User talk:Steel1943/Archive 14

Image markups
Dear Steel1943,

You marked 2 of my images as licencing errors - see my talk page. I have modified the licences now so they accurately reflect the source.

Is it possible you can check them and confirm they are fine now?

Thank you for the help

thepoliticsexpert 15:36, 5 January 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thepoliticsexpert (talk • contribs)
 * I've commented in the file discussion which you refer. Thanks for the heads-up, but please refer all further comments to that discussion, and feel free to use to get my attention when you comment there as I am not watching that page.  Steel1943  (talk) 16:23, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

The Pillar listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The Pillar. Since you had some involvement with the The Pillar redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 02:28, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

RFD
I've started an RFD for Walleo and related redirects. Since you requested me to start it, you might want to take part in it as well. ToThAc (talk) 20:21, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. (I was actually referring to the ones added to the other discussion. Either way, I could have sworn I responded to your ping by creating a new discussion, but I guess I must have imagined it.) Steel1943  (talk) 21:09, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

File:Graph of Meetup.com web traffic as of November 30, 2017.png
Why was this deleted?

How does one use a graph template without data to graph? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BitterSweetHorror (talk • contribs) 13:57, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * See Files for discussion/2018 January 4. You were notified of the discussion when it was initiated. Steel1943  (talk) 00:48, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * And I entered a rationale for why the image should be allowed. Apparently that was ignored.  It certainly did not give a reason why the dispute statement was totally ignored.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by BitterSweetHorror (talk • contribs) 03:40, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * You should ask the deleting administrator next as the file was the subject of a deletion discussion. Either way, to me, it clearly failed non-free content criterion #1 since free images/graphs can be created to illustrate data. Steel1943  (talk) 13:21, 31 January 2018 (UTC)


 * You'll have to walk me through how to create a graph with no underlying data. And I saw NO discussion about my rebuttal on that so-called "discussion" page.  Seriously, HOW do you make a graph without access to the underlying data????¿???????  — Preceding unsigned comment added by BitterSweetHorror (talk • contribs) 18:51, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter
Hello Steel1943, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!

Backlog update: New Year Backlog Drive results:
 * The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
 * We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!
 * We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update: If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
 * ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
 * Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.

Prime Minister's Cup
Hello, why was my request concerning the Prime Minister's Cup deleted? Akocsg (talk) 02:12, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Please see Talk:Chancellor Cup. Steel1943  (talk) 03:04, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Talk:Mother (series)
Can you please fix Talk:Mother (series) - it didn't follow the main page move, and should be at Talk:Mother (video game series). --Netoholic @ 22:05, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Looks as though that issue was resolved by at about 22:35, 14 February 2018 (UTC) .  Steel1943  (talk) 23:19, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks!
I mistakenly thought user-to-template-space #Rs were more miscellany than #R... ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 18:38, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You may have been thinking of the similar exception that stub templates and userbox templates are subject to (nominated at MfD instead of TfD) since as far as I know, that's the only such XfD forum exception. But, either way, no problem and glad to help. Steel1943  (talk) 18:44, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

My redirect
Please undo your change, which makes the redirect problematic again. I don't want that. I will use it for an essay, but I can't undo your change using my phone. Please undo it. -- BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 23:55, 22 March 2018 (UTC) BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 23:55, 22 March 2018 (UTC)


 * I figured out a temporary fix. Will smooth things out later. -- BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 00:51, 23 March 2018 (UTC) BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 00:51, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Accidental death listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Accidental death. Since you had some involvement with the Accidental death redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:20, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Your revert
Hi there Steel, I was wondering how my edit was a "broken relist"? I just double checked the link and it worked just fine? I was not intending to relist the discussion I commented on if that was the confusion. (I was providing an updated link for convenience to another discussion that has since moved that was in the rationale) -- The SandDoctor Talk 19:00, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Please see the edit that followed the edit of mine which you refer; I reverted myself. Steel1943  (talk) 19:01, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ Sorry about that. Just saw the revert notification and got confused so posted here without looking at the next edit/history. -- The SandDoctor Talk 19:03, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I have clarified the statement to prevent possible future confusion. -- The SandDoctor Talk 19:04, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, it probably would have been more efficient to have not posted that statement at all. The reader can follow the links of the relisted discussion to eventually arrive to the discussion they are meant to view. I mean, I don't see this happening, but what if the linked discussion was relisted again? Steel1943  (talk) 19:06, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Template:WPDISAMBIG / Template:WPDA
I apologize, I'm not sure how that happened, but I believe it was due to the automated process of the RfD listing. -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 19:10, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
 * If your intention was to nominate Template:WPDA, you did nothing wrong. I undid your edit so that you could see what I'm talking about; the edit histories of the two pages were transposed due to this edit, so I fixed them in this edit. However, as a result of the second edit (my move), the RfD tag was moved to the wrong title, so I had to make a series of edits to resolve that issue ... an issue that I created, but had no other way to fix. In effect, I also notified the true creator of Template:WPDA via Twinkle of the discussion (See this edit.) On a related note, I wanted to send you an email the other day for a related matter I think you maybe have recently noticed, but since you have your email disabled, I was unable to do so. Steel1943  (talk) 19:17, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Upcoming changes to wikitext parsing
Hello,

There will be some changes to the way wikitext is parsed during the next few weeks. It will affect all namespaces. You can see a list of pages that may display incorrectly at Special:LintErrors. Since most of the easy problems have already been solved at the English Wikipedia, I am specifically contacting tech-savvy editors such as yourself with this one-time message, in the hope that you will be able to investigate the remaining high-priority pages during the next month.

There are approximately 10,000 articles (and many more non-article pages) with high-priority errors. The most important ones are the articles with misnested tags and table problems. Some of these involve templates, such as infoboxes, or the way the template is used in the article. In some cases, the "error" is a minor, unimportant difference in the visual appearance. In other cases, the results are undesirable. You can see a before-and-after comparison of any article by adding ?action=parsermigration-edit to the end of a link, like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Foss?action=parsermigration-edit (which shows a difference in how infobox ship is parsed).

If you are interested in helping with this project, please see Linter. There are also some basic instructions (and links to even more information) at https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-ambassadors/2018-April/001836.html You can also leave a note at WT:Linter if you have questions.

Thank you for all the good things you do for the English Wikipedia. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 21:18, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

RFD
Hi Steel1943, My apologies I appeared to have closed the wrong one ?, I'm not really sure but I'd be more than happy to revert and relist if you want ?, Thanks, – Davey 2010 Talk 00:24, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I'd say just change your close to "keep", and you should be good. If not, feel free to relist. Steel1943  (talk) 01:03, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Okie dokie will do, Thanks, – Davey 2010 Talk 01:22, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Record label artist redirects
Hi Steel1943, I see you quite a bit at RfD when I check that board out, so I thought you might like to know there are quite a few European dance music labels like Armada Music with a significant amount of redirects (mostly of non-notable artists) pointing to them that aren't even mentioned at the target article. I thought you might like to list this, as I don't have much experience in listing entries at RfD, but I noticed this. Not sure if you want to do anything with it.  Ss  112   10:57, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how I didn't notice your comment until now. But, either way, I'll give it a check when I get some time. Steel1943  (talk) 00:12, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello Steel1943!
The debate has been closed by the nominator, but it is still listed over at Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2018_May_16. Do you know how to fix that? Thanks in advance, Edward Mordake (talk) 15:56, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The nominator, Septrillion, did not specifically specify if they withdrew their WP:RFD discussion or not. They would be the proper editor to ask. Otherwise, the template I restored on that page should remain for 7 days per Redirects for discussion/Administrator instructions. Steel1943  (talk) 16:01, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you. The nominator is on Wikibreak so its probably best to ignore the template for 7 days. Edward Mordake (talk) 16:02, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Dominic Barton
Hi Steel. I have a COI with Dominic Barton's employer. John Broughton was reviewing a draft I provided that would make the page much more filled-out, better-sourced, and more neutral (e.g. no awards and philanthropy section). It looks like he got through the Early Life section and the first paragraph of the Career section, but then moved on to other projects. It's been a couple months and I was looking for someone who might be interested in picking up where he left off. I saw that you had some interest in BLPs and was hoping I might be able to draw your attention to this page and collaborate on improving it. CorporateM (Talk) 12:44, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Cooking/
Given the outcome of Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 May 25, what do you think about these? — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 21:01, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I'd say nominate them all. Steel1943  (talk) 00:13, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Beetlejuice (1990 video game)


The article Beetlejuice (1990 video game) has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Unlike the other two Beetlejuice games, this one received very little coverage. I was unable to find anything besides the stuff listed on [MobyGames http://www.mobygames.com/game/dos/adventures-of-beetlejuice-skeletons-in-the-closet/mobyrank], which leaves a lot to be desired."

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.  Anarchyte ( work  &#124;  talk )  13:06, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Beetlejuice (1990 video game) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Beetlejuice (1990 video game) 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/Beetlejuice (1990 video game) 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.  Anarchyte ( work  &#124;  talk )  04:29, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Discussion about The Sun
There is a discussion about retargeting The Sun from Sun to a disambiguation page. Because you have participated in the previous discussion, I am inviting you to participate in the current discussion here - Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2018_July_25. The editor  whose username is Z0 07:04, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
Miss you --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:12, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations
-- Dolotta (talk) 04:13, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

RM/TR
Hi, i took your advice and relisted the Requested Move on Blue Wave (after reverting my close) and I removed the Technical Request. Maybe getting a few more voters in their can help make the decision a little more clearer. Thank you for helping me see a better path for the RM. JC7V (talk) 02:27, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
 * No problem! Yeah, it can’t hurt to see if more support arrives for the move first, especially since there are arguments on both sides about page view stastics and their specifics. Steel1943  (talk) 02:34, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Upcoming film redirects
Hi Steel1943. You don't need to notify me about any of these that end up at RfD. If I move any other film articles like this, I remember to untick the box to keep the redirect to save everyone a bit of time! Thanks.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 18:00, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I thought I saw your name a couple of time when I was tagging those redirects, but I didn’t check all of the edit histories before I tagged them to see who created them. It's Twinkle in action; I usually remove the selection from Twinkle to notify the creator's talk page if I see that I have notified them already, but these redirects had several different creators. I wish we could find a way to WP:G6 these. Steel1943  (talk) 18:31, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Cardi B at the VMAs 2018.jpg
Several pictures from the MTV International YouTube account are being used in Wikipedia articles. The other free alternative is a bad 2016 screenshot. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 22:59, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Just because they "are being being used in Wikipedia articles" doesn’t mean it’s right. That just means that a problem has grown large enough to where it looks normal, but it’s neither normal or accepted. MTV International is a commercial entity, and there is no proof that they have released any part of their videos or images with any free license. Due to that, fair use has to be assumed, and any image being utilized via fair use has to meet all 10 fair use criterion. The image you uploaded blatantly fails the first criterion since the subject is alive and a free equivalent already exists. (But, the subject being alive would have alone made the picture fail the first criterion.) Steel1943  (talk) 23:11, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Either way, I went ahead and reverted my edit since I’m almost 100% sure another editor will post an new (or the old) image in the event that the one on the article gets deleted, given the subject’s fame and social following. Steel1943  (talk) 23:20, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
 * ...And I just withdrew my deletion nomination of the file on Commons. YouTube is a tricky devil, it seems. Steel1943  (talk) 23:25, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
 * For my reference: Cardi B. Steel1943  (talk) 18:34, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Requested moves/Technical requests
Thanks for taking care of that (you know) swap. I was unaware of WP:RMTR; added to my list of things to remember along with notes on your actual procedure :)  08:01, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Lower East Side Tenement Museum
Hi. I noticed you moved Lower East Side Tenement Museum/version 2 to Lower East Side Tenement Museum, New York without leaving a redirect. This inadvertently broke links on the attribution tags at both Talk:Lower East Side Tenement Museum and Talk:Lower East Side Tenement Museum, New York, ironically making the history more difficult to find for GFDL purposes, the only reason we keep it. I believe "version 2" articles are generally leftovers from histmerges kept for attribution. I can't think of a reason to move them, but if you want to, it's probably best to leave the redirects, at least some of which are linked from talk pages or edit summaries. Station1 (talk) 06:04, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
 * One of those "version #" redirects had incoming links on a talk page??? That’s the first time I recall ever running across that. But anyways, since they are invalid search terms, the helpfulness of "version #" redirects have been discussed multiple times to a point to where they are essentially WP:G6 deletions if they do not have any edit history; moving the edit history away from the title resolved this. For reference, see Citizen Game/version 2, Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 May 18, Eloise Taylor/version 2, Planking (fad)/version 2, Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 February 10. There’s also a discussion on a Wikipedia talk page somewhere that I participated in about two or three years ago regarding this, but the discussion there was that it was okay to remove these "version #" redirects if they had no edit history. But regarding the edit summaries, where edit history moved can be hunted down by following the links of the deletion and move summaries on the moved/deleted pages; incoming links those, yes, are a different story so I’m going to correct the ones that definitely need correcting (such as the ones you mentioned) and keep an eye out in the future for sure. Steel1943  (talk) 12:39, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Citizen Game/version 2 is linked from a user talk page. Planking (fad)/version 2 is also linked from 2 talk pages. Eloise Taylor/version 2 is linked only from a bot log, so not sure how important that is, but I see no easy way track down where that one went from the move log. Station1 (talk) 03:06, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Seems like it, but those are examples that did not involve me. Either way, for attribution purposes, especially via Copied from, the example you brought up seems to be the only example of the bunch were it was imperative that the link was updated after the page move. But, even if it wasn’t, the move/deletion log could lead readers to where they are trying to go to find the edit history. Steel1943  (talk) 03:14, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I do see that now, but was only looking at the examples you mentioned and noticed they're all linked from User:Steel1943/VersionPageList/1. I wonder if these need to be discussed somewhere. I'm no expert on histmerges and attribution requirements, but these seem to be created solely for 'parking' the merged histories under obscure titles for legal reasons. Station1 (talk) 03:25, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, the purpose behind that page has been discovered! But in all seriousness, I discussed this somewhere in the "Wikipedia talk:" namespace about 2–3 years ago, but I don’t recall where it happened at the moment. If I recall, the moving away from "version #" pages was okay in the event of them containing no edit history. I’ll look for it; if/when I find it, I’ll ping you. I’ve been working on merges and attributed edit histories for a while, and from my understanding, if no merge is possible, as long as the edit history is somewhere, it meets attribution needs/requirements. (But, if course, it’s nice if it’s easy to locate as well in the event it needs to be found at any point.) However, since I also understand the usefulness of redirects as well, this task regarding "fixing" these redirects came to mind as sort of a backlog that needs cleaning. Steel1943  (talk) 05:05, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Just found the aforementioned discussion: Wikipedia talk:Administrators' guide/Fixing cut-and-paste moves. (Thought it was going to take me longer to find.) Steel1943  (talk) 05:10, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link. Station1 (talk) 07:36, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!


BOZ (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to their talk page with a friendly message.

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings". :) BOZ (talk) 15:45, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

TGV
Apologies for the rollback, have undone my error. Page jumped as I was clicking on a diff. Mjroots (talk) 06:10, 27 December 2018 (UTC)