User talk:MelanieN/Archive 43

Tara Aghdashloo
Takinson (talk) 21:04, 2 January 2018 (UTC)Hi Melanie, Hope you're doing great and Happy New Year! I noticed you deleted my sister's page Tara Aghdashloo. I think given the fact she's an active journalist with a long list of publications and a solid following in Iran (117k Instagram followers), she deserves to have a presence on Wikipedia. Please let me know if you need more references and resources to revive the page. I think her page is greatly missed on Wikipedia as a female influencer in Iran. Regards, - TA
 * Hello, TA, and thanks for the note. The page was deleted after a community discussion at Articles for deletion/Tara Aghdashloo. At the time, the consensus was that although she has written published articles and has many followers, she does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for an article. Those criteria require that other publications have written ABOUT her, not just that she writes and has followers. You can see the requirements at WP:GNG and WP:42. That discussion was two years ago. Has she become more celebrated in the time since then? Has there been coverage ABOUT her? In a search of the English language Wikipedia all I found was links that do not qualify as independent or rebliable, such as Facebook, Vimeo, LinkedIn, and her own Instagram and Twitter feeds. I found a little bit of coverage about her wedding, but not in what we consider reliable sources; it was at sites like boxnewsbox and TheManorHouseBride, not in regular journalistic publications. Are there any references that you would be able to add showing that she and her career have been written ABOUT by independent, reliable sources? One other thing: if you are thinking of re-creating an article about your sister, you should read WP:COI. It is best not to write about people and things that we have a close connection to. --MelanieN (talk) 21:46, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * P.S. Is Aydin Aghdashloo her father? If she does not qualify for an article of her own, it might be possible to mention her under a "family" section at the article about him. Let's talk about that. --MelanieN (talk) 21:51, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Melanie, thanks so much for your detailed response. I appreciate you taking the time to do this on your time off. I understand the Wikipedia article qualification criteria and I do believe Tara Aghdashloo meets the requirements as she's been written ABOUT by numerous reliable and trusted sources. I also want to mention that although Tara has been a professional journalist during career, she's a practicing multidisciplinary artist active mainly as a filmmaker. She is also a curator (she ran an art gallery in east London for three years and continues to curate international exhibitions). Finally, Tara Aghdashloo is a published poet and contributes to the Persian music industry as a lyricist. On a side note, The fact that her wedding received so much attention is mainly due to her high profile status as an Iranian artist. I'm going to list some of the articles about Tara Aghdashloo below:


 * 1) This is the latest, long interview with her about her life and career on Cultural Curator (English) https://www.theculturalcurator.com/nasty-women-the-interviews
 * 2) Interview about her work and style (English) : https://les-belles-heures.com/blogs/journal/style-talk-with-tara-aghdashloo
 * 3) High profile exhibition, Tara's retrospective of Cristina Rodrigues in Portugal (English) https://www.artrabbit.com/events/cristina-rodrigues-retrospective
 * 4) Interview and ambassador of style (English) : https://www.lou-black.com/ambassadors/
 * 5) A report about one of the exhibitions she curated at her gallery (English) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdMHxis3Gpg
 * 6) Tara giving an interview about copy rights with CopyrightUser.org (English)  https://vimeo.com/69624609
 * 7) Interview with Tara about freedom of expression in poetry  (Persian): http://pourzandfoundation.org/episode-10-freedom-of-expression-in-poetry/
 * 8) Featured and interviewed by Now Toronto (English) : https://nowtoronto.com/lifestyle/tara-aghdashloo/
 * 9) An interview with Tara and with her then partner who she wrote a successful album with, King Raam (English) : http://shahrvand.com/archives/14957
 * 10) VOA interview when her poetry book was published  (Persian): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lW1seoPo5s
 * 11) Famed poet Reza Baraheni's review on Tara's poetry collection when published  (Persian): http://balatarin.com/permlink/2011/6/17/2574115
 * 12) Listed as one of 2010's best dressed Iranians on PBS (English) : https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tehranbureau/2011/01/photo-essay-best-dressed.html
 * 13) Featured on Modern Times Theatre company in Toronto (English) : http://moderntimesstage.com/circle-tara-aghdashloo/
 * 14) Tara as herself in video in audiovisual portrait by Estrella Sandra (English) : https://vimeo.com/38234455
 * 15) A review of Tara Aghdashloo poetry reading in Toronto in Shahrvand newspaper (Persian): http://www.mehregon.com/mehregon/archive/2011/issue13/taraaghdashloo
 * 16) Tara Aghdashloo hosting the Art Gallery of Ontario's annual party as Marchesa Casati (English): https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/fashion-and-beauty/fashion/party-photos-of-the-week/article634178/#c-image-19

Additionally:


 * 1) Tara Aghdashloo was a guest lecturer at the MA of journalism class at Ryerson in 2010 to speak about citizen journalism
 * 2) Tara has a verified Twitter account, and has been the subject of hacking, fake reports, and fake accounts posing as her pervasively, which is why having a Wikipedia can ensure there isn't misinformation out there.
 * 3) She's been interviewed on Manoto TV network and BBC Persian numerous times.

Finally, I can provide more details on any aspects of her multifaceted career as you please. Best, - TA — Preceding unsigned comment added by Takinson (talk • contribs) 20:48, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Melanie and TA. To add to this discussion, this article was just published about Tara on Harper's Bazaar. I would say there is enough English language coverage at this point to warrant an article. --Itkin (talk) 18:17, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 * That could help add to her notability. It has been two years since the article was deleted per a deletion discussion, and it is possible that an article could now be written that would have enough independent coverage ABOUT her to qualify as an article. Would one of you want to try to create that article? (It would be better if it was written by someone unrelated to her.) If one of you wants to do this, here's how this can work: I can restore the article in a way that it is in your private user space rather than in the main article. That's called userfying. That way it would not be at risk of getting immediately deleted again, and you can work on improving it, making it more encyclopedic and adding better references. When you think it is ready to go back in the encyclopedia, you can ask me if it is different and improved enough that it would not get speedy-deleted per WP:G4. Would one of you like to have me restore the article to your private space so you can work on it? --MelanieN (talk) 18:45, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks to you both. Sounds good, I can take care of writing the article if it's OK with you and I'll go through you Melanie to ensure it's improved and uses proper references once I'm finished editing. --Takinson (talk) 13:18, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
 * OK, but please reread WP:COI about writing about someone related to you. You will need good sources (please review the guideline for sources), and you will need to avoid WP:PUFFERY and keep it strictly encyclopedic. I will look it over and evaluate it when you think you have it ready. Please start a new subject here when you want me to look it over, so our discussion doesn't get lost in the middle of the page. --MelanieN (talk) 16:33, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Invictus redux
Hi Melanie. I just noticed this edit from 24 December. I removed it, as well as some other negative BLP. This may cause renewed edit-warring, so I am just letting you know. Happy New Year by the way. Dr.  K.  18:26, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have the article on my watchlist, but please continue to notify me if there are problematic posts. --MelanieN (talk) 18:38, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Will do, Melanie. Thanks again. Dr.   K.  18:55, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Question regarding AfD Closure
Hi Melanie. I was curious as to why the result of WP:Articles_for_deletion/Terry_J._Powell was not correctly attributed to my !vote/discussion on the matter. I realize this is a minor thing in the grand scheme. Thank you for your time. Ventric (talk) 22:59, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello, Ventric, and thanks for your note. This was closed 2 1/2 years ago. The consensus to delete was unanimous, so the closure as "delete" was obvious and no closing comment was needed. Your !vote/discussion was basically agreeing with the nominator. What did you think should have been done differently? And what brings it up now? --MelanieN (talk) 21:39, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Civility at the Russian talk page
, I don't mean to bother you, and I know we haven't necessarily seen eye-to-eye in the past (over the same issue I'm raising below). But really, I don't think it's so unreasonable to ask that comments on the talk page 1) making specific article content critiques, and 2) created by someone who is not a known troll, be preserved and archived after regular timelines, in ordinary fashion. As far as I can tell your comments support that reasonable position. But I'm unhappy about the incredibly uncivil reaction I'm getting for making what seem to me to be fairly similar points. -Darouet (talk) 17:28, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Good Germans
Hi. FYI. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:27, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Jimbo Wales
Quick question: why do editors who believe Wikipedia has a liberal bias write comments on the Jimbo Wales talk page to complain about the supposed bias? Snooganssnoogans (talk) 02:58, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Because if they do it on article talk pages, they get hatted? --MelanieN (talk) 04:23, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Snerk. --Neil N  talk to me 04:30, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Jessica Jacobs vandal is back
This person has an obsession with the late Ms. Jacobs and also keeps introducing Americanisms such as "graduated" (Australians say "leave" or "finish" school) and "mom" instead of "mum". They've been at it for years. Can you do something please? Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 22:53, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note. It looks as if the problem IPs have been identified as socks and have been range-blocked. Thanks, User:NeilN! Let’s see if that solves the problem. The article is already under Pending Changes protection. --MelanieN (talk) 23:07, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * P.S. I noticed that the PC protection was about to expire, so I extended it for another year. --MelanieN (talk) 23:10, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Murder of Michelle Garvey
Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 00:08, 10 January 2018 (UTC) I'd like to add this to the article, but i feel you could do a better job. This report from KHOU indicates that there were signs of sexual assault (i assume that means she was raped) and although Michelle was clothed, she was missing things like her bra and her shoes. www.khou.com/news/investigations/investigations-who-killed-michelle/408484935
 * Thanks for the note, Paul, but I'm going to take a pass on this one. The article looks fairly well developed as is and it's not really my kind of subject. I'm sure you can do a good job of expanding it as appropriate. --MelanieN (talk) 00:03, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Queer sandbox page
Hi,

This could be nothing, but I smell something fishy about this. It looks like some sort of admittance of sock puppetry, but I can't be sure. Not entirely sure what to make of this, so I'm hoping you or an experienced talk page stalker can help. Thanks. Adam9007 (talk) 00:55, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, Adam. I agree it is strange but probably harmless. I don't offhand see any obvious reason to delete it. It is obviously a test edit, but test edits are OK in user pages and sandboxes. That is the only edit made by that user and I doubt they will be back so it will probably age off eventually. --MelanieN (talk) 00:07, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's just that they said they have 3 accounts and that "some" are "suspended" (blocked?). That looks somewhat suspicious. Also, I'm not sure if the shouting is unintentional. Adam9007 (talk) 01:31, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, since they haven't done any editing except to create that one sandbox entry, I would say it is kind of moot whether that is a sock account or not: they haven't used the account to make edits deceptively. If they were to start editing the encyclopedia, then we would need to look into it. As for the shouting and the general incoherence of that post - it's not part of the encyclopedia so it's not really bothering anyone. If any stalker thinks some kind of action is needed, please feel free, but I'm inclined to leave it alone as long as the account doesn't do anything else. --MelanieN (talk) 01:51, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

AfD closes
Just a reminder that AfD discussions should normally run for a full 7 days unless one of the early close criteria is met - if you feel an early close is justified please indicate which one applies in your closing statement. Thanks. --Michig (talk) 10:15, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Michig. So if something was listed on the 7th, I can't close it on the 14th? The link called "closing" took me to the 7th, so I have tended to assume that means they actually are closing. But I see that in some cases the discussions, although listed for 7 days, had not run a full 168 hours. I hadn't realized (or had forgotten) I need to be that much of a clock-watcher, but I will be more careful in the future. --MelanieN (talk) 15:10, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
 * There is an undocumented and, judging from a, never talked about script called AFD age detector made by Splarka back in 2009, that can be helpful. It will add a line to the top of an AFD discussion looking like this
 * and the moment we are passed the 168 hours, it will say
 * It can be installed by adding  to your common.js or your skin script file, then saving the file and bypassing the browser cache.
 * I tested the script again today, and the above functionality still works for me in both Vector and Monobook. When I tested it in 2016, it would also turn the background of the AFD subpage light fuchsia-sish. That functionality is lost now (not a great loss, IMO). May I ping User:Evad37 so they can consider if any of this is worth building into XFDcloser? If not as a default feature, then perhaps as a variable that could be set in the user's skin/common? Sam Sailor 14:49, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * It can be installed by adding  to your common.js or your skin script file, then saving the file and bypassing the browser cache.
 * I tested the script again today, and the above functionality still works for me in both Vector and Monobook. When I tested it in 2016, it would also turn the background of the AFD subpage light fuchsia-sish. That functionality is lost now (not a great loss, IMO). May I ping User:Evad37 so they can consider if any of this is worth building into XFDcloser? If not as a default feature, then perhaps as a variable that could be set in the user's skin/common? Sam Sailor 14:49, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion & Protection of Page SumanKumarMallick
I was recommending the page Suman_Kumar_Mallick for speedy as this is pure advert of a non notable politician. But the page has been protected by you. Just wanted to bring to your notice that the page was moved to Mainspace after getting rejected in draft multiple times. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Suman_Kumar_Mallick_(Politician)&oldid=821045398. This is pure promotional material by an account with COI. Hagennos (talk) 05:58, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, it's at AFD now. And it was sent there by an admin so that's how it will be handled. You could always suggest speedy deletion at the AFD discussion. --MelanieN (talk) 06:02, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Oops! Fell into the old "thought they already were one" trap. Sorry, User:Boleyn. P.S. Why the heck aren't you? --MelanieN (talk) 20:53, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Melanie :) I've never had the guts to put myself through the voting process, may be one day! Boleyn (talk) 21:14, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Trust me, you would be a shoo-in. And there are probably at least 50 people who would love to nominate you. Present company included. If you'd like to talk about it, send me an email. --MelanieN (talk) 21:49, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * P.S. There is a procedural reason why AfD deletion may be better than speedy: If it is deleted following a discussion, any recreations can be speedy-deleted per WP:G4. --MelanieN (talk) 06:07, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Any suggestions on how to handle the father and son editors? Hope they go away after the article is deleted? --Neil N  talk to me 06:10, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah, so that's the story: "It was my brother." If the article gets deleted and salted, as has been proposed at the AfD, that should hopefully take care of it. --MelanieN (talk) 15:57, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Three years of adminship
Wishing MelanieN a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Chris Troutman ( talk ) 00:18, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you, nice of you to remember! Three years, huh? And I haven't broken anything yet? I need to try harder. 0;-D --MelanieN (talk) 00:20, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations! I don't know how you have put up with all of us on American politics so long, while keeping your cool so well! PackMecEng (talk) 02:52, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

"take it up on the article talk page"
I cannot find the article talk page to reach a consensus on the edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soibangla (talk • contribs) 23:33, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

"You could just take the explanation you posted at the user talk page of TheTimesAreAChanging, which was quite persuasive, and copy it to the article talk page"

WHERE IS THE ARTICLE TALK PAGE? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soibangla (talk • contribs) 23:38, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I replied at your user talk page. Let's keep all of our conversations there. --MelanieN (talk) 23:41, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Sockpuppet
Hi, Melanija! :) We've got a problem at Kotromanić dynasty. The problem has decided to log into an account that appears to have somehow escaped the purge of his socks. Long story short, it's a man who claims to be the King of Bosnia, dispossessed of his rightful throne by Vatican and Free Masons. If only he were trolling. See User talk:Bosnipedian for details. I hope you can rid of us this problem for the time being at least. It's been recurring since 2009. Surtsicna (talk) 11:19, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Oh look, back in 2012, he created another hoax article using this account and escaped a block. My first interaction with him was when he created a hoax article about a Bosnian royal family in 2009. It is impossible to keep track of his accounts and hoaxes. Surtsicna (talk) 11:29, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Surtsicna: Thanks for the alert. As for "Melanija": Please see the disclaimer at the top of my userpage (under the picture). 0;-D --MelanieN (talk) 17:14, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for blocking the new user Tersarius and protecting the article. After some investigation I have indeffed Tersarius per DUCK as a sock of Bosnipedian (sleeping since 2012). I wonder if you might consider removing the full protection now? The disruptive accounts have gone bye-bye, and if the article is unprotected it might lure other socks into the open. --MelanieN (talk) 17:07, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, already reduced to a semi. Feel free to reduce further if you want. --Neil N  talk to me 17:10, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * High five, Neil. Nice tag-teaming. (Thanks for cleaning up the ANEW report, too.) Yeah, maybe I will unprotect it just to see if anything else crawls out from under the rocks.  --MelanieN (talk) 17:22, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * They are back as User:134.236.33.102. Dorsetonian (talk) 19:46, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Neil got 'em. Let's see what happens. If we just keep getting new IPs (as opposed to identifying new registered users) we should probably semi-protect again. We don't accomplish much by whack-a-mole-ing IPs. --MelanieN (talk) 19:53, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Whoops. I thought the removal of semi protection from Kotromanić dynasty must have been a mistake, so I put it back. Had not yet seen the discussion here. Please undo my change, if you unprotected as part of a plan! EdJohnston (talk) 22:02, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Ed. Let's leave it semiprotected. My plan was to try to smoke out sockpuppets, but now I realize there's really no point in smoking out IP sockpuppets. They just change addresses and come back. --MelanieN (talk) 22:15, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Anyone looking at the logs is going to wonder, "what are those idiot admins doing?". LOL. --Neil N  talk to me 22:25, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Don't they think that anyhow? --MelanieN (talk) 22:28, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * As a wise admin said a couple hours ago, "Touché!" --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 22:35, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * It looks like you've successfully flushed out User:Yearoundone. Dorsetonian (talk) 13:54, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Down the drain. --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 14:02, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Same pattern. Wake up a sleeper, do half a dozen edits to become auto-confirmed, and then resume the attack. They did a search for sleepers at WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Bosnipedian but didn't find this one. I wonder how many more of these he has? --MelanieN (talk) 15:35, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Checkuser data is kept for months, not years. So they won't find long-dormant accounts, ready to take on us Freemasonry/papist lunatics. --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 15:46, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * BTW Neil - it occurs to me that we may have something historic going on here: opposing this guy's claims is probably the only thing the Freemasons and the Catholics have ever agreed on. 0;-D --MelanieN (talk) 23:16, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * BTW Neil - it occurs to me that we may have something historic going on here: opposing this guy's claims is probably the only thing the Freemasons and the Catholics have ever agreed on. 0;-D --MelanieN (talk) 23:16, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Guys, this one is not going to go away easily. Here is the newest account, I think. It is possible that he genuinely believes he is the rightful king (of a country that hasn't had a king since the 15th century). He runs a website and several social media accounts and has been targeting various Wikipedia projects for 9 years. He has had over a dozen accounts on en.wiki alone and has created elaborate hoaxes. I suspect a mental disorder, as no troll would be this persistent and dedicated. Surtsicna (talk) 19:08, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Yep, probably another one. He can't edit the main article because he isn't autoconfirmed, but if he tries to edit either of the "Ban" articles that will be enough quacking for me. I don't really care if he is a vandal (don't be so sure that no troll would be this persistent; I could introduce you to a few who appear to be perfectly sane and just troll for their own amusement) or a true believer in his cause; either way it is disruptive. BTW folks, I am going to be away from the computer for a couple of days, starting tomorrow, so Neil and other stalkers may have to deal with things for a day or two. I don't mind if you keep the conversation centralized here. --MelanieN (talk) 19:17, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

At Kotromanić dynasty there was just a change to the coat of arms by a new user who followed the common sock pattern of creating a username, making some random edits, and waiting five days. The user claimed the change was supported by the talk page. Is this legitimate, or is it another iteration of the sock activity? I don’t know enough about the subject matter to tell. --MelanieN (talk) 16:26, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * A sock, my lady. It is our papist duty to seize the heretic. Deus vult! Surtsicna (talk) 17:48, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * So let it be written. So let it be done. --MelanieN (talk) 18:10, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

He's targeting Talk:Bosnia and Herzegovina again. This time he called me an "Ustaša piece of shit". It seems the lunatic is becoming desperate, as he had been rather civil all these years. Surtsicna (talk) 18:49, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Moves following ORCP comment
Good morning, Melanie! Thank you for moving to J. Thomas Dickinson and  to Jonathan V. Sweedler. Solving the misunderstood move of Jim Naismith → James H Naismith by moving it to James H. Naismith created a double redirect in James Naismith (chemist) that was later fixed by a bot. I would have moved James H Naismith to James Naismith (chemist), as that was the alternative suggestion that got support in the RM discussion, and then have created a R from long name in the then redlinked James H. Naismith to the target in James Naismith (chemist). Perhaps I got it wrong? In any case, when the mysteries are solved here, let's properly close the RM that the admin hopeful forgot to close, and maybe adjust the hatnote in James Naismith? Best, Sam Sailor 11:48, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Wow, Sam! I just set out to retitle an obviously misnamed article. I don't really have the time to untangle all this. Is it something you could do, or does it require admin tools? --MelanieN (talk) 19:56, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I guess the sysop flags can do a move over redirect in such a case, whereas the page mover has to do a round robin swap. I just wanted to liaise with you before taking action. Perhaps User:Aloneinthewild and User:In ictu oculi would double check and see if everything is in order now, redirects pointing to the right targets etc. Sam Sailor 16:24, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Sam. Sorry to dump it back on you but I have enough on my plate right now. --MelanieN (talk) 19:21, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Good for you
I see you reverted some of your edits at AE here. Of course, there’s not even an edit summary to indicate why you reverted. And you still haven’t corrected your statement that I should be topic-banned for intending to seek consensus to remove some of the material after I moved it. A very very disappointing experience, let me tell you.&#32;Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:49, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Deleting older, larger versions of Fair Use file
After recently uploading the file File:White Flag (Johns painting).jpg, I had to reduce the image size further after initially uploading the image because it wasn't small enough to be considered fair use. Is there a way to delete the older version of the file, like what has been done here: File:Corsica Mine Smokestack Elcor Minnesota.jpg? Thank you! Codyorb (talk) 15:37, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
 * OK, apparently the Wikilinks aren't working on these pictures. Copy and paste the file name into Search and add .jpg at the end. Codyorb (talk) 15:39, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Links fixed —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 21:34, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I've tagged the image for revision deletion. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 21:34, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Codyorb (talk) 21:36, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you, JJMC89! I wouldn't know what to do without my stalkers! 0;-D --MelanieN (talk) 00:31, 27 January 2018 (UTC)