to do when you're involved in a disagreement over article content is to start a discussion about it on the article's talk page. Try to engage other editors by explaining how your edits are correct in terms of Wikipedia policies and guidelines and give them a chance to explain their position. Absent any serious violations of Wikipedia policies or guidelines, or absent anything which is clearly a case of vandalism, you should be willing to discuss things with other. Wikipedia is a collaborative editing project and this means that disagreements need to resolved collaboratively to avoid problems.According to your account's contribution history, your posts here on my user talk page appear to be the first time you've tried to discuss anything with anyone on Wikipedia. You're not required to do so, but it sure makes things easier when you do per WP:BRD, especially when others express some concerns about your edits. The first step is always the hardest, but hopefully moving forward you'll be more inclined to discuss things with those you're in disagreement with and try to resolve things collaboratively. You seem to mean well and really want to help improve articles, but all of your good intentions aren't going to matter if you keep reverting and not discussing. Wikipedia is not intended to be a WP:BATTLEGROUND between two sides where one side needs to WP:WIN; sometimes disagreements are resolved that not only makes both sides happy, but also makes Wikipedia better. That's the type of resolution you should be striving to achieve.As for the YouTube links in the article, I've explained why they were a problem at Talk:Casablanca derby. If there's something you still don't understand, then feel free to post something in that discussion and either I or someone else will try and help. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:28, 14 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Yes you're right, i don't discuss with on wikipedia too much , i think just one or two times . Elhaddad77 (talk) 11:55, 14 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Please can you explain how can i talk with other editors in "article page discussion" ?
 * Because i didn't understand how to do it, thanks. Elhaddad77 (talk) 11:58, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * You can find out some general information on how to use talk pages at Help:Talk pages and Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines, but basically you do the same thing you've already done here and at Talk:Casablanca derby. As long as you try to discuss things your concerns about the article in terms of Wikipedia policies and guidelines, you should be OK. Just try to keep your comments on the content you want to discuss and try to avoid commenting on other editors and turning the discussion in one where it's you against them. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:27, 15 October 2020 (UTC)


 * I understand now thank you for the help, but when will you end my ban ? Elhaddad77 (talk) 15:07, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * You're not banned or blocked as far as I can tell. To begin with, I'm not a Wikipedia administrator and those are things that only an administrator can do, and as far as I can tell no administrator has done so yet. Another editor complained about your editing at WP:AN. I saw that discussion and tried to figure out if there was a way to resolve the problem without an administrator having to block anyone. I posted on your user talk page to advise you of the AN discussion and also suggest that you might need to slightly modify your approach to editing of Casablanca derby; otherwise, you might end up blocked if simply kept reverting other editors every time you thought they were wrong. Edit warring no matter how right you believe you are is not a good way to try and resolve content disputes, and you should be OK as long as you follow Wikipedia:Dispute resolution from hereon. Try to follow WP:BRD when you edit and use article talk pages to resolve any disagreements you may have with others over article content or article formatting, etc. Try to leave clear and precise edit summaries that explain why you've made an edit in terms of relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines and avoid using your edit summaries to attack or criticize other editors. Everyone gets frustrated when they edited and everyone makes mistakes, but you're going to start having problems if an administrator starts to see a pattern of making the same mistakes over and over again. That's why it's important to discuss things sometimes since it can help you to avoid making the same mistakes over and over again. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:36, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Josh Gray
Marchjuly thank you for your help with my first proper page Josh Gray the citation need comments you have requested I obtained that statements from biography on the england rugby website referencing his early sporting achievements an words such as dynamic and all round sportsman. Is that an appropriate source?

Source is england rugby website - https://www.englandrugby.com/england/mens-development/u20s-squad/josh-gray

Thanks MelbourneWang6727 (talk) 01:31, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi . The England Rugby website is, in my opinion, sort of like a comapny website in that it's providing information about it's "employees" (i.e. players) that is almost certainly true, but which might also be a bit of a WP:PRIMARY type of content that's also a tad promotional in its intent. There appear to be two experienced editors— and —trying to help you out at Talk:Josh Gray (rugby union); so, perhaps, discussing this on the article's talk would be a better idea than discussing this here. Anyone interested in Josh Gray and rugby is going to be more likely watching the article and its talk page than they are going to be watching my user talk page. Moreover, anyone looking for prior discussions related to Gray and the article will, in the same manner, be looking for them on the article's talk page and not in my user talk page archives. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:46, 27 October 2020 (UTC)


 * That's really helpful thanks MelbourneWang6727 (talk) 02:16, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

New article for the Japanese WP
Hello Marchjuly,

As I see, you also write in the Japanese WP.

I am trying to improve the Japasese article on the basset clarinet. The present article is quite inadequate. The Japanese know that. Therefore, under the article

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/バセットクラリネット

the following is written: “This item is a stub related to classical music. We are looking for collaborators to correct this item (Portal Classical Music / WikiProject Classical Music). "

I have completely rewritten the article for the Japanese WP, but only in English, as I don't speak Japanese. You can find the article text here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gisel/sandbox.

Now please take a look here: https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal‐ノート:クラシック音楽#バセットクラリネット.

Could you translate my draft article into Japanese and then paste it right there, i.e. replace the previous article with the new one? You would do the Japanese WP a good service. --Gisel (talk) 07:31, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the message, but I'm not that active on Japanese Wikipedia and only contribute bits and pieces every once in awhile. In addition, completely rewriting any article on any language Wikipedia is likely not going to be as simple as it sounds because each Wikipedia has its own policies and guidelines as well as its own community of editors. Simply saying that this is how the article should be is might receive some resistance from the local Wikipedia community who might have a different idea reagarding things. Have you tried discussing this specifically with anyone on Japanese Wikipedia? I'm not a native speaker and it might thus be better for you to try and engage someone who is and who actively edits similar articles on Japanese Wikipedia to help you with such a thing. You can try checking at WP:JAPAN to see if someone there might be such a person or you can try asking at ja:Wikipedia:Help for Non-Japanese Speakers or the Japanese equivalent to Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical music to see if someone might be interested in doing this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:57, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Blok E image fair use/quality
Hello,

For article "Blok E" (rocket stage for Soviet manned spacecraft LK) I've included a single cropped screenshot from the movie shot in Yuzhmash KB, which manufactured the stage in 1960s-1970s. No other sources of the block being manufactured are known. I've provided the rationale why this constitutes fair use in this case by filling the corresponding form; data from that form is available next to current version of the picture. I'm not sure what other forms need to be filled and why.

At some moment later the picture was replaced with half resolution one, and Wikipedia engine now complains that the picture is of low quality. I think that the previous one was more suitable for Wikipedia, but it's hard to restore the original picture. Avmich (talk) 06:27, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not really sure what you're asking about or what you're asking me to try and do. I don't remember recently editing any articles related to Soviet manned space craft. I see from your contribtutions history that you've did uploaded a file back in 2016 called File:Block E composition schema.jpeg. Is that the file you're asking about? FWIW, I don't think the PD-ineligible that file is licensed under is correct because there's nothing "Common property" about that particular image. Another file you uploaded back in 2014 is File:Block E KB Yuzhnoe.png, but I'm sure what you're asking about it since it's being used in the article Blok E, and appears (at least at first glance) to be correctly licensed with an acceptable non-free use rationale. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:46, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I was referring to the second file, "Block E KB Yuzhnoe.png", a screenshot from a manufacturing scene, which for some reason got downsampled to twice as low resolution, and I suspect that contributes to complaints of low quality. Is there a way to include a single cropped screenshot from a non-free movie as a fair use, without downsampling and causing image degradation? How decisions around that are made?


 * An also another issue appeared - two days ago I've restored a diagram in the article, and now that diagram - the first file you mention - is deleted and the link removed. Do you know why? I can't seem to find the reason; I guess the bot removed the link after the file itself was deleted, but why the file ("Block E composition schema.jpeg") was deleted in the first place? Thanks! Avmich (talk) 23:14, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * If you click on File:Block E composition schema.jpeg, you'll see the name of the administrator who deleted it and the reason why it was deleted; so, if you want clarification, then asking for it on the administrator's talk page is usually a good place to begin. Usually an administrator deletes a file after it has been tagged or nominated for deletion (for one reason or another) by another different editor. Most of the time the other editor will notify the uploader of the file of their concerns by placing a notification on the uploader's user talk page to give them a chance to respond. I'm not sure why that wasn't done in this case, but administrators can immediately delete any files they believe are clear copyright violations per speedy deletion criterion F9 asap with prior notification. Once again, you will need to ask the administrator who deleted the file about it if you want more details.As for your other question, non-free content is required to be low-resolution per non-free content use criterion 3b. I believe there are WP:BOTs which have been developed which go around checking files to make sure they satisfy this criteria, and tags files with Non-free reduce when they don't. Wikipedia editors who review files also can tag files for reduction when they believe it's needed. You can find more details about this in WP:IMAGERES. In some cases, a higher resolution of a file may sometimes be allowed if it's deemed necessary to help the reader's understanding of the article content connected to the file; however, usually this requires discussion and a WP:CONSENSUS established to do so. You might want to ask about File:Block E KB Yuzhnoe.png at WP:GL/P. Sometimes the editors who help out on that page are able to clean up images to make them a bit clearer, but also stay make sure they still meet criterion 3b. The Image-out-of-focus template that was added to the file's page back in 2014 is not really binding. It's just what one editor felt when they looked at the file. It's more of a suggestion that anything and doesn't take priority over criterion 3b. Non-free screenshots are allowed as long as their use(s) meet all ten non-free content use criteria. This usually means that the screenshot itself is somehow strongly contextually connected to what's written in the article, and not simply being added for WP:DECORATIVE purposes. Opinions on "contextual significance" can sometimes vary greatly among editors, and such disagreements are often resolved through a consensus established at WP:FFD discussions about the file and its use(s). -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:47, 24 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you Marchjuly, that's plenty of information for now to go with. Avmich (talk) 19:42, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

ATK Mohun Bagan
There is no consensus on the RFC. The consensus was based on the votes by SPA's. It has been discussed on the admins' noticeboard and, the consensus was to overturn the redirect per the discussion on the Administrators' noticeboard. See the discussion on the same regard.-- Akhiljaxxn (talk) 02:04, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for providing that link. I've asked about this at WP:AN. It will be sorted out one way or another by an administrator. I've got no personal preference either way, and just reverted the WP:SPA trying to override the redirect. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:14, 29 October 2020 (UTC)