User talk:Postdlf/Archive32

San Francisco Transportation WikiProject
Hello Sir, Where that page for San Francisco Transportation WikiProject? 03:19, 6 January 2019 (UTC) Colton Meltzer (talk) 03:19, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I understand your question. Given that there is going to be a strong and clear consensus at the AFD that the article should be kept and that it is not inconsistent with NOTTRAVEL, what is it you are hoping to accomplish? postdlf (talk) 15:52, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArticles_for_deletion%2FList_of_San_Francisco_Municipal_Railway_lines_%282nd_nomination%29&type=revision&diff=877011711&oldid=877010749

You told me "try to establish consensus for them." There no Wiki project page for San Francisco Transpiration? Colton Meltzer (talk) 21:32, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I said to make your suggestions on the talk page. I've often had difficulty reading your comments; are you using Google translate? postdlf (talk) 21:43, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * No Translate. Your comment was kinda vague. Suggestions on which talk page? On Their WikiProject or what? Colton Meltzer (talk) 00:05, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I apologize, but it seems as if English is not your first language as your sentences have often seemed incomplete. I meant the talk page of the list page in question. postdlf (talk) 00:12, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * English is not the issue. The comment for many users can have some repeated mistakes, but never perfect. Just asking for clarification. Kindly thanks!

Have a nice day. Colton Meltzer (talk) 00:28, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Any admin going close that https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArticles_for_deletion%2FList_of_San_Francisco_Municipal_Railway_lines_%282nd_nomination%29&type=revision&diff=877011711&oldid=877010749 nomination?
 * AFDs are typically open for seven days. postdlf (talk) 00:40, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:44, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Ways to improve 2018 term United States Supreme Court opinions of Brett Kavanaugh
Hello, Postdlf,

Thanks for creating 2018 term United States Supreme Court opinions of Brett Kavanaugh! I edit here too, under the username Boleyn and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Boleyn (talk) 20:57, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Category: Maritime case law
I do not accept your reversions of my edits of "Category: Maritime case law"

Please note that the term Admiralty Law is not only going out of use, (Aleka Mandaraka-Sheppards's book "Modern Admiralty Law" became "Modern Maritime Law" in subsequent editions; and the LJMU module "Admiralty Law" became "Maritime Law") but also it strictly covers only "wet law' (i.e. liens, ship arrest, collisions, salvage, towage, etc). I changed the category to Maritime case law, as "Maritime law" covers both wet and dry law (the latter covering carriage of goods by sea, the MLC, marine insurance, etc). The cases in the category so far are mainly dry law (and NOT admiralty cases).

I will not revert your reverts immediately, but I may do so soon unless I receive a reasoned and convincing response. Arrivisto (talk) 11:15, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You can start a discussion on the talk page of admiralty law if you think it should be renamed, or if you believe the two terms should be split as separate topics, but unless or until that demonstrated consensus for such a change happens the categories should match the article titling, not to mention be consistent as a whole category structure. Generally speaking, when you make a change that is reverted, you should not then redo it. See WP:BRD, WP:EDITWAR. And especially here where a category can actually be speedy renamed if it does not match the parent article’s title. postdlf (talk) 13:09, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Closing AFD
Hello there!

Thanks for your revert here. Firstly, I want to apologize for ignoring the AFD closing procedure. To make it clear, I mixed up the concept of closing/archiving with withdrawing as nominator.

However, since a nominator's withdrawal means almost certain keep, I would like to know why didn't you close the discussion yourself after you have reverted?

Thanks, and if you find anything inappropriate or offensive towards you, even if I have not intended, please let me know.

THE NEW  Immortal  Wizard  (chat) 21:42, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I did close one of the AFDs in which you withdrew your nomination as speedy keep because it otherwise had no support for anything but keeping from the participants. But in one of the other AFDs there was a comment that supported redirecting, and in another there was a delete !vote. Once that has happened, the nominator's withdrawal obviously impacts the final closure but can't unilaterally stop the discussion. postdlf (talk) 23:25, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

"America's Opportunity City" to Columbus Nicknames
Hello Postdlf,

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia and thorough verification of the validity to edits. Recently you've undone an edit this I made and I was seeking advice on how I may make the edit in a way in which it will stay.

The edit to add "America's Opportunity City" to the Nicknames section of Columbus, Ohio was removed due to the fact that the linked article did not substantiate that this was a nickname. Might one of the following articles substantiate that this is a nickname?

Transcript of the 2019 State of the City Address Columbus Young Professionals Article 10tv Article Noting the Nickname in Reference to Amazon HQ2

Increasingly I have heard this used used as a nickname and believe it to be more reflective as a nickname than what is currently listed. Thank you in advance for any guidance you may be able to offer on if this change is appropriate and what might be the best way to implement it.

Pdmejia (talk) 15:14, 28 February 2019 (UTC)pdmejia
 * From the citations provided, it doesn't seem this nickname is anything more than local, and it might actually be promotional. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 15:20, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

This looks like a good discussion for Talk:Columbus, Ohio. Beyond that, I will say that Chris is probably correct and that what constitutes an established "nickname" for a city (rather than ephemeral promotion) such that it should be included in the infobox should meet a pretty high threshold. postdlf (talk) 15:30, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Brian Morris


The article Brian Morris has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp/dated tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Prestonmag (talk) 21:55, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Don't ever propose or nominate anything for deletion without checking the history first. Thank you, postdlf (talk) 23:14, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular
   

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 03:02, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Category:English literature has been nominated for discussion
Category:English literature, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:27, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Roufique
Hello Postdlf, I noticed strange edits lately then saw that a previous account you blocked seemed related, so I'm posting the notice here. Probably a new start unsuitable for WP:SPI... They appear to only advertise a Korean IP address/domain/username and strangely an RFC (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7249); maybe a language barrier issue... Thanks, — Paleo Neonate  – 06:26, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
 * (old account)
 * (new account)

Charles Sheeler edit
Hi Postdlf, Just wanting to suggest we keep my edit that I made to the Charles Sheeler page. Evidence of Sheeler's involvement with the Baroness and a sculpture of Duchamp is of great historical importance.

All best, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigoldnance (talk • contribs) 11:18, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Just saying he took a single photograph does nothing to demonstrate any importance. Without context, it is trivial, particularly as the Baroness was not otherwise even mentioned in his article, and her article does not mention Sheeler. If his "involvement" with her was significant to his life, you'd need to demonstrate it with sourced content. postdlf (talk) 13:47, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

"Oldest star" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Oldest star. Since you had some involvement with the Oldest star redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 22:02, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:03, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Good luck
 豊かな十年へようこそ/WELCOME TO THE D20s Miraclepine wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade of change and fortune. このミラPはPostdlfたちのメリークリスマスも新年も変革と幸運の豊かな十年をおめでとうございます！ フレフレ、みんなの未来！/GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR FUTURE! ミラP 02:14, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Fantastic Four 66.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Fantastic Four 66.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. NeoBatfreak (talk) 21:28, 4 January 2020 (UTC)