User talk:Renamed user e8LqRIqjJf2zlGDYPSu1aXoc/Archive 21

Proposed deletion for Nisabdham
Hai Mr.Mendaliv

I am Michael arun from India, working as film director... Its glad to meet you through wiki...

Sir, I am doing my first film "Nisabdham" and created a page for it in wikipedia... But, it comes under deletion process...

Sir, I read the terms in wikipedia... But its my first directorial film... Each technicians i feed are on their debuts... Now only film get finished and we are processing in publicity campaign... Sure in future i will update every reliable sources come from any type of media publicity for the film by linking it all in the page...

Sir, please reconsider your decision and help me to construct a gud page about a social cause film for the people...

Thanking you for making me to learn...

Please re consider Majkr (talk) 03:58, 20 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, Michael, but from everything I've seen there just isn't enough material out there to satisfy our requirements. The particular rule for unreleased films is quite harsh, but the Wikipedia community decided that it was necessary because of the sheer number of planned but unreleased films that have received virtually no attention in the media. I will, however, tell you what you would need to find to satisfy the requirement. You need two or three—preferably more—long news articles about your project. Those two or three articles should be in different publications, written by different authors, and discussing the film in different aspects. They should just be interview articles, and they have to be significant publications, like major regional or national newspapers or magazines, or trade publications. These can be non-English publications. Having that much material would make it very easy to keep the article.
 * With all due respect, sir, if you are the filmmaker, you would be better served in your PR and marketing tasks by actively seeking the interest of the media, rather than creating a Wikipedia article. It will not put food on your technicians' tables, nor will it help the credibility of your project. If there are such sources that already exist about your project, then I would be happy to help... but we have made every best effort to locate such sources and found none. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 03:01, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

@Mendaliv...

Greetings to you... Yes, I understood... But its new production house producing its first film... Its under final works to finish... Then only we will start the PR work as like you said, then i had the requirements you asked... Sure will do everything possible to contribute the needs of wiki...

Thanking u — Preceding unsigned comment added by Majkr (talk • contribs) 03:39, 21 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Best of luck, sir. When the film does release and gets press, then it will probably meet the guidelines for inclusion—and once it's released the burden won't be nearly as high. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 06:20, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Notre Dame Invite
Hey! I know you are an alumnus and I hope you might be interested. If you'd like to contribute, please follow the links below. Especially, check out the To DO list, and our talk page. I also created this invite banner, so we can all invite people we believe might be interested. Thanks!

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Eccekevin (talk • contribs) 18:07, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Miniaturized satellite
 * added a link pointing to Wired


 * Poor Act 1697
 * added a link pointing to Whipping

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:16, 26 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Resolved both. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 18:22, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Edit-a-thon at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago!
Come join us on Saturday, March 5th between 12PM - 5PM for the Art+Feminism 2016 edit-a-thon at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago! We'll be focusing our efforts on women involved in the arts, and a list of articles for artists in Chicago and the U.S. Midwest has been compiled at the project page. The event is free, but only if you register at the project page ahead of time. I'll be there, and I hope to see you there too! I JethroBT (talk) 06:31, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Nisabdham
Hai... Once again my page Nisabdham tagged for speedy deletion... What else needed for authentication... If this is the way wiki works... Please go ahead and delete the page and we leave wiki Also...

Thanking you Majkr (talk) 12:12, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Like I said last time around, Majkr, you need to give evidence that some reliable sources (by Wikipedia's standards) have given significant coverage to Nisabdham. What you've created this time around doesn't do that. I saw that User:JamesBWatson was kind enough to restore the article in the draft namespace as Draft:Nisabdham, which is fine by me, and allows you a chance to work on it and try to conform to our standards without having to deal with deletion. But by going and pushing that content back out into the main namespace, the article must conform to the full standards that were applied at the time it's created. This is doubly so for an article that has been previously deleted via an AfD discussion, as happened at Articles for deletion/Nisabdham.
 * Please don't misunderstand. It is not my intent to chase you off Wikipedia. However, our policies and guidelines dictate the standards for each type of page on Wikipedia. Drafts go in the draft space (and begin with "Draft:"), and full, "ready for the public" articles may be published in the article space. I hope that explains things better. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 14:47, 17 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't think the article qualifies for speedy deletion under criterion G4, as the deletion was essentially due to lack of references, and there are now many references. However, I don't think that those references establish notability, so I have declined the speedy deletion, and taken it to a new deletion discussion at Articles for deletion/Nisabdham (2nd nomination). The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 21:10, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

@Mendaliv and @JamesBWatson Thanku both for the kind responses... But thanku so much... In India our processing about the film started with like this with references from our country sources... Maybe its not upto the standards of your policies... Thanku if possible will meet up with the standards expected from wiki... Thanku — Preceding unsigned comment added by Majkr (talk • contribs) 03:14, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

The Chardon Polka Band
User added tag to The Chardon Polka Band. Please see Talk:The Chardon Polka Band to discuss Notability. Lefton4ya (talk) 20:08, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Case in point
Regarding your WT:MfD post, this is the sort of thing I was talking about in my reply. The ossification and polarization at MfD is the result of behavioral issues, and I am concerned that any attempt at improving MfD that doesn't acknowledge that is going to be futile. VQuakr (talk) 21:28, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I get it. I figured I'd take a shot on the hope that everyone was as tired of the bickering as I am, and that we could all try reason rather than blind persistence. I don't agree that behavior is the root cause, rather than a secondary effect of passion. I'd rather not see the result of this dispute be determined by last man standing, you know? The fact of the matter is that both sides of the dispute have arguments with footings in policy (though both suffer from a lack of firm policy covering drafts and MfDs), and as a result this isn't a dispute that's just going to be ended by jurisprudential extensions of policy already in place. My hope was to get both sides working together to discuss the basic issues and agree on something reasonable, and not have the continuation of things at MfD interrupting that. Oh well. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 17:51, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree with everything you say here. You might be right that behavior isn't the true root cause. VQuakr (talk) 18:36, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't think...
...that you did anything more than express your honest assessment and opinion of the situation, and I don't assume in any way that you approve of my behavior or attitude (for all I know you may think that Wikipedia would be better off without me), but, nevertheless, I thank you for your straight-forward analysis of the situation in the "The Cloisters" imbroglio. I hope to be able to live up to your analysis. BMK (talk)


 * Not a problem. I just calls em like I sees em. :) —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 19:45, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Regarding this
Please don't patronisingly finger-wag at people who bring cases of editor misbehaviour to the administrators' noticeboards. And please don't agitate for discussion of serious misbehaviour to be shut down before it's really begun. It is perfectly appropriate to discuss content-rooted matters there when the "matters" being discussed include misrepresenting sources, plagiarism and copyright violations. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 15:27, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Interesting advice. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 17:00, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 * If I may, you note, in striking out your comment, that 'wrongdoing has since been clearly demonstrated'. Did you mean that expressing concern is OK only if the wrongdoing is clearly demonstrated? Is it in the public interest to discourage such expressions of concern or doubt or worry, for fear that clear demonstration is difficult? This is why whistleblowing legislation requires the whistleblower merely to have a 'reasonable suspicion' of wrongdoing, rather than 'clear demonstration'. Peter Damian (talk) 08:13, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd actually gone back and forth in my mind over the scope of the strikeout, though not exactly on the same terms you express here. I don't have a problem with expressing concern as such. Without making excuses for my post, I will say that there's a difference between expressing concern generally and doing it on ANI. At any rate, I'll go strike the rest of it since you make a reasonable argument. It doesn't matter so much to me. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 08:23, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

OTRS
“In light of the confidential information at OTRS, which appears intended to prove the lecturer claim”. As I pointed out elsewhere, the OTRS information is not intended to prove the lecturer claim. He has already admitted he made his employment as a lecturer up. The 'occupation' relates to his claim that he is currently employed as a biochemist. He has also submitted evidence of his BSc, but that was never in dispute. Peter Damian (talk) 07:21, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Fair point. I'll just pull that clause out. I'm at 499/500 words anyway. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 07:25, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Revoking of User Mendaliv's Administrator Privileges. Thank you. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 05:49, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Removal of Comments
Hi I was talking about removal of my comments. Please make your comment here.Arman ad60 (talk) 19:10, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Replied over there. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 19:19, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

OK I dont want to remove my comments. But can you please correct my English a bit? These are the articles I have commented on: Achaemenid empire, Sasanian Empire, Parthian empire.Arman ad60 (talk) 14:53, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't see any serious grammar errors in what you wrote. You really should not be making serious edits to comments you've made after other editors have replied. See WP:REDACT. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 14:56, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikicology arbitration case opened
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Wikicology. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Wikicology/Evidence. Please add your evidence by April 22, 2016, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Wikicology/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:57, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * The message was sent using the case's MassMessage list. Unless you are a party, you may remove your name from the list to stop receiving notifications regarding the case.

Weber
There are hundreds of articles referencing Weber being one of only the two non reporters seeing the files prior to publication of the panama papers. Google for yourself. In addition, as a professor, it is a very big deal to be quoted in research or investigative journalism, and his own school wrote an entire item on it published yesterday. You can see it here: http://www.rhsmith.umd.edu/news/panama-papers-reveal-global-network-secret-accounts

In addition, you can take a look at his bio page, which is now referencing the very "peripheral" items that you think are not a big deal. They are. http://www.rhsmith.umd.edu/programs/executive-education/who-does-it/meet-our-facilitators/david-weber JackinMD (talk) 16:19, 8 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Read WP:UNDUE. Of course Weber's own employer is going to excitedly brag that he got quoted. It's not Wikipedia material. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 16:21, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Jimmy John's
Not sure why you deleted my entry about the boycott against Jimmy John's. It was/is a boycott against the company itself, not the owner of the company. Your contention that the entry should be deleted because it deals with the owner instead of the company is inaccurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taquim (talk • contribs) 06:33, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
 * This discussion belongs on Talk:Jimmy John's. Per WP:BRD, the material should stay out until there is a consensus to insert it. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 06:38, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Prada gender discrimination case
Saw your note, will do.--WatchingContent (talk) 22:53, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll keep my eye open. I'm honestly not sure if a delete or a redirect to Rina Bovrisse is the right outcome. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 00:01, 21 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks again. The problem is that these entries and attacks on the other entries were all a part of the same efforts (the IPs and handles used show that), plus these were all developed after the case was lost. My serious contention, that I think all editors that care about Wikipedia should consider, is if Rina Bovrisse won the case and the companies and persons who were on the losing end of the trial created similar entries with their version of how things went, it would have been shut down immediately. If we allow this practice of abusing Wikipedia to develop multiple entries attacking others, we allow for the individuals to be the victims of such attacks by companies in the future. This is WP:BLP1E and these people should be encouraged take this practice elsewhere WP:ALTOUT. In my humble opinion.--WatchingContent (talk) 21:29, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Regarding Clash Royale
I noticed you wrote here Wikipedia isn't a game guide, but some articles have actual gaming guides on them, and the admins don't do anything to them. Iamthemostwanted2015 (talk) 22:32, 23 April 2016 (UTC)Iamthemostwanted2015
 * They shouldn't have gaming guides. Like the page I linked you says, Wikipedia isn't for such intricately detailed content. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 23:22, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Wow!!!
Hi Wow!!! The expansive, diligent and concise comments you’ve written regarding the Robert Buntine article have blown me away and (I believe) should serve as an example for every Afd! Thanks. Picomtn (talk) 12:13, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you! It's always nice to get good feedback on AfD remarks. :) —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 12:49, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi You are MORE than welcome, and as a stark contrast to your fantastic Afd discussion I've referenced here with you, please note the Krista Franklin one that is the most complex and contentious (and in my opinion borderline racist) ones I've been involved with during my very short time span here. Thanks. Picomtn (talk) 13:27, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

What does this mean?
Hello Mendaliv, I came across this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Module:Category_handler/blacklist

Please, what does it mean? I can't wrap my head around it. Thanks in advance Claudia 20201 (talk) 18:25, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * See Help:Module for information on what module pages do. To my understanding it's a Lua script. I don't know what it does, but usually these scripts take care of things in the background to make certain convenience tools work better. Some templates use Lua modules to make them more efficient, more robust, or to make the template's syntax simpler. I would say unless there's a reason you need to understand what that specific page does, you can safely ignore it. :) —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 23:31, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for helping out. I think I'll just ignore it :)  Claudia 20201  ( Talk  )  23:32, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Ross Medical Education Center's Promotional Content
Hi @Mendaliv. Can you provide me with some more specific feedback on what exactly wrong with the Ross Medical Education Center page that is getting flagged for promotional content? I am trying to provide generic information about our company and am not sure what is "promotional" language... Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JeffPemberton (talk • contribs) 03:36, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Clash Royale Arenas
Hey @Mendaliv! I would be happy to reference the arenas section, but I don't fully understand how that is a how-to guide? Thanks for the link to the video game guidelines, but arenas are a significant part of the game, so I think that they should be included. I've rolled back the changes and referenced the information. Feel free to talk with me about it.

LionWaffles (talk) 01:16, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Robert McClenon (talk) 22:41, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

TWA Flight 800 questions
Hi,

You may have missed my reply or not had the time to respond yet, so I'm copying it below for your consideration. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Would like to hear your thoughts before I enter my significant corrections for consideration on the TWA Flight 800 Talk page.

--- Hi Mendaliv, thanks for looking back at my past effort. Was "getting the truth out" my language? If so, I can see how it could be misread. My goal then, as it is now, was to make that page accurate and maintain a NPOV. I'll take your advice by expressing my concerns on the Talk page, and I definitely will not insert any "fringe" material. I hope you may be willing to monitor my efforts on that page to help ensure no such material is inserted, and if possible, it would be helpful if you could provide any example of fringe material that you believe I have pointed out, so that I can specifically avoid that/those areas. ---

Thank you,

Stalcup (talk) 18:12, 18 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi again,


 * Just writing to let you know that my proposed changes to the TWA Flight 800 article have been submitted that article's talk page, if you are interested.


 * Tom
 * Stalcup (talk) 07:55, 23 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads up. I'll try to take a look, but I can't promise anything since it's a busy time and the proposed changes are, at first glance, rather lengthy. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 17:00, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Desk: revert
I removed the post because it was by an IP of an evading banned editor (Vote X). I don't value any posts or edit by such editors. PS - I'll leave it with you, to decide. GoodDay (talk) 14:14, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation. Just a note in the edit summary that it was a banned user would've been helpful. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 18:17, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

James John Liautaud
Would like to request talk on discussions for James John Liautaud claims of advert and notability. Colinrgodsey (talk) 23:58, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Interesting posts on the RefDesk about telegrams, thank you! This kitten will protect your talkpage.

The Quixotic Potato (talk) 18:22, 5 June 2016 (UTC) 

TWL HighBeam check-in
Hello Wikipedia Library Users,

You are receiving this message because the Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to HighBeam. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:


 * Make sure that you can still log in to your HighBeam account; if you are having trouble feel free to contact me for more information. When your access expires you can reapply at WP:HighBeam.
 * Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed. For more information about citing this source, see HighBeam/Citations
 * Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let us know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thank you. 20:36, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Days Inn.svg
 Thanks for uploading File:Days Inn.svg. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:33, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Advowson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Conveyance. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:11, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Israel Military Industries.svg
 Thanks for uploading File:Israel Military Industries.svg. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:35, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Aw, thanks Kudpung. It's always good to get appreciated. Though I will note that you're way past me in terms of raw number of contribs to EAR. (That said we're both past SineBot, and with a page like EAR that means something!) Sad to see it in decline, but maybe it can be "reoriented" to serve a similar task at some point (I've always kind of seen it working best as an ad hoc place to resolve content disputes, kind of like the opposite of ANI). —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 20:51, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

FYI
Discussion may be of interest to you: Articles for deletion/Sports Lawyers Journal. Montanabw (talk) 21:17, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Contra poster.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Contra poster.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:33, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Heckler and Koch logo.svg
 Thanks for uploading File:Heckler and Koch logo.svg. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:37, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:LBNL logo.svg
 Thanks for uploading File:LBNL logo.svg. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:40, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:33, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

File source problem with File:UIUC seal.svg
Thank you for uploading File:UIUC seal.svg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [ list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Corkythe hornetfan  (ping me) 21:22, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Chicago Meetup at Sulzer Regional Library!
Hey there! I'm hosting a meetup at the at the Sulzer Regional Library on Saturday March 25th from 12 PM to 4:30 PM. You're welcome to come and work together with other editors on articles or other contributions, get to know other editors around Chicago, and ask any questions you might about using or contributing to Wikipedia. Food will be available, and we'll likely go out for dinner afterwards as a group. If you're interested in joining us, please RSVP at the event page here! Thanks, I JethroBT drop me a line 20:23, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was sent by through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:23, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Of interest to you
I believe you were involved with this discussion in the pas:. Montanabw (talk) 21:49, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:McCormick Place Chicago logo.svg
 Thanks for uploading File:McCormick Place Chicago logo.svg. 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) 17:34, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:PR Newswire logo.svg
 Thanks for uploading File:PR Newswire logo.svg. 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) 17:50, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia and Politics
Dear Mendaliv,

We are a team of social scientists conducting research on collaboration among Wikipedians and would love your input. We have prepared a very short survey (it takes just a few seconds to a few minutes) that asks about your political preferences and if you had any experiences collaborating with editors with similar or different preferences. Please fill it out here:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSftvvCdGGY07VL1R1O4JhwnOTHl8CyiFnn17gC6EeWgJj-2Bg/viewform?usp=pp_url&entry.587409359=Mendaliv

You can find out more about our research project here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_%2B_Politics

Thank you for your time and help!

Bill10000 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:30, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Plummer v. State RfC
Sir, since you seem to support the recommendation in the threaded discussion section of the RfC, could I ask that you indicate that support in the survey section that immediately precedes it? If I'm incorrect and you oppose it, please indicate that also. I just want to make sure that we capture all of the viewpoints on the issue. Thanks, GregJackP   Boomer!   00:24, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Dominion logo.svg
 Thanks for uploading File:Dominion logo.svg. 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) 17:24, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

AN/I
As you participated in Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive957, you may be interested in Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 03:15, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Luigi Franchi logo.svg
 Thanks for uploading File:Luigi Franchi logo.svg. 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) 18:20, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Re: RFA
Dear Mendaliv,

I hope you're enjoying 4th of July (it looks like it will rain where I am, sadly). As suggested to me by, I wanted to reach out to you as a community member who believed I was not yet ready last year for adminship.

I clerk for SPI, and the tools would greatly assist my work there - being able to block socks, view deleted pages, and merge casepages would cut down on bureaucracy, considering I currently have to flag cases for admin attention (where they often remain for days). after further prodding from colleagues, I am preparing for another run.

Since last year, I've gotten involved in AFD nominations and discussions, and have maintained a CSD log detailing my work. Among my content work, I have written 1995 CIA disinformation controversy and gotten it to GA, gotten Operation Infinite Reach to GA and then FA, and heavily expanded Carré d'As IV incident to GA status (plus DYKs for all three). I've also conducted copyediting for the WP:GOCE. My SPI work includes nearly 200 cases filed for registered users alone; examples of cases I've clerked/filed are: Sockpuppet investigations/Ashishchopra778, Sockpuppet investigations/OfficialPankajPatidar, and Sockpuppet investigations/Motivação. Some more details on my preparations may be found on my talkpage.

I appreciate your feedback and thoughts.

All the best,

GABgab 21:26, 4 July 2017 (UTC)


 * The fact that you're reaching out like this goes a long way in my book. I'll be happy to take a closer look. I'll say preliminarily that your SPI work would be a major factor for me, especially given you seem to be focusing on the clear logic of needing the tools to do SPI. Also, I took a quick look at your new CSD log and was pleased to see heavy lifting, high accuracy, improvement over the course of the log, and a willingness to try working in CSD areas you might not normally. That CSD log would carry a lot of weight with me, though if I were to be nitpicky I'd suggest looking at what I've done with my CSD log, which I mostly did when I was contemplating RfA myself a couple years ago—where the speedy was declined, or the link is blue, I put a notation as to why, and where applicable a link to a subsequent AfD. It'd be a boatload of work for your log, but I think it could help assuage certain worries with your log. For instance, that a number of early CSD tags were removed by the page creator and not subsequently re-added. I'm not criticizing on that ground, just saying that it might annoy some voters; in that instance on my CSD log I'd probably add a notation that, though the CSD tag was removed, subsequent development pushed the article past A7 (or whatever) in my view, and as such re-tagging wasn't warranted. So, I'll say that preliminarily, I don't see any reason that I'd oppose. But I'll definitely take a closer look when I have more time and let you know. Again, good call on reaching out. In law, the phrase grasp the nettle gets used to refer to this kind of problem solving, where you boldly and directly seek to address the problems in your case. Sadly, I can't remember what judge or justice popularized the phrase, but I think it applies quite well to what you're doing here. Well done! —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 19:05, 5 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your prompt response, kind words, and advice. It's much appreciated. GABgab 00:42, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Navy pier current logo.svg
 Thanks for uploading File:Navy pier current logo.svg. 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) 17:14, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind
I just re-ordered the replies on the ANI so I'm not responding to statements in a disordered fashion, I moved yours into a block. Boundarylayer (talk) 03:40, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't really mind, just that where you moved my original response kind of messed up the flow of how the thread originally evolved; my first response was a response to Deacon Vorbis, not to you, and came before you wrote anything. So I moved that first response back where it belongs. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 03:48, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Of admins and rules
The fact that you do not know a rule does not mean that it does not exist. It is wrong to act upon that assumption when performing an admin’s task. Yecril (talk) 09:10, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Mister wiki case has been accepted
You were recently listed as a party to or recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 15, 2017, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Kostas20142 (talk) 21:34, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Fred Gottheil concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Fred Gottheil, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Lucasfilm Ltd. logo.svg
Thanks for uploading File:Lucasfilm Ltd. logo.svg. 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) 18:16, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

AFD
User:CESchreyer absolutely butchered your AFD by inserting their comments randomly throughout it. I've done the best I can do undo the damage but you might want to take a look at your initial statement to make sure nothing got lost. Sorry about this. --Tarage (talk) 05:56, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Ffs, thanks for the catch Tarage. Looks like you fixed it. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 06:44, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Seasons' Greetings
...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 16:16, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

ANI notice: improper COI tagging
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Improper_COI_tagging. The discussion is about the topic Language Creation Society. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saizai (talk • contribs) 18:26, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I've responded at ANI. It's Christmas Eve. I don't have time for this. Your organization shouldn't be editing the article, and the people at the ongoing AfD seem to agree that there are problems. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 18:36, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

LCS
Hello Mendaliv, thank you for reviewing those three sources, I appreciate that a lot. I was writing a reply to you in the AfD discussion, but then got into an edit conflict with the closing admin. Still, because you at least deserve a decent answer for your efforts (and also not to let my own efforts go to waste), I'll put it here, with your permission.

I have to agree with you about one thing: the coverage in those three sources is indeed not very much in-depth. They do provide quite some info, but what they lack is an analysis of the subject. Even so, I've carefully read the policy links you provided, and still do not entirely agree with your interpretation. First of all, unless there is a difference between "non-trivial" and "significant", coverage in these sources can definitely not be called trivial. The publishers (a university and two scientific periodicals) are undeniably reliable, and the authors are independent from the subject: Věra Barandovská-Frank is an internationally acclaimed scholar in the field of interlinguistics (unconnected to the LCS), and although I don't know anything about Mrs. Shuvalova, she seems to have rather respectable credentials as a scientist as well. I'd say that these examples of non-trivial coverage, in combination with some of the newspaper articles etc., should be just enough to tipple the balance when it comes to WP:SIGCOV, although admittedly it would still be a borderline case.

The problem with our debate is that the issue of notability got completely mixed up with the (rather deplorable) state of the article itself. Therefore, the outcome is not surprising, although at this point I think merge-and-redirect would have been a better solution than keeping or deleting. I genuinely believe a better article would have been possible, and I have even considered drafting an alternative version myself. Because you see, even though I may not be neutral myself, I'm still able to write a fairly decent, neutral article. But don't worry, I won't even try! I rarely write articles here anyway, since my English is not good enough for that. And please note, my participation in the discussion (or in any other deletion discussion I've ever participated in) was not because of personal involvement, but merely out of a feeling of responsibility for the conlang section as a whole, which is what I've been doing here for over 13 years now. Hope I'm not sounding too apologetic now!

At last, let me apologise for being too harsh in my judgment of your actions. I know I've taken a few things too personally when this whole thing started, which kinda got me going (that's just my weak point: if there is one thing I can't stand, it's when people question my integrity), and I've said a few things I shouldn't have. Sorry for that! Best regards, &mdash;IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu?  21:51, 29 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your kind words. I really don't take it personally; one of the things I've had to learn in my career is how to argue passionately one day and work together the next. Nonetheless, it's always a good feeling to be able to shake hands after a dispute, and I appreciate you reaching out like this. As to your points, I think there's a lot of grey area between what's trivial and what's significant, and that's part of where discussants at AfD are allowed to reach a consensus. If it were all black-and-white, we wouldn't need much of a discussion to evaluate notability issues. As I said at the AfD, I really don't enjoy writing about organizations because the coverage is often difficult to assemble into a coherent, neutral narrative. At least for me, anyway. Anyhow, thanks again for your message! —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 22:24, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

New year's greetings
Hi Mendaliv! Just wanted to say I always find your input at AN/I helpful, if even I disagree with them sometimes. Wishing you a happy new year. Alex Shih (talk) 13:30, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Timing of One-Click Archiving of ANI threads.
Hi Mendaliv, thanks for helping to clear ANI of old closed threads. Please remember however that closed threads should not be one-clicked archived until at least 24 hours after the close. (This allows all interested editors enough time to view the close, no matter what their time zone, work schedule, sleep schedule, or login schedule is.) To accurate gauge whether at least 24 hours has passed since the close, Google utc time, and subtract one day from that (remembering to add 12:00 for PM times), and don't archive any threads closed after that time. Thanks very much, Softlavender (talk) 13:56, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Fred Gottheil


Hello, Mendaliv. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Fred Gottheil".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 20:01, 16 January 2018 (UTC)