User talk:Ww2censor/Archive34

Talk page • Archive 1 • Archive 2 • Archive 3 • Archive 4 • Archive 5 • Archive 6 • Archive 7 • Archive 8 • Archive 9 • Archive 10 • Archive 11 • Archive 12 • Archive 13 • Archive 14 • Archive 15 • Archive 16 • Archive 17 • Archive 18 • Archive 19 • Archive 20 • Archive 21 • Archive 22 • Archive 23 • Archive 24 • Archive 25 • Archive 26 • Archive 27 • Archive 28 • Archive 29 • Archive 30 • Archive 31 • Archive 32 • Archive 33 • Archive 34 • Archive 35

post office article into Philately wikiproject?
I noticed your edit putting a random post office into WikiProject Philately. Was that an error? I reversed it. It can't make sense unless there is some special reason, not yet explained There are thousands of post office articles. There's no indication in the article that the place has any significance in the subject area of philately.

This reminds me vaguely of some unpleasantness about an editor trying to thousands of post offices into a stamps/philately navigation template....were you involved? Please do reply, and i'd appreciate if you could ping me. --Doncram (talk) 03:26, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Whew, at that TFD discussion, I see u were involved but u were reasonable IMHO, you weren't that other guy. What's up now tho? --Doncram (talk) 03:32, 25 May 2019 (UTC)


 * In response to your post, I'm travelling and very unavailable until next month. My edits are not random assessments; they are made when I discover new unassessed articles, so on that sense they are random. I really consider this an exceptionally rude edit summary] reverting a project assessment. The philately project covers all aspects of the post office, their functions and services worldwide, so when you can prove that these post office articles have nothing to do with the postal services, I'll be happy for you to remove them all. Until then I will continue to add the philately project banner to all such APPROPRIATE articles. If, as you seem to infer, the US post offices are not appropriate to the philately project than all the entries in this template Template:United States Postal Service are also not proper. Do you intend to remove the project assessment from those too? And what about all the other non-US post office? This is an entirely proper project for any post office articles to be included in.
 * I do also remember the template topic you mentioned and 2 years ago because I completely refined Template:Postage stamps of the United States at the time. ww2censor (talk) 23:37, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I am sorry, that was a rude edit summary, when I mistakenly thot that u were the other editor. And I do recall your participation then as very constructive in face of unfortunate adversity. Please don't take offense.  I did try to erase it as far as i could by making a null edit following.  And I am sorry to be concerning you while you are traveling.
 * But, there are thousands of post offices with articles, because many are listed historic sites for their architecture or there are historic New Deal murals located at them, and the like. Many, perhaps most, on my Watchlist.  And philately does not have much to do with most of them.  Perhaps there are some where the release of a new stamp or postmark was a notable event covered in reliable sources.  I thot your edit looked like a mistake.  I don't in advance imagine that Philately Wikiproject editors want to be involved in improving the post office articles to cover their architecture, etc., but I would not object if they really did want do. Do you want to discuss expanding the Wikiproject greatly this way, at the Wikiproject? --Doncram (talk) 04:40, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Ping
Can you please reply to Portal_talk:Philately? Thanks! -- Wesha (talk) 13:38, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Wrong page for that discussion. I've moved it to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Philately. ww2censor (talk) 18:33, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

File Copyright problem: Kline–Fogleman airfoil
uploading File:KFm-Family-descriptions3.jpg

Dear Ww2censor i have been through this many times already and the file has been approved by the Wikipedia group many years ago. I have permission from the inventor of the foil who is also the creator of the file KFm-Family-descriptions3.jpg

I have WRITTEN permission from Dick Kline and WRITTEN approval from Wikipedia. I am disappointed we need to consistently need to revisit this issue which is considered resolved by wikipedia. Please research your inbox and mail to find history of correspondence between Dick Kline, Wikipedia and myself which resolves this issue. I expect this matter to be put to rest once again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chiefmanzzz (talk • contribs) 02:37, 3 August 2019‎
 * Seven plus years is rathe a long time to post your complaint to me when all I did was nominate the image for deletion because it has no permission. I have no involvement in its actual deletion, so cannot help you. You need to contact the deleting administrator or make a request at WP:REFUND. You state you have WRITTEN approval from Wikipedia. Where is that approval? If an OTRS permission ticket had been verified it would have been added to the image and that would have prevented it from being deleted. You had plenty of warning on your talk page and at the article talk page, where other editors gave you additional information on how to verifiably provide permission but I cannot see that was ever done. If the copyright holder sends in their own permission statement to the OTRS team and it checks out, they will restore the image and add a permission ticket to the image. I'm sorry to tell you that just stating you have permission is not sufficient. I am not an admin so cannot help you with this. ww2censor (talk) 06:41, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Georgia Guidestones-lowres.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Georgia Guidestones-lowres.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) 17:32, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

File:HMS ALISMA, BRITISH FLOWER CLASS CORVETTE. 22 APRIL 1942.jpg
You tagged this file, but it is PD. The uploader approached me on Commons, and movetocommons seems appropriate. I have forgotten how most of these templates work on Wikipedia, you may want to check it over. I don't think there is an equivalent to PD-UKGov, which is the best license to apply on Commons. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 11:38, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
 * The uploader needed advise here to which I replied giving the correct enwiki license which is the same on the commons: PD-UKGov = c:Template:PD-UKGov. I did not add it for them so they would possibly learn by doing it themselves. ww2censor (talk) 13:03, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. They seemed confused (and slightly panicked) about how images are hosted between Wikipedia and Commons, so there's probably quite a lot for them to get to grips with. Harmonizing with other IWM uploads does not seem worth thinking about until the photograph is moved over to Commons, so not much more to do, there's no need to over ice the cake for now. --Fæ (talk) 13:38, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I see you added the proper license and also found a higher resolution version too. Good stuff. Thanks. ww2censor (talk) 09:52, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Help!
Been doing some rating of the backlog recently. A lot of starts and stubs need a photo or infobox....but either the format has changed or I've forgotten it. Say .........class=start|importance=low|image??|infobox??}} Sarah777 (talk) 19:54, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * It's true, many articles do need images of accessable places and some might be in your wheelhouse. There now seem to be 2 of you trying to bring down the almost 8,000 total. I try to do a few each day but I'm now an OTRS agent so that takes up quite some time dealing with copyright issues. Why not us a rating tool like User:Kephir/gadgets/rater though it has been updated by User:Evad37/rater. I tried the newer one but reverted to Kephir but don't remember why. However, for the Ireland WikiProject just clicking on the photograph box is not good, instead put "image-needed" into the "new custom parameter" box, click "add" and then put "Yes" into the empty box to the right of the "image-needed" words. Hope that helps; Rater is much faster then doing it manually because you can add several project banners at the same time. You can of course just post something like this ".......class=start|importance=low|image-needed=yes|infobox=yes}} instead. I bet you did not see this image File:Debtor's Prison, Dublin.jpg I took in Dublin a few years ago which was rather inaccessable. An 8cm gap below a solid steel gate. ww2censor (talk) 23:25, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks WW - "image-needed=yes|infobox=yes" was what I couldn't remember. No, I didn't see the debtor's prison image but I'm concerned you'd refer it to me! You must somehow know I'm nearly broke. Great photo. Sarah777 (talk) 17:28, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
 * "infobox=yes" doesn't seem to work....see Talk:Servreagh O'Folan Sarah777 (talk) 17:54, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Fixed Talk:Servreagh O'Folan. I seldom look at the source when using the tools, but you can. What you need is "needs-infobox=y". Debtor's prison photo could better: it was a usual soft October Dublin day = no aspersions meant! ww2censor (talk) 18:32, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Many thanks. I have seen a working example and copied that. Sarah777 (talk) 18:35, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
 * It appears I was sloppy in a few of my "class" assessments! Luckily you are there to clean up after me :) Sarah777 (talk) 17:17, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
 * not really sloppy at all. Now that it's working again, I just review the daily log for those articles that have just one assessment element newly filled in but I tend to also classify all other project assessment banners to the same level if they are missing or not the same. Some buildings are also historic monuments, so I add the "Historic sites" project banner as well, such as this one you assessed Talk:Brian Boru's Fort, and sometimes adding infobox and image needed where I think it might be possible to any article, i.e., after about 1800. Good work. Thanks, have a great weekend. ww2censor (talk) 17:24, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:William Norton - Irish Trade Unionist.jpeg
Thanks for uploading File:William Norton - Irish Trade Unionist.jpeg. 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) 18:59, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Ireland
Ireland, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 08:49, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Turgon
Hello,

You recently deprodded Turgon and I sent it to AfD. I just wanted you to be aware of the AfD. I would like to hear your opinion on this subject.

Thanks, Hog Farm (talk) 05:07, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The AfD seems like WP:SNOW to me. ww2censor (talk) 00:10, 8 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Another AFD?
 * Rakestreet - I've also notified SeoR Sarah777 (talk) 23:33, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Based on Google street view, it's a t-junction with a pub, an agricultural supply of some sort and some houses. I'd prod it and if unprodded, AfD it. ww2censor (talk) 23:50, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Quality rating of other projects
Some time back you said that when we change a rating for an article we should do it for all projects as quality class should be the same regardless of project. Then I noticed you actually re-rated the quality class of other projects where I had changed the IrlProj rating but left the others as they were. To avoid repeat visits to the talk-pages I started adopting your policy in the past few months. But check out Talk:Billy Hughes (footballer, born May 1929) - I changed "stub" to "start" per our normal criteria on Irlproj (as suggested by User:BrownHairedGirl and agreed some years ago). But now someone reverted reverted Billy Hughes; not just for the football projects but for IrlProj also. I've since restored the "stub" - buy only for the IrlProj - cutting the proverbial baby in half :) Should we continue re-classing quality for all projects to the Irlproj standard? Or continue to standardise class but back-off on the rare occasions when another project disagrees? Sorry for the bother - just trying to keep the ducks in formation! Sarah777 (talk) 18:45, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * In general articles should indeed be rated the same for all projects, though some projects have some oddities that do not allow some certain ratings. I agree with the editor who reverted you. Billy Hughes is certainly not more than a stub. I normally consider only the amount of actual prose, not how much other fluff there is to decide between stub and start, but remember it is subjective and I tend not to fight if someone rates it a bit higher or lower unless I have time and really disagree. Were you down in Herbert Park to see the ducks in formation? ww2censor (talk) 18:53, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Maybe we need to bring BHG/others back into this but based on the way I've been rating articles for years, as per her suggestion, this would be a start - it has a good quality infobox, references and text. The quality of the text is good, albeit the quantity is limited. It's borderline, but I'd always give this a "start". This is a stub: Billy Millar (footballer, born 1906)
 * Herbert Park is a long way to go see ducks - we have lots in a pond behind our wall in the sunny southeast - of Dublin! Sarah777 (talk) 19:49, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The Irish quality scale is listed here WikiProject_Ireland/Assessment and is based on criteria of the general articles. If you look at the examples for Start and Stub, they are actually very generous compared to what I suggested above. Their example has three decent paragraphs, an infobox and an image, which is significantly more than Billy Hughes (footballer, born May 1929) has with only 3 sentences and an infobox. BHG and others were involved in determining the importance suggestions but BHG is always a good person to bounce ideas off.
 * Before I was sent to boarding school Herbert Park was on the way home from school. I'm racking my brain as to where there would be ducks in a pond in SE Dublin. I presume within Dublin postal districts, so maybe somewhere in Dublin 18 but close to the coast. What about Shankill? ww2censor (talk) 23:13, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * At D18 you are getting warm....move away from the coast :) Sarah777 (talk) 17:00, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Ah go on, go on, go on

 * thanks so much; it's nice to be appreciated even if occasionally. Have a great holiday season. We are off to Strasbourg to meet my son and his wife as her father lives there. ww2censor (talk) 18:39, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Procedural Question
Thank you again for your quick response yesterday. I have been on Wikipedia for two weeks and have had many admins help with advice from everything about how to place the correct copyright notices to how to format things. Each time I received a response within 24 hours most of the time much quicker. In that regard, I would like to know what is the expected wait time to receive a response from an administrator? There is only one administrator for whom I have yet to hear back from (and it isn't you as you responded super fast the other day.)

Also, am I to expect that an administrator will place a comment on the talk page either agreeing with the reasons I gave for the pictures or explaining why each reason is not valid? Thank you for your time. Boston1775 (talk) 06:30, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia has no deadlines so be a bit patient. You may get a response quickly, slowly or not at all, but remember that everyone here is a volunteer and their time is their own, so real life will likely determine when, or if, you get a response. Anyone can edit the WP:MCQ page not just administrators, of which I am not one, but have 14 years of experience to contribute. As a newbie you may need to slow down a bit, familiarise yourself with issues that may affect your editing and continue learning how things function but I can tell you that copyright is one of the most complex topic we have to address. I'll get to an MCQ page response sometime later. ww2censor (talk) 10:17, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * No worries. I can wait. By the way one of the bloggers responded to my request to use the photo. It is " File:Croix de guerre 1914-1918 with silver star from World War I.jpg" and the user wrote: (sorry it is in French naturally.)
 * Bonjour
 * Je vous autorise à utiliser la photo de la croix de guerre avec étoile d'argent.... Bien cordialement. christian LE GAC
 * I got his email from his blog. Do you know how I can update the copyright to show I permission to use the file? Boston1775 (talk) 10:32, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Because it is a previously published photo, the photographer, who may not necessarily be the blog owner must submit a completed permission statement, naming the image/s, to the OTRS team. You will have to verify that with them as they may have obtained the photo from elsewhere without any permission from the original photographer. Please refer them to WP:CONSENT but they must send their email directly as forwarded permissions are not allowed. ww2censor (talk) 11:14, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * That's fine but I am going to need a French version as the blogger is in France. Very few people in France speak English except some in major cities like Paris. And even if they do speak English they often refuse to do so. My dad is French and I've been to France so I know of what I am speaking :-) Boston1775 (talk) 11:41, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Just click on the French link to the left of the page to get to the French version. As a computer tech support person for several years, I frequently used to tell my clients to "look around the page well" as the answer you are looking for is often right there on the page you are on, or in a drop down menu. BTW, many people do speak English, even here in the French countryside, not just Paris, though they may not be very proficient. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 11:54, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I guess when he sends the form into the french email they will be able to access the American page to put up the permission?? Boston1775 (talk) 16:04, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * The WP:OTRS team can see any language file they like though they may not be conversant with the original language of the file but only know that of the permission email, they can pass it on to someone with the suitable bilingual skills. Despite the fact the Wikimedia Foundation is US based, there are no American pages. All wikipedia articles are language based and in America, the continent, the main language spoken are English, Spanish, French and Portuguese, not American. Wherever we live it is best to adopt a worldview and not a US-centric viewpoint. ww2censor (talk) 23:38, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Peer Review vs Rfd ??
Can you explain the difference? I completed the 119th Field Artillery Article and once the picture issue gets resolved with consent forms in (or after I remove the pictures) I was going to place it up for FA review. I've read all the documentation the requirements but wanted an independent opinion on the quality of the article and where if any improvements should or could be made. Not sure if requesting a peer review or an Rfd is more appropriate. Thanks. Boston1775 (talk) 20:25, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Peer Review should be done before moving on to WP:GAN and WP:FAN. I doubt you really mean Redirects for discussion. Generally I would suggest you should progress from one review to the next, especially considering you are such a new editor. With more experience you might just go directly to Featured article review. ww2censor (talk) 23:53, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I meant "Articles for comments". I've seen that heading used on the WikiProject Military history/United States military history task force page. I'm new to editing on Wikipedia but I'm experienced in editing in other regards. I'm not sure if you do reviews but you have been super helpful so far so if you have time in your day, I'd appreciate you check out 119th Field Artillery Regiment and provide comments on the talk page. I noted the questions I have on the matter there and also asked for other ideas. Boston1775 (talk) 00:01, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * You would be better to ask some editors from the WikiProject Military history/United States military history task force as it is not my area of interest and I don't have any time. Thanks for asking. ww2censor (talk) 00:04, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

The Great Britain/Ireland Destubathon
Hi. The The Great Britain/Ireland Destubathon is planned for March 2020, a contest/editathon to eliminate as many stubs as possible from all 134 counties. Amazon vouchers/book prizes are planned for most articles destubbed from England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland and Northern Ireland and whoever destubs articles from the most counties out of the 134. Sign up on page if interested in participating, we have over 44,000 stubs! ♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:18, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Talkback
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sv1xv (talk • contribs) 12:19, 18 August 2020‎

If you don't mind
I'm going to ping some aviation accident article editors to get their opinions about the President Airline crash article. Those I will ping- MilborneOne, Ahunt, Mjroots, Jetstreamer, YssYguy, Sam4fu. If you know anybody else who may want to join in, ping them. Please write back. What I said at the talk page about the discussion and restoring the info, I will abide by....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 18:03, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Sounds fine to me . I'll also see if I can find details of whether the primary source is available. ww2censor (talk) 23:05, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I pinged everyone. Today was a Sunday, so lets give a few days at least to get a response. Ahunt and Milborne I'm sure we will hear from unless real life has them tied up....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 23:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

A favour, please
Hello User:Ww2censor, may I ask you a favour? You have recently helped greatly with the article on Fritz Brase, among others by including images that were not free but published elsewhere on the web. I have just created an article on the notable Irish musicologist Frank Ll. Harrison, and the only image I have found of him is this rather blurred one here. There must have been a simple trick to upload such an image into Wikimedia Commons, but I seem to be too inexperienced with this kind of thing to do it quickly. Can you do it? I don't want to do a full infobox, just his name, dates of birth and death, the commentary "Irish musicologist", and that's it. Many thanks indeed. – Aklein62 (talk) 23:02, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
 * In order to use that photo on the commons you would need to know the author and, or if, they are dead, and if so for how long. The likelihood is they are not dead long enough, normally 70 years pma, so unless you can get those details this is a non-free image and you would have to use it under the same format that I used for the Brase photo. Just upload the image to the enwiki and choose the "Plain form for local uploads" and use the same format template I used for Brase but change the information. You can find the template here with all its usage details. Cut and paste, and fill in the appropriate details. Regarding the infobox, you can use as many or as few fields as you like but the ones you mention, which is 1 less than Brase. When someone does a project assessment they may request an infobox if it is missing. ww2censor (talk) 23:40, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Many thanks! It seems to have worked. – Aklein62 (talk) 09:49, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
 * That all looks perfect now though the article could still use some more citations, preferably at least one per paragraph. We usually learn better by doing these things ourselves, so well done. I'm going to do a little work on Brase and think his life and career would be better, more unified as separate sections instead of being intertwined. So, when I get a chance I'll do that. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 10:31, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk pages / classification
Hi User:ww2censor, thanks for the talk page and classification for my article on Harry White. Are you sure it's only start class? What else is there to add for C class?

Another of my Irish-related articles is still waiting for a talk page. I've done this about five weeks ago: Paul Alday (start class is fine here).

And I've created a number of pages about minor French composers. Don't know if this falls into your remit (if it doesn't, can you alert others?). These are Charles Delioux, Lucien Haudebert, Jean-Chrisostome Hess, and Georges Pfeiffer.

Thanks, and have a nice day! – Aklein62 (talk) 07:59, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Assessments are a subjective matter and I rate them as I find them through various report pages. I've improved your citations using the preferred templates with full publication details. I noted you have a least two references to bookjacket quotes which are essentially advertising so cannot really be considered reliable sources. The first honours paragraphs has no sources at all and some of the sources don't actually support the prose, so a C rating seemed too generous. Thanks for commenting. ww2censor (talk) 11:00, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Weasel words
Greetings, which words in Cepta Cullen are you looking at as the weasel words. I tried to ensure the content matched the citations. If you point them out to me I can adjust them or remove them? It gets hard to see problems when you've read the various citations half a dozen times and you are just trying to be sure not to plagerise them.  &#9749;  Antiqueight  chatter 10:42, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I've remove the tag and maybe I was a bit overzealous. Possibly the most successful she choreographed was Puck Fair was what caught my eye and I see you have this sourced to a submitted degree paper. Those are not considered reliable sources and for such a comment one would state who was making the statement, which is great if they are an expert on the topic, but not a student. I know you have recently been doing a lot of great Irish work, so thanks for that. ww2censor (talk) 13:29, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
 * No worries about it - I had come across the concept that it was possibly, maybe, considered etc. I can dig out a book that says it I think, possibly (!) a newspaper article. The degree paper was just the first one I grabbed. I'll redo.. It's good to remember what's good.  &#9749;  Antiqueight  chatter 13:53, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 11
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Baltinglass, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Samuel Lewis ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Baltinglass check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Baltinglass?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:23, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

USPS
What are your thoughts on working with me to get the USPS wiki up to par and getting it more organized? I am a letter carrier for the USPS so I have a lot of access to things with them. Galendalia (talk) 14:28, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for asking but I do not have sufficient interest or time in significantly improving the article. While you probably have better knowledge about the workings of USPS, you need to remember anything you add must be sourced to published reliable sources, so personal insider knowledge that is not available from sources cannot be used. For instance you added a comment about putting mail in letter boxes, but that was lacking a source. This was not good enough because, even though that sentence has a source, that existing source did not verify what you added. It required a source of its own and with a later edit you did add a published source which is how it should be. Part of that initial edit was commentary which we don not do in articles; we use a source. Also please do not add redlinks for topics that do not exist, unless you are actively going to write them. You can always add a link when such an article is created. Unless you know something we don't, the 1773 date does not seem to be verified, especially per this source. Basically any statement that might be questioned and is not common knowledge should have an inline cited source. Because the article is bout the USPS, using their own sources are not independent and should be used sparingly: instead use other third-party sources where possible. As you are a new editor, I'm just trying to give you some guidance you so don't take offense by anything I say. I suggest you work slowly and make sure you especially follow the 3 topics I linked in my welcome note on your talk page: Verifiability, Citing sources and No original research. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 22:14, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

I am working on the 1773. If you look at https://www.archives.gov/research/guide-fed-records/groups/028.html it shows it actually started in 1773 even though he wasn't appointed until 1775. I am aware that if it is not public knowledge, I cannot use it (I signed my name in blood like a thousand times to that); The redlink I will fix. I am not sure what you mean by commentary, as it is published and I will link to the actual law for it. Thanks for the info. Galendalia (talk) 22:22, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

USPS works of fiction
Hey I’m wondering why you need citations when the movie/show is shown and linked in the article with an explanation as to what the reference to the USPS was in that work? That would seem like duplicate work to me. Galendalia (talk) 10:09, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Because trivia like that should be cited even when linked to their article. Very often those articles do not even have citations for the prose used in the USPS article or even mention some of what is written. It's good practice and otherwise it is really not verifiable. ww2censor (talk) 10:15, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

editing Luciano Micallef Page
Hi. This is Angie Balzan. Quick note to say thank you for fine tuning the page I created for Luciano Micallef. Once I saw your adjustments I realised exactly where I was incorrect. Thank youAngie Balzan (talk) 09:13, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

File:Jô Fernandes.jpg
Hello. I sent another email to OTRS with the specific statement of permission as requested. --Horcoff (talk) 15:31, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
 * as I already told, the OTRS discussion takes place in the privacy of the OTRS system. There is no need to post here just because I added a ticket number to a file page. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 18:10, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Page move of Talk:Arklow_Hill
Hi WW, I've literally forgotten how to move a page! If you go to the talk page on the article Arklow Hill (always had a question mark here) you'll see it is under the wrong name. Sarah777 (talk) 21:36, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I can't move it because both titles are being used. Ballymoyle Hill is a redirect, so you will have to request a page move by an admin. You probably need to find more than just one reference to each name to support Ballymoyle as the WP:COMMONNAME. See Requested moves. ww2censor (talk) 21:58, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Didn't know it had both names - best just leave it as "Arklow Hill" is a common name for it. Sarah777 (talk) 11:22, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Neither did I b without more or better sources it's probably best to just leave it alone for now. Neither comes up in https://www.logainm.ie/ and Liam Price's The Placenames of County Wicklow, an extensive and detailed survey, just lists a Ballymoyle in Ennereilly parish but only in the 1600s but [ this site] list it in the Griffith Valuation with links to the census of 1901 and 1911 and its locations seems about right. I can't find anything else for either name. Google's satellite map does show a Ballymoyle House about 5km NNE of Arklow which appears to be at the base of where I expect Ballymoyle Hill to be and clicking on the middle of the forest at the top of the hill does show it as Ballymoyle per this map but searching for Arklow Hill shows virtually the same location in this map. ww2censor (talk) 16:22, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Help to keep Dooley Car Rentals page alive on Wikipedia
Please help to keep the article Dooley_Car_Rentals alive on Wikipedia.

This article was initially nominated for Speedy deletion but I contested and an Admin approved the page. Now It's nominated for deletion by the same user User:Praxidicae who nominated for speedy deletion at first place.

2 more Irish car rental company pages : Bunk_Campers and Irish_Car_Rentals, are on Wikipedia and it's only fair that this article treated the same way!

Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NixBee (talk • contribs) 13:20, 17 September 2020
 * WP:OTHERSTUFFEXIST is not a reason to keep non-notable articles. I've posted my views at the deletion nomination where you can make any points you want for keeping it. The other articles you mention should probably be deleted too. ww2censor (talk) 11:34, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice!

Copyright question
Hi, I seem to remember you answering a copyright question of mine somewhere, many moons ago. If the following is not to do with you, any chance you could direct me to the right people?


 * 1) I have access to the unpublished musical manuscripts of a British composer who died in 1956.
 * 2) I am not the owner of the copyright.
 * 3) I transcribed/made an edition of one his compositions for organ solo, using Sibelius score-writing software.
 * 4) Using the playback function of Sibelius, I made a digital sound file (eg .flac /.wav) of the work.
 * 5) Some time back I uploaded the sound file either to en:wp or Commons. It was removed for 'copyright reasons', which I cannot remember and didn't fully understand at the time.

Could you tell me what the status of such a sound file would be, or point me in the right direction, please? Cheers, >MinorProphet (talk) 02:54, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry but I don't recall our previous interaction. Do you remember the file name of the file in question, so I can review the deletion. This is not really my area of expertise but I'll try to help but you may be better off asking either at media copyright questions page or the Commons, Village Pump copyright page where a wider audience of editors can contribute to your question. ww2censor (talk) 11:04, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 7
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rathdangan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aughrim.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:26, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Poste Maroc logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:Poste Maroc logo.png. 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, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!
 Happy Birthday! Have a very happy birthday on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 00:54, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Ireland
In your edit here, it does make a difference. The template Irish Featured Articles had not updated at all, see history:. Funandtrvl (talk) 23:18, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Also see instructions at User:JL-Bot/Project content, it doesn't list the template namespace. Funandtrvl (talk) 23:19, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

A beer for you!
.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:24, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Pakistan Post logo 2017.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Pakistan Post logo 2017.gif. 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. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 01:39, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

WP:NOTBROKEN
It is not "beter to avoid a redirect". The IP whose edit you restored has been engaged in large-scale disruptive violation of WP:NOTBROKEN and has been warned on his talk page. DuncanHill (talk) 22:51, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Be that as it may, I agree with their revision. WP:NOTBROKEN is not the be all of guidelines that cannot occasionally be ignored. Your reversion is equally as time wasting. Do what you like. ww2censor (talk) 22:59, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I won't revert you again on that article, but I think if you were to repeat your action elsewhere I would regard it as disruptive, in that you would deliberately reinstating the edits of a disruptive user. Repeatedly changing redirects just because you don't like them is behaviour which has got people blocked before. DuncanHill (talk) 23:02, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Riordan image
Hey hun, you left me a note about the Ann Riordan image being problematic but haven't said in what way it's problematic so that I can try to fix or respond. Can you give some detail? Or do you have access to a free image?  &#9749;  Antiqueight  chatter 12:10, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I wrote a reasoning but for some reason it did not come through. Because Ann Riordan is dead less then two weeks, it seems highly premature to add a non-free image so soon. I wonder what diligence you have done in any attempt to try to find a freely licensed image? It seems that, having died, any old can now be added but that is not the generally accepted situation. This comment by User:Masem seems appropriate even though it was made concerning a George Floyd image: "It is simply too soon for a non-free to be allowed per WP:NFC policy. We expect editors to make efforts to find free images of recently deceased people before rushing off to include non-free ... that we can approach friends and family to license an image for free. The lack of effort to do this ... is the issue." ww2censor (talk) 12:41, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * It seems too soon to approach family and friends. After an online search I used her linkedin image on the grounds that it seemed the least monetarily compromised image to use (i.e. least likely to negatively affect someone financially) but I see the point. I mostly was puzzled as to the specific objection but apparently that was the system being unhelpful and eating your note.  &#9749;  Antiqueight  chatter 12:55, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I suggest you wait a few months and then make some inquiries. Asking family and friends would indeed seem way too soon. As she seems to have been well known in various rather public Irish organisations, it seems highly likely a freely licensed images can be obtained through one of them. Tourism Ireland might be a good place to start. ww2censor (talk) 13:02, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Wyldsson Logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:Wyldsson Logo.png. 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) 18:10, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Ad Ticket#2021051110012239
Hello Ww2censor, ad 2021051110012239, please note the first line of the original email (sent by me), "Forwarding to the VRT, as it is not relevant to my staff duty. Please respond to the original sender". Unfortunately, it looks you managed to send the reply to my WMF staff mailbox. Could you please send it to the original sender as well? Thanks! Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:57, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * apologies, I copied the email and then forgot to paste it into the header. I've sent it again now, so you won't see it again from me. Thanks for letting me know. ww2censor (talk) 15:38, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot! --Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:39, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Are lists articles in terms of quality rating?
I was removing "stub" tags from lists and replacing them with the "list" tag. I do this because the quality rating can't be both without a double entry. Any opinion? Sarah777 (talk) 22:26, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Correct, if it's a list article it can't also be a stub. Well spotted. I've seen this previously and do the same. All quality ratings for a page should be the same for each project otherwise it makes no sense. However some project don't have all ratings so even when you put a rating in, such as a "C" it may show up as a "B". IIRC, the Military project does that. I see it's a warm day in Dublin though we will reach 30° by 4 o'clock here! ww2censor (talk) 12:11, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * What I normally do now is something you recommended several years ago. If there is a quality rating from other projects I change it to the rating I'm giving the article - on the assumption that I'm probably the latest reviewer. If a project hasn't already given a quality class then I don't add one. Sarah777 (talk) 22:54, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, it was warm, humid and mainly cloudy here today - max 25C. Sarah777 (talk) 22:56, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * If any project is missing a rating, you should really give it one, the same as all the others. The quality does not vary between projects, just the importance rating. 34° expected today!! I definitely have to swim today. A majority of people in South of France have one, it's at 23° now. Just a bit warmer than Seapoint or the 40 Foot ever is but with global warming who knows if it might not rise to that heat. ww2censor (talk) 08:31, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Re quality - will do! Sarah777 (talk) 15:44, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Further advice required!
A very high proportion of the stubs I'm looking at have this in the "talk page":

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on Darragh Hurley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:


 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140225090727/http://www.ercrugby.com/eng/matchcentre/1612.php to http://www.ercrugby.com/eng/matchcentre/1612.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140225090725/http://www.ercrugby.com/eng/matchcentre/1881.php to http://www.ercrugby.com/eng/matchcentre/1881.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110126112735/http://www.munsterrugby.ie:80/rugby/8567.php to http://www.munsterrugby.ie/rugby/8567.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120526005109/http://www.munsterrugby.ie:80/news/10511.php to http://www.munsterrugby.ie/news/10511.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:36, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Should I delete these? Most are from 2016 and sometimes there are several, causing a lot of clutter. Thanks in advance! Sarah777 (talk) 18:53, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I usually check them and mark as true if correct, though sometimes a new updated link is better and easily found instead of the archive link. It's up to you. If it's false I may try to find a new citations but that depends on my mood and my motivation of the topic in question. I generally just leave those posts there but if the talk page is too full, maybe 50+ posts, I would setup an auto archive but many don't really have so many that would warrant deleting them. I don't even remember even doing that. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 20:38, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Quiet Man Cottage Museum Suggestion
Hi ww2, long time no talk! Re the cottage museum, are you still interest in putting this at DYK - if so ping me here and will take a look at a review. I was thinking of putting up The Two Norries, if you want to Do these as a QPQ. Ceoil (talk) 18:01, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for thinking of me but surely it's just a bit late and I don't really have the time right now, but I really like The Two Norries. I have not done a DYK or QPQ for years. ww2censor (talk) 15:31, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

More BI stuff
Hi Ww. Could you look into this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Black_pudding&oldid=prev&diff=1029578778&diffmode=source

Some editor seems to think "British Isles" is a country. I've run out of reverts! Sarah777 (talk) 21:06, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

File:Krystal Gabel in 2020.jpg
Hi! I noticed that the file is licensed GFDL only. Could you have a look and see if cc-by-sa-3.0 should be added to this photo too? For some reason I could not add a note and ask in VTR. --MGA73 (talk) 21:27, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Indeed you got me. It is now dual licensed per the ticket per the "VRTS Migration Bot." ww2censor (talk) 21:38, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi. Thank you. I changed the file per Special:Diff/1032223947. I do not understand what your comment about the bot means. But if the file is now correct then I’m happy :-) The reason I noticed the file is because of No more GFDL. Happy editing! --MGA73 (talk) 05:33, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I thought the bot had made the licence change when in fact it was you. Thanks you. ww2censor (talk) 14:18, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Southern Rhodesia/Zimbabwe stamps
Hi - unfortunately UK statute is pretty clear, crown property passes to the successor state; see s.11 Property and assets: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1980/395/pdfs/uksi_19800395_en.pdf Frankly I find it strange that US copyright law should globally trump this entire project...but I guess as long as the WMF servers are US based, there is no alternative? Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 00:17, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Your edit to Sir John Lees, 1st Baronet
Hello. I fixed a misspelling in the a source's name in this article, and you reverted it and introduced another misspelling. The writer's name is Charles Dod, not Dodd. We even have a page for the man. Gnomingstuff (talk) 14:02, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I am going by the source in that article which is https://books.google.fr/books?id=VdkNAAAAQAAJ&hl=fr&pg=PP7 where the spelling is Dodd, so it appear that is correct, even if Dod is used elsewhere by others. Other editors may well also review the source and just revert it again from Dod to Dodd per the source. Most of the Peerage entries at Worldcat use Dodd per this search. Without a birth cert the spelling seems rather ill defined. ww2censor (talk) 14:24, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Czeslaw Slania.png
Thank you for uploading File:Czeslaw Slania.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:MacWEEK cover nov98.png
Thanks for uploading File:MacWEEK cover nov98.png. 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) 19:31, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 23
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited MacWEEK, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wired.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Marley Park


A tag has been placed on Marley Park requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. – S. Rich (talk) 05:08, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Arthur Linz
Because MOS:DATETIES applies. He was American so we use America date formats. The edit summary is added automatically by the script. GiantSnowman 09:30, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Link Removed
Hy there recently i added link on postage stamps and it got removed twice. I am providing useful information. Joshwanblogger (talk) 06:52, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The link you placed is not an appropriate one per WP:ELNO. Please stop because not every weblink is suitable. If you persist in readding you may be blocked from editing. ww2censor (talk) 10:05, 9 October 2021 (UTC)