User talk:RarelyIfEvenUsedAccount/Archives/2021/March

February 2021
Hello, I'm CommanderWaterford. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to Eugeniusz Baziak have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:56, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
 * Antony Bek (bishop of Durham)
 * added links pointing to Thomas Beck, William Middleton and Oliver Sutton
 * John Peckham
 * added links pointing to Thomas Beck and John Kirkby
 * Robert Kilwardby
 * added a link pointing to John Bradfield
 * William of Louth
 * added a link pointing to Oliver Sutton

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:16, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

William Wallace Webb moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, William Wallace Webb, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:44, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:William Wallace Webb.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:William Wallace Webb.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) 19:16, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 13
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
 * Antony Bek (bishop of Durham)
 * added a link pointing to Thomas Beck
 * John Peckham
 * added a link pointing to Thomas Beck
 * Muro Lucano
 * added a link pointing to Angevin

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Home Temple Movement


A tag has been placed on Home Temple Movement requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/home-temple-movement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Perryprog (talk) 22:33, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 2
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pope John Paul II, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paweł Socha.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 15
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited David Toups, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Beaumont.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:31, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Mark Ji Tianxiang moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Mark Ji Tianxiang, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. ... disco spinster   talk  02:36, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:  Anarchyte  ( talk &#8226;  work ) 08:51, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

Proposed deletion of Home Temple Movement


The article Home Temple Movement has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Can't find any in-depth coverage of this movement. Currently is almost totally sourced by primary sources."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  Onel 5969  TT me 15:47, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Nazianzus
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Nazianzus, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images from either web sites or printed works. This article appears to contain work copied from, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

It may also be necessary for the text to be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
 * Have the author release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License (CC BY-SA 3.0) by leaving a message explaining the details at Talk:Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Nazianzus and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure they quote the exact page name, Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Nazianzus, in their email. See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If you hold the copyright to the work: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org ] or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Nazianzus. See Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0", or that the work is released into the public domain, or if you have strong reason to believe it is, leave a note at Talk:Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Nazianzus with a link to where we can find that note or your explanation of why you believe the content is free for reuse.

See Declaration of consent for all enquiries for a template of the permissions letter the copyright holder is expected to send.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at [ this temporary page]. Leave a note at Talk:Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Nazianzus saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Pipsally (talk) 16:58, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

What here is stolen under copyright? These are public records only listing the bishops of the diocese and the names. This is the only website that is considered a WP:RS besides the book of bishops?

You tagged two of my diocese articles for copyright violation while these are just names of dates of people around from around 2,000 to 100 years old... KEleison (talk) 17:38, 23 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Because both have lists that are lifted directly from the source. That’s a copyright vio, and it doesn’t matter if it’s the only source.


 * and why do you have two accounts?Pipsally (talk) 17:52, 23 March 2021 (UTC)


 * That's the exact order of the bishops this is public information, I'll change it up then if that was your only problem. Also old one had password issues I forgot it and never set an email and only had access on one device. KEleison (talk) 17:54, 23 March 2021 (UTC)


 * lots of things are public information Charles. That doesn’t mean they can be taken and posted on Wikipedia. Pipsally (talk) 17:59, 23 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Charles? I mean like I said, I can just trim down to only include names and dates if that is alright. KEleison (talk) 18:01, 23 March 2021 (UTC)


 * And given that your first account was editing after the second was created, and, indeed,created the user page for the second, there a strong whiff of bullshit here.Pipsally (talk) 18:02, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Please listen that it was on ONE DEVICE I had access to. What is your problem with me... KEleison (talk) 18:03, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

I mean if you're going to complain over a list of bishops, might as well start by deleting all Wikipedia articles related to bishops for copyright violation... Either we can get a third person involved, or you can start complaining without resolve. I'm not sure how I offended you...KEleison (talk) 18:06, 23 March 2021 (UTC)


 * It’s not a question of complaining, it’s about the creation of two articles where the bulk of the content is directly lifted from another site, which, indeed is also the only source then cited in the article. The copy is stuff exist to protect I P and Wikipedia and these articles are in breach.Pipsally (talk) 18:12, 23 March 2021 (UTC)


 * So... can I then have the list which I modified on the talk page? Other than that there is no physical logical way to keep any lists of any diocese up. KEleison (talk) 18:14, 23 March 2021 (UTC)


 * There, look on the two temp pages, if this can not be used then delete every diocese article for copyright violation... KEleison (talk) 18:22, 23 March 2021 (UTC)


 * So... instead of discussing this stuff you move on to keep deleting more and more of my stuff... Don't know what I did for you to start changing up my old account talk page. KEleison (talk) 19:10, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

You're running two accounts, and using one to delete talk page stuff about marginal to problematic efforts on the other. That's why I'm restoring, because it's verging on sock puppetryPipsally (talk) 19:17, 23 March 2021 (UTC)


 * It's on an archive page... It's clear you're angry at me for something... I don't literally know what I did to upset you that you have to come and use vulgarity and undo and write copyvio on things that can either be easily changed if they are somehow copyvio or just things that have been changed already.KEleison (talk) 19:20, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Carlisle Music Company for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Carlisle Music Company is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Carlisle Music Company until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Pipsally (talk) 18:04, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Carlisle Music Company
Hello KEleison,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Carlisle Music Company for deletion, because it seems to be copied from another source, probably infringing copyright.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to rewrite it in your own words, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=&action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Hangon_preload&preloadtitle=This+page+should+not+be+speedy+deleted+because...+ contest this deletion], but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 11:15, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Note: Fixed the small part of violation a week ago of it as it was the first source available to use. KEleison (talk) 08:09, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Theodore Diehl


The article Theodore Diehl has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Non-notable, even Heads of Mission are not inherently notable; fails WP:GNG / WP:BIO without significant coverage in independent secondary reliable sources."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:17, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 28
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Antidoron, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Blessed.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Catholic Church in the United States (3rd nomination)
Hi, can you please sign your nomination statement on the above AFD as it does not seem to be showing up, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 23:32, 28 March 2021 (UTC)