User talk:Diannaa/Archive 29
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Diannaa. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 25 | ← | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | Archive 31 | → | Archive 35 |
Request for the deletion of Orphaned non-free revision
Hello Dianna :)
How are you ?
Please delete the Orphaned non-free revision for the file : Yevadu poster
Have a Joyful day.
Raghusri (talk) 15:18, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Raghusri! I am well and hope you are too. The task is done-- Diannaa (talk) 18:50, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you so much Dianna
. Have a joyful day :) Regards, Raghusri (talk) 11:55, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you so much Dianna
Request for clarification
Hello again, Diannaa. I've been looking over the list of coats of arms discussions at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2013 July 17, and I was wondering if you could give me some clarification regarding your position on this entire class of images. You opposed deleting many non-free renditions of coats of arms at that page, indicating that they could be used under our non-free content policy. But a week later, at an AN discussion, you stated "We already know that it [a non-free COA rendition] fails NFCC #1, because a free image could theoretically be created using the description given in the blazon."
I just want to make sure I understand your position correctly since you're an extremely active, long-time Wikipedian with a solid knowledge of our policies. Do you feel that a non-free rendition of a PD blazon fulfills all of our non-free content criteria, including #1? (Let's assume that it's used in an article that mentions the coat of arms, but not that specific rendition, as is the case the vast majority of the time.) Thanks for any help, – Quadell (talk) 14:50, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- I think the assertion that coats of arms fail NFCC #1 is technically correct. However, the material from the http://www.araldicacivica.it/ website is released under a Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate 3.0 Italia (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 IT) license. Which if I am understanding it correctly should be enough for us to host these particular files as fair use. That was the decision taken by the Italian wiki at the time of the discussion on the Commons. commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Italian CoA. The files were transferred to the Italian wiki from the Commons at that time, and I expect that's how we got our collection of stemma images as well. We have currently got 3,009 images that mention araldicacivica.it on their file description page, so it seems pointless to single out these twenty for deletion. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:49, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for your reply. – Quadell (talk) 19:56, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- I have copied over part of my reply to the FFD page. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:58, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for your reply. – Quadell (talk) 19:56, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
You deleted two images here as G7 because the uploader, User:Vanished user jp3oilqwdjlk4t, was the one who nominated the files for deletion. However, in the discussion, two users (User:76.65.128.222 and User:Quadell) questioned that it was unencyclopædic and that the deletion rationale was flawed. The IP suggested G7, so the deletion doesn't seem to go against the IP's wish, but User:Quadell only wrote that it should be kept. Doesn't G7 require that no one opposes deletion? I think that some G7 deletions may have been undone by other people at WP:REFUND, although I'm not sure.
If you look at the history of the deletion discussion page, you can see that the uploader removed parts of the deletion discussions. I'm not sure whether you noticed this when you closed the discussions. I don't know what the files looked like, so I'm not sure what I would have written myself if I had participated in the deletion discussion. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:47, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Stefan. I was not aware at the time I did the deletions that the user had removed other people's comments. The images were previously published on Facebook, and the file descriptions included links leading to an individual person's Facebook page, complete with real name and photo etc, so in order to protect the uploader's real-life privacy I think they should stay deleted. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:02, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- I see. Based on this additional information, I agree that the files should be deleted. However, it was not at all clear from what I saw in the deletion discussion. I have been away on holiday and recently started going through my watchlist when I noticed the removal of comments in a diff for that page. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:26, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank you
Hasteur (talk) has given you a cup of tea. Tea promotes WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day ever so slightly better.
Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a tea, especially if it is someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy!
Spread the lovely, warm, refreshing goodness of tea by adding {{subst:wikitea}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Thank you for cleaning up the remainder of User:HasteurBot's Nomination spree of G13 tasks. Hasteur (talk) 03:08, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks Hasteur! -- Diannaa (talk) 03:14, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
Image Question
Do you think the radio logo on this page (which is the former logo for WBSC (AM)), would be allowed with the singers and what-not on it? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:10, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
- I think not. Let's try to find a copy of the logo without the additional images, which would have copyright issues beyond what we normally have for a corporate logo. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:14, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
- I didn't think so either. I'm looking for a logo without the singers, but coming up empty. Still looking though. Thanks. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:15, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
- I am going to try to remove them using Paint. I will get back to you shortly. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:17, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
- Okay, it's done. I am gonna upload it now. Stay tuned -- Diannaa (talk) 22:35, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
- Awesome! I tried that, but didn't have the skills. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:56, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
- In looking for another copy of the logo (which I didn't), I found this article and in the 10th paragraph, it mentions the following: "Rich Gehm, 65, a radio engineer who was laid off in October when the local A.M. radio station went under...". Now, I'm not sure about how the station went under, I'm still waiting on some information about that, but do you think that would be a reliable source to mention that the station "went under" in October of 2011? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:17, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, that will be a good source, as long as it was the only AM station in town at the time. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:46, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
- I did a search on the FCC's Consolidated Database System and the only station (radio or TV) to be licensed to Bennettsville, SC (from 1920 to now) was WBSC. The Consolidated Database System gives all the applications and licenses from 1920 to present day for any given town, state, or company. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:01, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
- All righty then. It looks like it's a good source for this information. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:09, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
- I did a search on the FCC's Consolidated Database System and the only station (radio or TV) to be licensed to Bennettsville, SC (from 1920 to now) was WBSC. The Consolidated Database System gives all the applications and licenses from 1920 to present day for any given town, state, or company. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:01, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, that will be a good source, as long as it was the only AM station in town at the time. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:46, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
- In looking for another copy of the logo (which I didn't), I found this article and in the 10th paragraph, it mentions the following: "Rich Gehm, 65, a radio engineer who was laid off in October when the local A.M. radio station went under...". Now, I'm not sure about how the station went under, I'm still waiting on some information about that, but do you think that would be a reliable source to mention that the station "went under" in October of 2011? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:17, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
- Awesome! I tried that, but didn't have the skills. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:56, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
- I didn't think so either. I'm looking for a logo without the singers, but coming up empty. Still looking though. Thanks. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:15, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
Could you give the first paragraph, third sentence a read and let me know what you think? That's where I added the reference. Thanks. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 20:34, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
- I think since you know for sure and have done your research, you can simply say that the station went under at that time. Or if you want to be a little more elaborate, you could say "A former employee told the Huffington Post that layoffs occurred in October 2011 and the station went under." -- Diannaa (talk) 20:38, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
- I like it. :) I kinda combined the two, using mostly yours, and came up with "A former employee told the Huffington Post, in January 2012, that layoffs occurred in October 2011 and the station had went under."
- I tend to add too much to a sentence or an article, trying to give the whole story, when most of the story isn't relivant. :) Thanks for your help. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 20:52, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
- It's okay, because if anyone challenges it, you have done your research and will know what to tell them. ttyl -- Diannaa (talk) 20:53, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
- I tend to add too much to a sentence or an article, trying to give the whole story, when most of the story isn't relivant. :) Thanks for your help. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 20:52, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
CSM blogs
Hi Diannaa. Thanks for finding that report on WP:RSN. I left a detailed reply on Charmlet's talk page about the blog piece, which he erased. I have sent you an expanded version of that reply by email. Thanks again for digging around. Mathsci (talk) 23:57, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
Itchin' On A Photograph
For the complete list, see User:Diannaa/Soundtrack
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCLek4aSpbo
If you have a moment ...
... could you perhaps take a quick look at Talk:SmartScore and check that I haven't inadvertently stepped over any lines? I'd be grateful. It's possible that someone else may have done so there, but that isn't why I'm asking. All the best, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:30, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Jlan. You are repeatedly being told that you seem to have a Bone To Pick, ie. the COI editors are accusing you of having a COI, which it is pretty obvious to me is not true. I found it quite shocking that CorporateM felt you were harassing the other user. I do not agree with that assessment at all, and it made me wonder about the possibility of these being good hand-bad hand accounts. But CorporateM has got the article into not-too-bad shape; the reception section is overwhelmingly negative, which is an accurate reflection of the actual reception of the software. I would not worry too much about what the earliest review said about the software; it's no longer very relevant, as a Lot can happen to a piece of software in 13 years. I will add the article to my watch-list for a while. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:21, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks so much for that. Actually I think CorporateM was telling the other guy he was close to harassing me, but maybe I misread. And I'm certainly not bothered about it. Thanks for watch-listing it, too. All the best, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:45, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
Your opinion needed
Since you commented on a discussion on WP:ANI about single cover images, I thought I would let you know I started a discussion at User talk:Werieth#Notable cover version single covers that pass WP:NFCC. Since both of the discussions are about the same topic, your opinion would be appreciated. Aspects (talk) 04:28, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Zombie433
...is back, 79.214.132.203 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is the latest. I found another two a week or two ago but forgot to notify you, apologies. GiantSnowman 14:10, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
- Recent IPs (79.214.132.203, 79.214.133.192, 79.214.171.20, 79.214.176.105) are from a slightly different range (79.214.128.0/18 [up to 16384 users would be blocked]). I will try blocking this range for two weeks. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:18, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Assistance with an Image Upload
Could you give me a hand with an image upload? I attempted to upload this image as "WTYD-FM WXTG-FM 2013.png". For whatever reason, after I went through the steps with the Upload Wizard, clicked the location where the image have been, it failed to upload. Can you help, please? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:04, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Neutralhomer. It didn't work because the source image is a jpg, not a png. I have converted it to a png using this website. And I have put in the article WTYD. Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 22:13, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
- Ooooh, this I did not know. :) I always try to convert images (via MS Paint) to PNG cause it seems to be the perfered file type. Now I can convert them via the website you linked, which will work better. :) Thanks again for your help. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:23, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
- I just found out about it myself recently too. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:26, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
- Ooooh, this I did not know. :) I always try to convert images (via MS Paint) to PNG cause it seems to be the perfered file type. Now I can convert them via the website you linked, which will work better. :) Thanks again for your help. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:23, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
- (stalker) I have wondered this myself. I will ask at commons if someone wishes to create a .jpg vs .png page. My camera uses .jpg but I use .png when doing transparencies. I can report back here if you wish. I convert myself with GIMP. Just open and save as almost anything in that program.--Canoe1967 (talk) 04:27, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- svg is best for logos, but I don't know how to do that. -- Diannaa (talk) 04:31, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- Inkscape is the freebie for .svg. I tried and gave up, steep learning curve for me after using GIMP for years. I agree they are better for logos but you can't do them with photographs, I don't think. I will see about getting a simple page written at commons for the pros and cons of all formats in a three paragraph nutshell.--Canoe1967 (talk) 04:49, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- Some of the image deletionists have been lately complaining that svg files are too high quality for fair use, and some have been converted to png. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:48, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- The resolution issue should go to a consensus discussion. I always assumed that the re-use warning template on .svg covered any re-use issues.--Canoe1967 (talk) 04:18, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
- Some of the image deletionists have been lately complaining that svg files are too high quality for fair use, and some have been converted to png. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:48, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- Inkscape is the freebie for .svg. I tried and gave up, steep learning curve for me after using GIMP for years. I agree they are better for logos but you can't do them with photographs, I don't think. I will see about getting a simple page written at commons for the pros and cons of all formats in a three paragraph nutshell.--Canoe1967 (talk) 04:49, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- svg is best for logos, but I don't know how to do that. -- Diannaa (talk) 04:31, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Who thing
I see you removed the image of the 12th doctor. I asked whether the fair use image was 'character in costume' on the talk page. I think our fair use policy allows this if we show him as a character and not an actor. I actually don't care if we have 11 or 12 but other editors may whine. If they do just use the 'we are not in a hurry' clause. That should keep them quiet until we have RS as to what the character looks like.--Canoe1967 (talk) 04:18, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Canoe1967. I removed the 12th Doctor per a discussion at the main drama board, see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Capaldi image. Logging off now, good night. -- Diannaa (talk) 04:23, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- Your reason for removing the Capaldi image is because he is not in character, yet the image of Matt Smith is a photo of him on the set, not in character as the Eleventh Doctor. My version of the image included an image of Matt from The Rebel Flesh.--(Sootyheightsfan (talk) 13:46, 5 August 2013 (UTC))
- Are you saying there was more than one version with eleven doctors? I have no easy way of chcking that now, because Edocker has deleted the excess files. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:53, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- It had the 12 doctors in it, but I think the image of Eleven is much more appropriate: http://s24.postimg.org/smbzzvcth/Versions_of_the_Doctor.jpg The image looks a little blurry because it's not as compressed as the others, here's the original: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-o3UMLBMGVKU/Tc4skmzPmsI/AAAAAAAANUE/tCRCSF8374Y/s1600/rebel_promo.jpg I tried to find one to represent his era, but one where he doesn't look Photoshopped and weird like most of the series 5/6 promo images! -- (Sootyheightsfan (talk) 14:03, 5 August 2013 (UTC))
- This change needs to be discussed at the file talk page or at the wikiproject level. I don't actually know anything about Dr Who and thus unable to help select a photo of the 11th Doctor. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:23, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- It had the 12 doctors in it, but I think the image of Eleven is much more appropriate: http://s24.postimg.org/smbzzvcth/Versions_of_the_Doctor.jpg The image looks a little blurry because it's not as compressed as the others, here's the original: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-o3UMLBMGVKU/Tc4skmzPmsI/AAAAAAAANUE/tCRCSF8374Y/s1600/rebel_promo.jpg I tried to find one to represent his era, but one where he doesn't look Photoshopped and weird like most of the series 5/6 promo images! -- (Sootyheightsfan (talk) 14:03, 5 August 2013 (UTC))
- Are you saying there was more than one version with eleven doctors? I have no easy way of chcking that now, because Edocker has deleted the excess files. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:53, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- Your reason for removing the Capaldi image is because he is not in character, yet the image of Matt Smith is a photo of him on the set, not in character as the Eleventh Doctor. My version of the image included an image of Matt from The Rebel Flesh.--(Sootyheightsfan (talk) 13:46, 5 August 2013 (UTC))
- I agree with Diannaa. I don't know Who is Who because I haven't watched the show that much. A fair use review/drama board should help decide which Doctors are in character and which are not. The ones that are not in character would probably violate policy.--Canoe1967 (talk) 04:15, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
Close Your Eyes and Count to Ten
For the complete list, see User:Diannaa/Soundtrack
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNDVBEpYUNo
Colours
For the complete list, see User:Diannaa/Soundtrack
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ddd70PMxTE
WP:GOCE July backlog drive award
|
The Modest Barnstar | |
| Thanks for copy editing well in excess of 4,000 words during the Guild of Copy Editors July 2013 Backlog Elimination Drive! Please accept this award along with our appreciation. —Torchiest talkedits 05:36, 7 August 2013 (UTC) |
August wikification drive.
Hi, Diannaa! Did you know that I got the wikification drive for August started up a few days ago? I noticed no one else has joined up yet, so I'm spreading word about it. Cheers! :) Can you decipher this acronymical code? CYDTAC (Hint: It's really easy!) (talk) 06:09, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thnks! I will pop over and do a few on the weekend. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:20, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
How to delete specific revision logs from a Wikipedia page ?
How can I delete specific few revision logs from a Wikipage created by me ? While creating a page for a living person, I made some mistakes while creating a page. I was new to Wikipedia and created many edits while updating information about the living person. Hence i want to delete the earlier revisions, call it draft edit revisions? Is there any particular e-mail address where I send my request and the necessary details ? Please note: I want to ONLY delete my draft edits / revisions. Please help !! Satish Kapoor 12:38, 8 August 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Satish Kapoor (talk • contribs)
- Hi Satish! The rules for revision deletion are pretty strict and it sounds like the draft material you are talking about would not qualify for deletion under the rules at WP:CRD. If it's an article you created that no one else has worked on at all, the entire article can be deleted under a speedy deletion criterion G7. If you think it qualifies, please tag it {{db-g7}} and an administrator will review the article and delete it if it qualifies. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:16, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Watchlist
Suicide of Rehtaeh Parsons. Two arrests were made in relation to the case according to her mother. The police are not saying anything. You may wish it on your watchlist again in case it needs a quick protect. If we mess up then it may effect legal procedures if we have false statements in our article. IPs will probably slam it when names are released. It isn't like a current violent event so IPs will probably have the same sources as us. It is just slow justice now and we aren't in a hurry.--Canoe1967 (talk) 15:10, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
- Okay, I will watch. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:28, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Regards to Archiving
Hi Diannaa, I have a question, my user talk is almost full. How do I archieve those just like yours? Thanks for the reply. Cheers Hamham31Heke! 02:41, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Hamham31. There's detailed instructions at Help:Archiving a talk page. -- Diannaa (talk) 05:29, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for the help Diannaa, I owe it all to you. Hamham31Heke! 07:43, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Re: Protection of Sexual abuse cases in Brooklyn's Haredi community
Thanks! –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:10, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
MOS violator (again)
Hello again. A few months ago, you helped us blocking a Guatemalan person who has been disrupting with multiple IPs (archive). This person has returned and in the last week s/he has edited at least with 190.106.222.129 (talk · contribs), 190.160.206.239 (talk · contribs), 190.106.222.230 (talk · contribs), and 190.106.222.231 (talk · contribs) which is the current IP. Can you rangeblock one more time this person? Thanks. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:01, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
- The one outlier IP (190.160.206.239) is coming from Santiago and the rest are Guatemala City. I will block the Guatemala City range for another two weeks. This is a bigger range than last time: Range 190.106.192.0/19 (up to 8192 users would be blocked) -- Diannaa (talk) 20:11, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you so much. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 04:33, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
Oops
Pete aka --Shirt58 (talk) 16:25, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
- Replying via email. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:30, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dianna! I'm working on cleaning up some old OTRS tickets following the recent upgrade. I am requesting restoration of the above noted image, based on permissions received in ticket# 2012110610010489. I appreciate your assistance. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Best regards, Cindy(talk) 17:47, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
Done If you could please add the ticket that would be best. -- Diannaa (talk) 17:50, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks! I've added the ticket and licensing information. Your work is appreciated! Best regards, Cindy(talk) 18:04, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
Protection of Sexual abuse cases in Brooklyn's Haredi community
What is your opinion on the matter? Should the material be removed?
I noticed that you protected the article soon after Roscelese's second revert in the "edit war".
Civil Rights5 (talk) 04:07, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
- I don't have an opinion on the content dispute and have not read the material. -- Diannaa (talk) 04:14, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
How would you recommend I handle the issue?
I tried to correct the complaints. I reworded everything and only put back part of the material. I made sure not to veer off the EXACT message of the source. Roscelese again TOTALY removed it (did not attempt any alternitaves). It seems that the Roscelese is trying to avoid the material at all cost. (Unless the user finds a way to somehow hide the message). Civil Rights5 (talk) 04:30, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
- You need to read closer what Roscelese is saying. Read this again. Please read and understand Wikipedia policies that are in place to protect the website and living people from harm that can result from material that we post here on this website, one of the top ten viewed websites in the world. Just because you can source something does not mean it belongs in the encyclopedia. We have a responsibility to do no harm. That is Roscelese's primary motivation, and mine, in preventing you from adding material to the article. This is an official Wikipedia policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons; and it applies to all our articles. It says, in part: "Material about living persons added to any Wikipedia page must be written with the greatest care and attention to verifiability, neutrality, and avoidance of original research. Material about living persons must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. The possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment." If your edits are repeatedly being removed by a Wikipedian with eight years experience and over 22,000 edits to the encyclopedia, it's because they do not belong in the article. I am logging off now for the night -- Diannaa (talk) 04:57, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
- I did not (and still do not) understand any connection between THIS and what I added (at least the first main part).
- I thought I was adding material as a response against a direct attack on a living people.
- I thought I was bringing in sources explaining the reasoning behind why these living do this these horrible acts that this article accuses them of doing.
- I also thought that the user Roscelese is preventing the material in order to further attack these living people and make them sound crazy.
- I also noticed previous edits by Roscelese on this article in which the user partialy altered the sources in order to make this group of people sound like idiots.
- Am I seeing that you also agree with Roscelese that we should refrain from this, and I therefore maybe should stop editing this issue?
- Civil Rights5 (talk) 05:36, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
- Speculating on other people's motives is never a good idea.
- Adding content on individual cases will turn the page into a wall of shame, and we don't want that.
- Adding the Exclusive Bombshell Claim of one juror gives that opinion undue weight. You wouldn't find it in a paper encyclopedia, so don't add it here.
- You have less than 30 edits to this wiki. Perhaps you should choose a less controversial article to edit. It takes a while to learn Wikipedia policies and a controversial article is not a good place to do that. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:19, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
- Ok, you brought out very significant points. I will leave the issue now. I will get back to this article at a later time perhaps after gaining more experience, and giving the issue more time to calm down.
- I hope you will continue to keep a close eye that this article should not get worse and should be as nuetral as possible for such an article.
- Civil Rights5 (talk) 22:31, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added --1ST7 (talk) 22:43, 11 August 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
User talk:Dhruvekhera requesting unblock
Diannaa, please see User talk:Dhruvekhera for a new unblock request dated August 11. You did the original block back in fall of 2010 and you suggested to the user that they make a new unblock appeal in six months. Since that time, most of his unblock requests have been ridiculous but finally he has made a sensible one. Do you want to see what you would do now? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 01:13, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
- Wow, it's been nearly three years. Thanks Ed -- Diannaa (talk) 01:32, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
- Just page-stalking. A nice call. Irondome (talk) 01:54, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the positive feedback, Irondome :) -- Diannaa (talk) 14:36, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
- Just page-stalking. A nice call. Irondome (talk) 01:54, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
49.144.189.67 continues to vandalize an article
Hi Diannaa, I've noticed this IP address 49.144.189.67 which is responsible to add a sections in this article about live coverages, which is not really covered by the said network. Can you please help me to warn this user, as he try to disrupt Wikipedia? You're action and response is highly appreciated, since I tried to warn him. Thank you. Hamham31Heke! 05:14, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
- It looks like your warning worked, as they stopped editing right after that. Persistent vandals should be reported to the vandalism noticeboard at WP:AIV. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:23, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Wannsee Conference
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Wannsee Conference you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
Zoomer (NES accessory)
Hey, there, my image was deleted by you, I just want to know why. I uploaded it as a non-free image, and Future Perfect at Sunrise told me, "If the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia".
The file, as it turns out, cannot be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file, as it is a copyrighted product and therefore a copyrighted image. Please try and undo your deletion of the file, or just reply back.
--Matthew (talk) 16:00, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
- The object is not the problem, it's the photograph that was non-free; it came from www.assemblergames.com and hence is a copyright image. The non-free photograph can be replaced by a freely licensed photograph simply by taking a photo of the object and uploading that. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:33, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
File permission for File:Ayaan CHawla.png
Hello Diannaa, I have mailed the permission details on permissions-en@wikimedia.org 5 days ago and also written on (talk) talk page and i requested Ayaan Chawla also to email on permissions-en@wikimedia.org if he can so please check.... And restore the photo.
Regards
Ron Gates —Preceding undated comment added 10:48, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Mr Gates. The image will automatically be restored once the email is reviewed by a member of the OTRS team. This could take up to a month, so please be patient. -- Diannaa (talk) 12:07, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
—Preceding undated comment added 17:01, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Diannaa, thanks for your reply but can you inform OTRS team. and also i have mailed them again at permissions-en@wikimedia.org to just remind.
Regards Ron Gates
Your GA nomination of Wannsee Conference
The article Wannsee Conference you nominated as a good article has passed 
Your GA nomination of Amon Goeth
The article Amon Goeth you nominated as a good article has passed
Auschwitz
Saw your edits there tonight; thanks for redoing all those references. I've been a bit derailed by real life the past two weeks--Mrs. Khazar and I rather unexpectedly just bought a house!--but am hoping to dive into more serious rewriting soon, perhaps next week.
I'm still not really happy with the level of citation or organization there; the information seems mostly sound, but I feel like it lies in the article in heaps rather than giving a coherent narrative of the camp's creation, development, and liberation. I'm also interested in adding some sort of "legacy of Auschwitz" paragraphs or section discussing the camp's tremendous post-war infamy and the views of various memoirists, historians, etc. on that. I've ordered Rees's book and a few others to help out. What are your thoughts? -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:38, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- Just stalking. It may even deserve a seperate article. Bolting on new paragraphs to the existing article may not be sufficient. Better to create an entirely new article. The concept has tremendous potential as a stand-alone piece. Cheers! Irondome (talk) 01:48, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- That's an interesting idea; for now I'm not sure I'd be able to assemble much beyond a few paragraphs of overview, but I'll keep it in mind for the future. Thanks for the suggestion -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:52, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Irondome and Khazar2. Structurally the article is a mess. We need to think about an overall organisational plan. None of my intra-library loans have arrived yet, but I have Steinbacher from the local collection, and it has given me some ideas for structure. I will post a list of items we need to cover, but I will put it on the article talk page rather than here. I agree we may not have enough Legacy material for a stand-alone article but regardless we will need an overview of it in the main article. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:08, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- Fiddling with the citations plays up the amount of work needed there. With list-defined references, it was not as obvious that a lot of material is missing essential details such as page numbers. We might end up with essentially a total re-write, which is something you thought we could avoid. No such luck, homes. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:12, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- Excellent. I am assuming you would wish to prioritise radically reworking what we have. I would agree with that. At a later point a legacy of A article would be a remarkable addition to WP if we got it right. The A legacy resonates to this day in so many ways, ranging from current Israeli foreign policy to the arts. Enormous and draining work though. Happy to assist in whatever modest way I could. Cheers! Irondome (talk) 02:19, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- The main thing we have to do is to always have a half decent article on display for our readers. I have done this kind of project before, but never had to do a big structural change. We will be able to start by rearranging and adding to the material that's already in place, as some of it is okay at least in the short term, and then trim to size. We want to end up in the 8,000- to 10,000-word range. A project this size will prolly take a month. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:29, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)Yeah, I agree that we may end up doing something close to a total rewrite here. I like your proposed outline at the talk page; I'll comment further there. -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:33, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- Congratulations to the Khazar family! I hope your new home is always happy and blessed :) Will contribute as well as I am able at the relevant talk page. Cheers all! Irondome (talk) 02:42, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks! Little Miss Khazar is definitely going to enjoy having the extra space to toddle in. -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:44, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- Same from me: Best wishes and I hope you enjoy your new home :) -- Diannaa (talk) 02:52, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks! Little Miss Khazar is definitely going to enjoy having the extra space to toddle in. -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:44, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- Congratulations to the Khazar family! I hope your new home is always happy and blessed :) Will contribute as well as I am able at the relevant talk page. Cheers all! Irondome (talk) 02:42, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- Excellent. I am assuming you would wish to prioritise radically reworking what we have. I would agree with that. At a later point a legacy of A article would be a remarkable addition to WP if we got it right. The A legacy resonates to this day in so many ways, ranging from current Israeli foreign policy to the arts. Enormous and draining work though. Happy to assist in whatever modest way I could. Cheers! Irondome (talk) 02:19, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Speedy delete File:Synclavier II Demo 2.ogg
Hi, you declined speedy delete of File:Synclavier II Demo 2.ogg, saying it is in use. It is not as it has been replaced in Additive synthesis (its only use) with File:Jon_Appleton_-_Sashasonjon.oga. You may want to review your decision. Olli Niemitalo (talk) 05:32, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- There's been some problems with the Wikimedia software that has caused glitches similar to this. The file was removed from the article on 16 July. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:32, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I want you to help me delete my recent created article, Kristn, as I found out that some people/editor here in Wikipedia claims that this article is an advertisement. I don't want to block because of this, way though, I admit that I've created this article but no intentions of displaying a hoax/advertisement article. Thank you. Hamham31Heke!KushKush! 05:55, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you Diannaa, and sorry if I made any mistakes. Hamham31Heke!KushKush! 23:51, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Wolfe Tone Societies
Hi Dianna. Thank you for restoring the Wolfe Tone Societies article. I've read your comments on the talk page too. Before correcting the article I need to ask your advice regarding the version you have restored. You've taken out the "Formation" and "Formation of NICRA" sections which I had rewritten, but you've left in the "Wolfe Tone Society, London" which was a copy and paste from the Wolfe Tone Society article, now blanked and redirected. It was discovered in the discussions about the new article that the London stuff was all a direct lift from CAIN by the original creator of Wolfe Tone Society in 2006. I had corrected it in the last revision on the temporary page. diff here [1]. Have you made a wee mistake by publishing it again in the restored article? Did you in restore the article from it's own revision history and blank the suspect sections or did you restore it from the temporary page at Talk:Wolfe Tone Societies/Temp?
It'll just save me a little work if my revisions from the temporary page are acceptable. Thanks. SonofSetanta (talk) 08:49, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
I'm even more confused now I've done the copying and pasting myself. You've deleted information which I had rewritten but you've left me no comments to work from, yet you left in a section which was definitely a copyvio. I've put in an RfC now to get second opinions. I really would like you to look at this again and explain your methodology to me. SonofSetanta (talk) 12:08, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- I will reply at Talk:Wolfe Tone Societies/Temp. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:14, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- Request withdrawn - somebody else stepped in and sorted the issue out. SonofSetanta (talk) 15:16, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- I am un-watching the page, so if you need me again re: this issue please ping me. Regards, -- Diannaa (talk) 15:17, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- Request withdrawn - somebody else stepped in and sorted the issue out. SonofSetanta (talk) 15:16, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Request for the deletion of Orphaned non-free revisions
Hello Dianna :) How are you? Hereby, i request you delete the Orphaned non-free revisions for the following File : 1 (Nenokkadine) film poster. Regards, Raghusri (talk) 10:57, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Bir yıldız da sizin için!
|
Diplomasi Yıldızı |
| Respect Rasulzade (talk) 15:48, 16 August 2013 (UTC) |
-- Teşekkür ederim -- Diannaa (talk) 15:54, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
please delete the Richard Garfield photo I uploaded
It was a mistake. Leadwind (talk) 03:20, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
Assistance requested
Dianna would you be kind enough to look at File:Army Training Booklet.jpg for me please. I had been striving to find a publication date for the manual for some time and have now established it as 1976. That means a change of licencing to non fair use Crown Copyright. There is a strong suspicion that I might be able to change that to OGL in the future but in the meantime I don't want the file coming under undue scrutiny and as it's only being used in Ulster Defence Regiment at the moment this seems to be the best option.
My problem is: when I've tried to put in the Crown Copyright licence and the fair use rationale it automatically reverts to a deletion template. There's obviously a hidden script which I, as a mere editor, don't have access to. Can you fix the licencing and fair use rationale or should I nominate it for deletion and reupload as Crown Copyright? SonofSetanta (talk) 11:18, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
- The reason that's happening is because the file is on the Commons, and they don't host non-free files. We would have to move it over here, and the copy on the Commons would be deleted. However, in its current usage, the file appears to be in the article purely for decoration as it is not the subject of commentary in the article and thus fails the non-free content criteria. Please have a look at WP:NFCC. Non-free content has to meet all ten criteria to qualify for use. The ones it's failing right now are #1 and #8. #1 is not met because the fact that the men received a training booklet can be described using words alone. We don't need to see the booklet to understand this point. And #8 is not met because the presence of the image does not add anything to our understanding of the subject of the article (Ulster Defence Regiment), and its loss would not be detrimental to that understanding. You should nominate the image for deletion in my opinion. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:14, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
- Ok I think I'll do that until such times as I can get OGL licencing confirmation for it. Thanks for your help. SonofSetanta (talk) 15:20, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
Block Needed
I got another sock of User:Zimmermanh1997, this time on 24.170.254.249. You can tell by the edits of the two accounts that the user is the same. Same weird obsession with radio station WICL and now with radio station WDHC. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 13:18, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hi NeutralHomer, Drmies got it. Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 14:45, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
Bashing another Wikipedian user, need help.
Hi again Diannaa, one of our contributors keep bashing on our fellow Wikipedia user WayKurat. He was been bashing by this user. It keeps claiming that the contributions he/she created is just a result without any source. I guess that it needs some attention as he violates the Wikipedia rules. Thanks and regards. Hamham31Heke!KushKush! 01:06, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
- The user has only made one talk page post, this one, so I disagree. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:51, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Good morning, Diannaa! I'm working on verifying authorization for the above noted file. In order to expedite the process, I am requesting temporary restoration of this image. Feel free to drop me a line if you have any questions. I appreciate your help. Best regards, Cindy(talk) 16:46, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
my pictures+
Hi Diannaa ~
I am hoping this will reach you and perhaps you can tell me why you have deleted my photograph of Allison Crowe that was @ commons:File:Musician Allison Crowe on the red carpet for "Man of Steel" World Premiere, Lincoln Center, New York - June 10, 2013.jpg
and elsewhere on Wikipedia.
This was flagged only today - and I responded immediately I saw the information - to the email provided.
Now, I find this image has been delated, and you are flagging other images for deletion - pics for which I control all rights - either as creator, or through obtaining licenses for same over the years.
Thank you, Adrian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adrian22 (talk • contribs) 04:03, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hello Adrian22. I have already replied to your question, on your Wikipedia Commons talk page. Here is a link: commons:User talk:Rimbaud22ca -- Diannaa (talk) 04:10, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello Diana ~ Why was the image deleted? And why was it deleted when it was only flagged today? Your response to these questions will be helpful to me in understanding what is happening here - and so as to avoid similar circumstances in future. Thank you, Adrian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adrian22 (talk • contribs) 04:37, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa ~ I have replied to your message on another page - though I cannot find that page right now, it seemed it'd be this talk page. In any event, I appreciate your concern and assure you, much as I appreciate your words in that direction, it's not a personal inconvenience I write about. It's that a change can be made which impacts on Wikipedia and all its users for weeks due to the backlog you've mentioned. And, your fuller explanation of why you have heightened concern about potential copyright violations is fully understood. I trust, too, you now know that I, as well, am not in favour of violations. Thanks for your time and consideration. Adrian22 (talk) 21:34, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
A few Rees citations
The final pages of Rees aren't available in the Google Books preview, so I've put a few page numbers in that I wasn't able to "translate"--368, 369, 370-71. Sorry for the minor confusion I know I've created with those; this seemed the best placeholder option until you have the US copy.
I feel like we're making some good headway! There's still a lot of work to be done, and I wish I had more sources on hand than just Rees and Steinbacher, but I'm encouraged with how many sections we've already gotten up to a passable level. -- Khazar2 (talk) 04:31, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
- My copy of Rees is waiting for me at the library and I will bring it home tomorrow and check the pagination on everything from that source. I have the one by Dr Nyiszli here but I have not had time to look at it yet. Auschwitz Album and Gutman & Berenbaum (1998) are coming in on intra-library loan. I did some more shuffling of sections tonight and I think we are getting close to our final section arrangement. Check it out when you have a minute and see what you think. Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 02:33, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- I've been watching as you work tonight--but not, y'know, in a creepy voyeur way, just in a helpful editor way--and I think the new outline looks quite good. One thing I think the article is still arguably missing is a brief paragraph or two of context to these events--the background of Hitler's racial policies, invasion of Poland, etc. The lead touches on this but we haven't worked it into the body yet. This is admittedly so famous that no one may need it, but it seems unencyclopedic to leave it out.
- On a smaller scale, I'm hoping to work on the medical experiments section tomorrow, maybe "Command and Control" also. I might also start the Legacy section in the next day or two. I want to include a quote or two from Snyder's Bloodlands about how Auschwitz has become the primary symbol of the Holocaust and why he thinks this awareness is good but also misleading (because it omits the equal number of mass killings of Jews in the field), a few sentences about famous memoirists and survivors of the camp and their takes on it, that sort of thing. I'm still working through Friedlander's massive volume, so perhaps I'll find a good quotable interpretation in that, too. -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:57, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- I can copy over an abridged version of the background material from Wannsee Conference if you like. It's freshly written by yours truly and already meets the GA standards for sourcing and prose. And don't worry about looking over my shoulder; I've gotten used to working under a microscope because of working on some high profile articles and being an admin, people are always watching. Don't let it bring you down -- Diannaa (talk) 03:14, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- The text at Wannsee would be perfect--exactly what I was thinking of. And thanks for the song, too! -- Khazar2 (talk) 03:36, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- I can copy over an abridged version of the background material from Wannsee Conference if you like. It's freshly written by yours truly and already meets the GA standards for sourcing and prose. And don't worry about looking over my shoulder; I've gotten used to working under a microscope because of working on some high profile articles and being an admin, people are always watching. Don't let it bring you down -- Diannaa (talk) 03:14, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
no copyright violation - but image file deleted
Hi Diana ~
I have just found this explanation:
23:16, 19 August 2013 Diannaa (talk | contribs) deleted page File:Musician Allison Crowe on the red carpet for "Man of Steel" World Premiere, Lincoln Center, New York City, June 10, 2013.jpg (F9: Unambiguous copyright violation: http://www.allisoncrowe.com/images.htm)
How is my uploading my own photograph an "Unambiguous copyright violation"? I noted that I/we have previous published the image on our website @ allisoncrowe.com - and, that, to me, is further evidence that I have the right to post this image, and release it.
Please explain, thank you! Adrian Adrian22 (talk) 06:26, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa - sorry if I've assumed your name IS Diana! fyi, thinking this through, so as to avoid this becoming a recurring issue - as well as writing to permissions, a note permitting reuse under the free license CC-BY-SA has been made at the site of the original publication - specifically this note is prominently posted @ http://allisoncrowe.com/images.htm and http://allisoncrowe.com/images2.htm Adrian22 (talk) 09:33, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Adolf Hitler article
An RFC has been opened on the talk page. You may wish to comment on the subject matter in which you were involved in the past. Up to you, ofcourse. Kierzek (talk) 12:47, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dianna! I've received authorization for use of the above noted image. Would you mind restoring the file so I can update the permission and licensing details? I appreciate your help. Best regards, Cindy(talk) 23:50, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
August 2013
Hi Diannaa, I would like to inform you about this pages named DWNP, and DYPE. These articles was created without any sources, and according to ABS-CBN here in the Philippines, these stations are not existed on the areas assigned in our country Philippines, can you please review it properly. Thank you. Hamham31Heke!KushKush! 06:38, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Hamham31. If you think these articles need to be deleted, you can nominate them for deletion. Please see Wikipedia:Afd#Nominating article(s) for deletion for informaiton on how to to that. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:27, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Versions of the Doctor sources
Hi, Diannaa
I noticed the image you uploaded File:Versions of the Doctor.jpg some of the source links do not work any more can you please fix this? thanks Kelvin 101 (talk) 17:21, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Manual Barnstar
- I appear to have lost appreciation-sending functionality :/ so I am awarding a MANUAL ORIGINAL BARNSTAR :) for your sustained and concentrated work on Auschwitz concentration camp over the past days. A true Wikipedian. Cheers! Irondome (talk) 23:25, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks! -- Diannaa (talk) 02:01, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
NF image
Please could you look at my response herre. You'll see from the discussion that is linked that I haven't got a clue what is going on now: things are being moved around and changed almost at will while the discussion continues. - Sitush (talk) 05:18, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
- My opinion is that File:Official Aam Aadmi Party logo from their website.gif does not meet the Threshold of originality for copyright protection. Same with the File:Official Aam Aadmi Party logo from their website.png currently at the Commons. I will post at the deletion discussion. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:05, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa, I'd like to let you know that I've kept this file although you tagged for missing permission. The uploader had already left a note on the file page that he is the son of the now deceased photographer. As the heir he may certainly grant permissions for the file, but please feel free to nominate it for a formal deletion discussion if you're still in doubt. De728631 (talk) 11:59, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
P.S. Please see also the discussion I've started for File:Group With Experience masthead.jpg. De728631 (talk) 12:07, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
- The subject of the photograph is not the copyright holder of the image, the photographer is. So the heir of the man in the photo is not the copyright holder, any more than the heir of the woman is. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:12, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
- That's right. It seems I totally missed that the person in the photo was also declared the author. So I've now deleted it. De728631 (talk) 18:54, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:56, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
- That's right. It seems I totally missed that the person in the photo was also declared the author. So I've now deleted it. De728631 (talk) 18:54, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Zombie433
Hi, sorry to bother you again - he's back as 79.214.164.254 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). GiantSnowman 12:00, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hi GiantSnowman. This is once again a slightly different range. I will block 79.214.164.0/24. If you could collect additional IPs we will widen the block later if need be. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:21, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll let you know as soon as I find any more. GiantSnowman 15:12, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Siddhartha, S'chn T'gai, Anne, and Wayne
|
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar |
One reason I like having your talkpage on my watchlist is that I get frequent reminders of your role models for non-attachment, logic, courage, and class. You really seem to live up to those values, and I hope I can do half as well at that. Thanks for being a part of Wikipedia! – Quadell (talk) 15:29, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
|
- Thanks! -- Diannaa (talk) 18:41, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Please note that WP:CSD#G8 does not apply to NowCommons files. You can mark the file at Commons with {{Talk at enwp}} when there is local discussion. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 16:11, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
- Okay. Thanks -- Diannaa (talk) 16:18, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
- No problem. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 16:23, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
- Also, File talk:Umple Logo.png doesn't appear to meet any speedy deletion criterion. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:02, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
- No problem. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 16:23, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
Rangeblock question
Hi Diannaa, User:Anna Frodesiak and I were wondering if a range block would be possible to combat the disruption on Sasanian Empire. It seems to be coming from the 2.186* range. I plugged the IPs into TP's range counter and came out with 2.186.162.52/19. Is that correct or should I be looking wider? Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 16:13, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Mark. I plugged in seven IPs:
- 2.186.162.52
- 2.186.166.167
- 2.186.166.243
- 2.186.169.43
- 2.186.169.60
- 2.186.185.188
- 2.186.191.69
and got a range of 2.186.160.0/19 (up to 8192 users would be blocked). -- Diannaa (talk) 18:29, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks for your help, that looks right. I'll soft-block it for a week. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:51, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- You're welcome, Mark. Anytime :) -- Diannaa (talk) 19:56, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- And thanks to you both from me. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:37, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
GOCE Barnstar
Hello, sorry for the delay in my response; I was on a bit of a wikibreak. Thank you for the barnstar. So you are aware, I am currently working on a new "menu" page for WP:GOCE; let me know if you are interested, preferably on my talk page so that I don't miss your message. --17:45, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
Guatamalan IP at it again
190.106.222.191, 190.106.222.129, are just two IPs I found right now. There's probably more. Erick (talk) 18:30, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
- Blocked 190.106.222.128/25 (up to 128 users would be blocked) for one month. He is the only person active on this range. Please let me know if he pops up on other IPs. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:24, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
Big Fish
Not got a response here or here so the plan is obviously to re-upload the proper Big Fish poster, but I don't want to be blocked. So that's why I'm posting this first. I don't like the threat of being blocked when I'm making a correction that ONE person is reverting without a valid reason. So I'm basically seeking your assurance that I won't be blocked again. Cheers. Film Fan 22:40, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
- I already told you that if you continue to edit war to restore your preferred version of the poster, you will be blocked. I've seen nothing that would change my mind about that. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:42, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
- Can you justify that threat? I have done what I'm supposed to do. I have opened TWO discussions, only ONE of which has had a response, and ONLY from the ONE person reverting me, who thinks that it doesn't matter if a poster doesn't resemble the original if it is a tiny bit sharper that the copy that does. It's insane, and there has been no input from anyone else because no one gives a crap so what am I supposed to do? I'm not letting it go when I know I'm right and the sight of the distorted poster hurts my eyes. I'm playing by the rules, so what happens now? Film Fan 23:05, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
- The thing is, you come here to my talk page, asking for my permission to continue an edit war against multiple editors (Pleasant1623, Zeeyanwiki, and InfamousPrince) you have been pursuing since May, which has already led to you being blocked once for a month. I am saying No, you do not have my permission to continue the edit war, no matter how strongly you believe you are right. Because the version of the poster you feel is the only valid version actually looks blurry and washed out on my computers, both here on my laptop and on my Dell downstairs. The present version looks rich and beautiful on my display, as I have to assume it does for many other people, since they continue to upload other versions of the poster. So the edit war would have to continue ad infinitum for you to retain your preferred version, and you most cdertainly do not have my permission to do that. I think the best thing for you do do is drop it. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:08, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
- Well, at least you're now finally revealing that the reason you want to keep blocking me is because you don't like the poster I'm uploading. And no, I am edit warring with ONE person, who has not received a warning from you, simply because you prefer the poster they are uploading. I'll take this matter elsewhere, ta. Film Fan 09:59, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, I do have an opinion about your version of the poster. It's blurry. That's why people don't like it. But I try not to let my opinion about the poster impact my evaluation of your behavior, which is the problem I am trying to address. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:02, 28 August 2013 (UTC) You keep insisting you are right and everybody else is wrong, but the issue is not actually as clear-cut as that. The reason I told you how the images present on my computers is to try to communicate with you how other people are seeing the images on their individual set-ups, possibly depending on what brand of computer they are using, which browser, which monitor, etc. I suggest you look at them on your computer at work, at the library, or at a friend's house to get an idea why so many people prefer a different version of the poster. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:23, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
- Okay. For now, I'll adjust the clear copy to something between that copy and the correct copy. Note that this is not edit warring, it is finding a compromise. Film Fan 13:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
- You need to check out any proposed image on multiple displays. Or send me a link, and I'll look at it on my set-up, which is apparently quite different from yours. The best way to get a nice clear image is to upload the best, biggest one you can find and let the bot reduce it to the correct size for you. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:36, 28 August 2013 (UTC) I think you are concerned that the poster we use be the "official release version" with a certain layout of text. Others don't seem very concerned about that aspect, and are looking purely at esthetics. So there's probably no need to compromise on the text aspect. I don't know for sure on this point, as I think Zeeyanwiki edit warred with you over this point. Or was it Pleasant1623? -- Diannaa (talk) 13:42, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
- Saw this after uploading. The new version is much more like the wrong version. Biggest crime being that you can hardly see the road in the foreground. I'm not happy with it, but I've wasted too much time. Film Fan 13:48, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
- You need to check out any proposed image on multiple displays. Or send me a link, and I'll look at it on my set-up, which is apparently quite different from yours. The best way to get a nice clear image is to upload the best, biggest one you can find and let the bot reduce it to the correct size for you. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:36, 28 August 2013 (UTC) I think you are concerned that the poster we use be the "official release version" with a certain layout of text. Others don't seem very concerned about that aspect, and are looking purely at esthetics. So there's probably no need to compromise on the text aspect. I don't know for sure on this point, as I think Zeeyanwiki edit warred with you over this point. Or was it Pleasant1623? -- Diannaa (talk) 13:42, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
- Okay. For now, I'll adjust the clear copy to something between that copy and the correct copy. Note that this is not edit warring, it is finding a compromise. Film Fan 13:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, I do have an opinion about your version of the poster. It's blurry. That's why people don't like it. But I try not to let my opinion about the poster impact my evaluation of your behavior, which is the problem I am trying to address. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:02, 28 August 2013 (UTC) You keep insisting you are right and everybody else is wrong, but the issue is not actually as clear-cut as that. The reason I told you how the images present on my computers is to try to communicate with you how other people are seeing the images on their individual set-ups, possibly depending on what brand of computer they are using, which browser, which monitor, etc. I suggest you look at them on your computer at work, at the library, or at a friend's house to get an idea why so many people prefer a different version of the poster. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:23, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
- Well, at least you're now finally revealing that the reason you want to keep blocking me is because you don't like the poster I'm uploading. And no, I am edit warring with ONE person, who has not received a warning from you, simply because you prefer the poster they are uploading. I'll take this matter elsewhere, ta. Film Fan 09:59, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
- The thing is, you come here to my talk page, asking for my permission to continue an edit war against multiple editors (Pleasant1623, Zeeyanwiki, and InfamousPrince) you have been pursuing since May, which has already led to you being blocked once for a month. I am saying No, you do not have my permission to continue the edit war, no matter how strongly you believe you are right. Because the version of the poster you feel is the only valid version actually looks blurry and washed out on my computers, both here on my laptop and on my Dell downstairs. The present version looks rich and beautiful on my display, as I have to assume it does for many other people, since they continue to upload other versions of the poster. So the edit war would have to continue ad infinitum for you to retain your preferred version, and you most cdertainly do not have my permission to do that. I think the best thing for you do do is drop it. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:08, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
- Can you justify that threat? I have done what I'm supposed to do. I have opened TWO discussions, only ONE of which has had a response, and ONLY from the ONE person reverting me, who thinks that it doesn't matter if a poster doesn't resemble the original if it is a tiny bit sharper that the copy that does. It's insane, and there has been no input from anyone else because no one gives a crap so what am I supposed to do? I'm not letting it go when I know I'm right and the sight of the distorted poster hurts my eyes. I'm playing by the rules, so what happens now? Film Fan 23:05, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
Million Award
|
The Million Award | |
| For your contributions to bring Adolf Hitler (estimated annual readership: 7,047,000) and Nazi Germany (estimated annual readership: 1,919,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers. -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:33, 28 August 2013 (UTC) |
Remember when I said I wished I could give you credit for a dozen articles for Nazi Germany? Well, here's the next best thing.
The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Wikipedia:Million Award. You're also welcome to display these userboxes:
 | This editor won the Million Award for bringing Adolf Hitler to Good Article status. |
| This editor won the Million Award for bringing Nazi Germany to Good Article status. |
If I've made any error in this listing, please don't hesitate to correct it; if for any reason you don't feel you deserve it, please don't hesitate to remove it; if you know of any other editor who merits one of these awards, please don't hesitate to give it; if you yourself deserve another award from any of the three tiers, please don't hesitate to take it! Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:33, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
- Dianna, I am glad your hard work on this project is recognized. I wish you had a clone, the encyclopedia could use her for its betterment, as well. Kierzek (talk) 15:10, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
- Put me on the clone request list, too. -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:39, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for the award and the positive feedback! It couldn't have come at a better time. Best wishes, -- Diannaa (talk) 19:04, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
- Put me on the clone request list, too. -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:39, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
And it looks like you've got another one to add to your barnstar page already:
| This editor won the Million Award for bringing Auschwitz concentration camp to Good Article status. |
I listed you solo in the Hall of Fame because as the award's creator I don't feel it's appropriate for me to ever "win" it--I want it to stay something I'm doing for other Wikipedians--so don't feel weird about that. You deserve it with all the reading you had to do for this one! (Remember six weeks ago when I said, "Hey Diannaa, this one probably just needs a little touching up, got a few minutes?" Good times.) Anyway, thanks again for the collaboration. I still plan to work on Holocaust and Nuremberg trials sometime after I'm done moving house; I'll drop you an invite when I do! -- Khazar2 (talk) 17:20, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks Khazar2 for all you did to improve the article and thanks for thinking up the kewl new award. -- Diannaa (talk) 17:40, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
GA Auschwitz concentration camp achieved. Congratulations!
- Thanks for helping to bring up to GA standard this important article on WP. It was a formidible task for you and Khazar2. Ive been watching with great admiration. Cheers! Irondome (talk) 17:16, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks very much! -- Diannaa (talk) 17:40, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Good Article Barnstar | |
| Thanks Diannaa for helping to promote Auschwitz concentration camp, which is most definitely one of the most important articles on Wikipedia, to Good Article status. Please accept this little sign of appreciation and goodwill from me, because you deserve it. Robin (talk) 17:16, 30 August 2013 (UTC) |
- Thanks Robin for taking on the review, and thanks for the barnstar too! --Diannaa (talk) 17:40, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
Are you one of the following stalker's'
Here are a few questions for you -
- a) are you a talk page stalker?
- b) are you a contribution stalker?
- c) are you a file contribution stalker?
It does'n't necessarily mean that you have to answer these question. Its up-to you. ☸ 16:08, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
- Answer is "None of the above". I responded to an {{admin help}} template the user placed on his talk page. Hope this helps. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:13, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
- Sohambanerjee1998, I would suggest you focus on your own matters and not worry about admin tasks. Kierzek (talk) 16:57, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
- I owe you an apology. Sorry those questions but they were asked by me not for questioning or enquiring about your contributions in wikipedia but simply for lightening the mood. Once again sorry, forgot when to be serious. I want you to know that the work you do as an admin is good since I have seen you deleting old redundant non-free revisions. I hope this mends the fence. I was not talking about that {{Admin help}} but was referring to the numerous occasions when you deleted the those non-free large-resolution images for me that led me into believing that you might be the following stalkers and there is no harm or nothing wrong in being one of them as it helps me. Should have thanked you directly. ☸ 06:19, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
- Apology accepted. I had no idea your remarks were intended to be funny or sarcastic. I thought you were serious. One of the things I do as an administrator is look after image maintenance, and where I draw the tasks from is User:Diannaa/Dashboard, not from following people around. That's also the place where admins can spot people who call for help using a help-me or admin-help template. Sorry if you find this creepy but as one of the only admins working with images right now if you work with images too you will tend to see my name. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:51, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
- Yes I do work with Images a lot these days and your name cropped up a lot while working (all for right reasons) and I thought the only way one could be this productive was by doing one of the above but I was wrong and irked you and other editor, sorry for that. Sohambanerjee1998 12:36, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- Truly hope this apology opens up new doors of collaboration between us. Sohambanerjee1998 12:39, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- Please don't worry about it any more. I do like your new signature, by the way. Quite stylish. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:05, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- Truly hope this apology opens up new doors of collaboration between us. Sohambanerjee1998 12:39, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- Yes I do work with Images a lot these days and your name cropped up a lot while working (all for right reasons) and I thought the only way one could be this productive was by doing one of the above but I was wrong and irked you and other editor, sorry for that. Sohambanerjee1998 12:36, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- Apology accepted. I had no idea your remarks were intended to be funny or sarcastic. I thought you were serious. One of the things I do as an administrator is look after image maintenance, and where I draw the tasks from is User:Diannaa/Dashboard, not from following people around. That's also the place where admins can spot people who call for help using a help-me or admin-help template. Sorry if you find this creepy but as one of the only admins working with images right now if you work with images too you will tend to see my name. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:51, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
- I owe you an apology. Sorry those questions but they were asked by me not for questioning or enquiring about your contributions in wikipedia but simply for lightening the mood. Once again sorry, forgot when to be serious. I want you to know that the work you do as an admin is good since I have seen you deleting old redundant non-free revisions. I hope this mends the fence. I was not talking about that {{Admin help}} but was referring to the numerous occasions when you deleted the those non-free large-resolution images for me that led me into believing that you might be the following stalkers and there is no harm or nothing wrong in being one of them as it helps me. Should have thanked you directly. ☸ 06:19, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
- Sohambanerjee1998, I would suggest you focus on your own matters and not worry about admin tasks. Kierzek (talk) 16:57, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
Can you now delete these images, clearly no ORTS e-mail was ever sent. LGA talkedits 02:11, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
File:Daniel Sheehan.png - OTRS permission received
Hi Diannaa, could you please undelete File:Daniel Sheehan.png, as OTRS permission has been received, 2013082910016453. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:12, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Rolling in the Deep
For the complete list, see User:Diannaa/Soundtrack
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYEDA3JcQqw
No fair use rationale
Hi! I noticed that you tagged two files as having no fair use rationale:
Did you mean something else? Both files appear to have two fair use rationales for the same article. None of the fair use rationales appears to contain all required information, although you do seem to get all information if you combine both FURs. I'm not convinced that all of the FURs accurately describe how the images are used, but that is in my opinion a separate issue which I would have addressed by using {{subst:dfu}}, stating what I find is wrong. I am also not convinced that it is a good idea for the article BigHit Series to contain two non-free images which together take up 3-4 times the space of the text on the page, but that is also a separate issue. --Stefan2 (talk) 01:01, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- I see what you mean. I agree one of the two images should be deleted; the red one seems to be the more current one, so I will fix it up. Thanks, -- Diannaa (talk) 02:02, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- I think I updated the non-free images (2) right on the page I created BigHit Series, you left a comment on my talk page about it. I am new to creating pages and uploading content, but I do believe my uploads are not in vain. Please review my images as they do provide insight into the page, and free versions of them are not available due to it showing what the specific game covers look like with respect to the format of BigHit series games.
- Also, may I suggest that both images stay up! You are right, the red one is the more current format being used for now current and future releases; however, that is a recent change (still looking to see WHEN that change happened), and not showing the yellow format case would be a disservice to users and services as a valuable contribution to identify if a specific box art still falls into the BigHit series. I understand the need to reduce the amount of non-free images on wikipeda, and that is why I did not include any other box arts which ARE very different from the two shown; however, they tend to be older PS2 and PSP games. The newer PS Vita games tend to show one of the two red or yellow formats...due to them being old, they don't really add a lot of additional information as the newer games (and formats)
- Oh, and I plan on expanding this article farther! The two links I have at the bottom of the page, provide games that are in the BigHit series titles. I plan on mirroring Greatest Hits (PlayStation range) and providing a basic history, and a list of games. So right now, yes those images are 3-4 times larger than the text, but I JUST created this page recently. I am doing research on also "UltraPOP" games and how it relates to BigHit series games. So that might go in the history section, or even in its own page.
- By the way, thanks for putting the fair use rationals in the correct format! I tried uploading the pictures via the normal way, but the upload button failed to be enabled. That is the 3rd time that has happened. So I went with the more advanced (harder-to-find) method of uploading them. Thanks, Ciscorucinski (talk) 16:59, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Ciscorucinski. The problem is that there's two non-free images in the article. Our non-free content criterion #3a states that "multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information." Usually we like to keep it to one non-free image per article, unless there's a very good reason to include more. Neither image is not the subject of critical commentary in the article, and appear to have been added purely for decoration. Thus including a second image fails NFCC #8, which states that "non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." Please see WP:NFCC for more information on this topic. Another administrator will review the images and their context in the article before deletion. -- Diannaa (talk) 17:02, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- By the way, thanks for putting the fair use rationals in the correct format! I tried uploading the pictures via the normal way, but the upload button failed to be enabled. That is the 3rd time that has happened. So I went with the more advanced (harder-to-find) method of uploading them. Thanks, Ciscorucinski (talk) 16:59, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Raven File
What is wrong wit the Raven file I uploaded? It says on the file page that it is not the subject of the article but it is. The article is about the DC superhero Raven and that is indeed an official picture of Raven. Morning stranger going through the Titan Computer! (talk) 01:50, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- The article contains eight non-free images, which is way too many. The image needs to be the subject of sourced commentary in the article, and it's not. It therefore fails at least two of the non-free content criteria, and it needs to pass all ten. WP:NFCC. You can add comments to the file talk page, which the assessing administrator will review before deletion. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:59, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Need help
Hi again Diannaa, I really have a big problem with this IP address. Despite my warnings I left on his/her talk page, it continues to vandalized this article 1, article 2, and article 3. I suspected that this IP address is only used for vandalizing Wikipedia. I need help for this to block this IP address immediately to prevent vandalizing other articles again. Thank you for the response Hamham31Heke!KushKush! 02:36, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- The user is on a dyamic IP, which is why you see vandalistic edits coming from (for example) 120.28.128.51, 120.28.143.49, 120.28.128.144, and 120.28.133.69. I have blocked the range of IPs 120.28.128.51/20 for one week. Please fix any bad edits made lately by these 4 IPs and I will watch-list DWRR-FM, which seems to be a favourite target. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:49, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- I really appreciate your action Diannaa, thank you and cheers :). Hamham31Heke!KushKush! 02:54, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Image Rationale
I'm sorry to cause you trouble. I've tried to be a bit more specific about the purposes of this image, and was wondering if you could have another look at it. Hopefully it meets the criteria for fair rationale, but I fully understand if it doesn't. Thank you in advance for your time! Trafalk09 (talk) 03:37, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- The problem is that there's already one non-free image in the article, in the info box. So the image fails NFCC #3a, which state that "multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information." Usually we like to keep it to one non-free image per article, unless there's a very good reason to include more. This image is not the subject of critical commentary in the article, and appears to have been added purely for decoration. It thus also fails NFCC #8, which states that "non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." Please see WP:NFCC for more information on this topic. Another administrator will review the image and its context in the article before deletion. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:01, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
I'm done
--Niemti (talk) 16:56, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks N. I will finish the citation work after lunch. Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 17:04, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Deletion of File:1948 Hatzic Pumphouse Breach.jpeg
Hi Diannaa,
I do not frequently login to wikipedia. I just found out that you had deleted an image I had uploaded back in May. File:1948 Hatzic Pumphouse Breach.jpeg. This file fall under Public Domain as it was created in Canada before 1 January, 1949. It was created by Dave Buchan for the Vancouver Sun in 1948. As it was immediately published and not registered (thus not renewed) with the US copyright office, it does not fall under US copyright protection. Template {{PD-Canada|commons}} applies.
How can I re-upload the image?
Thank you Fbfree
- Hi Fbfree. I have undeleted the image and added the correct licensing templates. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:04, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- Note that this does not meet {{PD-1996}}. It is unfree in USA as stated in the deletion discussion as it was taken after 1945. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:18, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
It is the wrong template then, because the uploader states that the copyright was not renewed. {{PD-US-not renewed}} is what I should have put. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:22, 2 September 2013 (UTC)- {{PD-US-not renewed}} can only be used if it was taken before 1946, or if it was published in USA within 30 days after publication in Vancouver, as explained at WP:Non-U.S. copyrights#Four-point test:
- Note that this does not meet {{PD-1996}}. It is unfree in USA as stated in the deletion discussion as it was taken after 1945. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:18, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- Is the source country a WTO member or a Berne Convention signatory? (use this table)
- Yes (Canada joined Berne in 1928 and TRIPS in 1995).
- Is the work copyrightable in the United States?
- Yes (clearly above the threshold of originality).
- Had the copyright expired in the source country on the date of restoration? (see table)
- No (copyright expired in Canada three years after the date of restoration).
- Was the work published before January 1, 1923?
- NO: The work is under copyright in the United States, and will remain so until at least 2019.
It's one of those very annoying things with URAA... This is free in Canada, almost all of Europe, large parts of Asia, large parts of Africa and at many other places, but not in USA. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:30, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Deletion of 'East London Mosque - elevated view (2012).jpg'
Hi Diannaa
The image 'East London Mosque - elevated view (2012).jpg' was deleted due to non-free content problems. I have contacted the copyright holder (the photographer), and he is happy to allow free use for this image, provided he is properly attributed. Could this image be undeleted and its tags suitably amended?
UsamahWard (talk) 11:40, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
- Hi UsamahWard. What you have to do is have the copyright holder send an email to the OTRS team telling us that the image is being released under license. Please ensure the copyright holder specifies which license they are using. There's information on how to word the email and where to send it at Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries. Sorry for the extra trouble, but this ensures the copyright holder's rights are protected. Once the email has been received and processed, the file will be restored. Please be patient if this takes a while, as they are experiencing backlogs. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:23, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you, Diannaa, I'll try to arrange that. The consent email requires a URL for the image "as located on Wikipedia"; should I use the original link? UsamahWard (talk) 06:46, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
- Yes. The file was located at File:East London Mosque - elevated view (2012).jpg. You can't view it there any more, but administrators can, -- Diannaa (talk) 13:25, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you, Diannaa, I'll try to arrange that. The consent email requires a URL for the image "as located on Wikipedia"; should I use the original link? UsamahWard (talk) 06:46, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
August 2013 wikification barnstars!
|
The Greater Working Wikifier's Barnstar | |
| For scoring 5th place on the leaderboard during the August 2013 wikification backlog drive, Diannaa, you are hereby awarded the Greater Working Wikifier's barnstar. Congratulations! :) |
|
The Iron Wikification Barnstar | |
| For wikifying a total of 10 articles, you are also awarded the Iron Wikification barnstar. Keep up the good work! :) |
Cheers! Editing with a pen leads to a lot of things unsaid. (talk) 14:42, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks W! -- Diannaa (talk) 14:43, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Normandy Landings
Writing decisive victory is no longer neutral point of view. Also allies were more in number. German defense plan is well organized as well. One more thing, reason you have book on your desk is not enough, write cite from this book or just bring link of page you read this. Otherwise its not reliable source --Obitauri (talk) 15:02, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
- Please post your comments at the article talk page, not here. Thank you, -- Diannaa (talk) 15:10, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
F5 deletions
You have missed multiple associated talk pages when making those deletions. Werieth (talk) 16:47, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
- This is true of the large batch done with Twinkle. I will go back and locate the talk pages shortly. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:51, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
- No big deal, just thought you would want to know. Werieth (talk) 16:56, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
- I thought we had a bot that located these and placed them in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as dependent on a non-existent page? -- Diannaa (talk) 16:57, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
- Nope. Werieth (talk) 17:04, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
- There is Wikipedia:Database reports/Orphaned talk pages which is supposed to list those talk pages but the report hasn't been updated since February. I suspect that there might be quite a lot of orphaned talk pages around. --Stefan2 (talk) 23:08, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
- I will certainly be more careful about it in the future then. I assumed this process was semi-automated. I will ask the bot operator if he could please generate the report and then we will know where we are at. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:16, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
- There is Wikipedia:Database reports/Orphaned talk pages which is supposed to list those talk pages but the report hasn't been updated since February. I suspect that there might be quite a lot of orphaned talk pages around. --Stefan2 (talk) 23:08, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
- Nope. Werieth (talk) 17:04, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
- I thought we had a bot that located these and placed them in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as dependent on a non-existent page? -- Diannaa (talk) 16:57, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
- No big deal, just thought you would want to know. Werieth (talk) 16:56, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Efficiency
Thanks for doing that clean-up for the Battle of Prokhorovka article. I wanted you to know that it was noticed and appreciated. Thanks much! Gunbirddriver (talk) 03:24, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
- This will speed up the GA promotion, -- Diannaa (talk) 03:29, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
Circuit of the Americas image
Thanks for spoiling the Circuit of the Americas article by deleting the picture for no reason... Speedy Question Mark (talk) 19:04, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
- File:Circuit of the Americas sky view.jpg. The file was deleted as failing to meet our non-free content criteria. The complex of buildings exists, and anyone could create a freely licensable file by going to the location and taking a picture. The image therefore fails our WP:NFCC criterion #1, which states that "non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose." Sorry, -- Diannaa (talk) 18:10, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks
|
The Hard Worker's Barnstar |
| Pretty busy day at the CSD corral. I noticed you helping a lot.SPhilbrick(Talk) 20:17, 5 September 2013 (UTC) |
- Yeah, its those dratted talk page deletions, see Wikipedia:Database reports/Orphaned talk pages, which was just generated for the first time since Feb 2013. Yikes ~! Thanks for the barnstar, -- Diannaa (talk) 20:22, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
Please delete this image
Hi again Diannaa, sorry to interrupt you, but can you help me delete this thumb file I previewed? This image was uploaded by myself last September 25, 2011, it was previously used on List of Digimon Adventure characters article, but now it was removed, and never used it again. Please help me for this, Thank you. Hamham31Heke!KushKush! 00:13, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Hamham31. The image is now tagged as an orphan non-free file, and will be deleted in about a week. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:16, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
PD-HHOFFMANN
Are you used to this template? I found File:Burgdorfphoto.jpg which had {{PD-US-no notice}}, but it seems unlikely that a photo by Hoffmann would be published for the first time in the United States. The EXIF data suggest {{PD-HHOFFMANN}}, though. Click on "Show extended details" to see everything interesting:
- Image title = General Wilhelm Burgdorf, Chief of Army Personnel Branch (Chef der HPA) and Chief Adjutant of the Wehrmacht. (From Hitler photographer Heinrich Hoffmann´s album).
- Credit/Provider = NATIONAL ARCHIVES
Do you think that this is enough information to keep the image as {{PD-HHOFFMANN}}? Commons:Category:Heinrich Hoffmann suggests that there are images by Hoffmann in both the UK and the US national archives, and the provider tag doesn't specify which country's national archives we are talking about.
{{PD-HHOFFMANN}} tells that images held by the US National Archives are in the public domain in the United States. The Commons category suggests that the images held by the UK National Archives also are in the public domain, but it isn't clear whether the images only are in the public domain in the United Kingdom or whether they also are in the public domain in the United States.
The image was also uploaded to Commons; see Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Wilhelm Burgdorf.jpg. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:07, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
- Yes I am familiar with the Hoffmann template; remember User:Diannaa/Problematic images? For this particular image, I was unable to find any images tagged as Wilhelm Burgdorf at the National Archives or at the Bundesarchiv. The person who uploaded the image is still active on this wiki, so I suggest you ask them to provide us with better source information so we can verify the copyright status. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:28, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
EyeTruth
Hi I notified User:EdJohnston, User:Mark Arsten, and User:Bbb23 to let them know they were mentioned at AN by EyeTruth. Did I miss any others? Caden cool 10:08, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
- Sturmvogel, Binksternet, Irondome, and Howicus. Irondome is aware, as he posted to the thread since I commented there. Thank you Caden. Pardon me if I do not comment further in the thread, though he is trying to draw me in; -- Diannaa (talk) 12:59, 6 September 2013 (UTC) I changed my mind and posted a wee comment. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:31, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa! I am working on verification for the above noted file. In order to expedite the process, I am requesting temporary restoration so that I may view the image for possible approval under the public domain as an image pre-dating 1978. Your help is appreciated. Best regards, Cindy(talk) 13:17, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Un-delete request
Hi there. On the 29th April, you deleted File:Ashton Town AFC logo.png, because it was an unused non-free file. However, it was only unused because someone uploaded a version to Commons and used that in the original file's place. When the Commons file was inevitably deleted for being non-free, the page became logo-less. Could you un-delete the original if at all possible? Cheers, Malpass93! (what I've been up to/drop me a ___) 23:12, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
- Blimey, that was swift! Thanks! Malpass93! (what I've been up to/drop me a ___) 00:25, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
Photo of Cristóvão Tezza
I saw that you just deleted the File:Cristóvão Tezza.jpg page for violating non-free content criterion #1 - Non-free image of a living person. I don't disagree that it could violate that criteria, as a free image should be available, but I've been trying to find a free one for awhile now, and so far no luck. Shouldn't we be allowed to keep an image under the fair-use doctrine until a freer alternative becomes available? If not, do you have any suggestions as to where I can find a free image? The non-commercial use file that you just deleted is the closest thing to free I could find. I even went to a Wikipedia workshop last week to ask questions about it. The explanation I got wasn't the best, but they thought the Cristóvão Tezza photo should be okay under fair-use. I tried to explain the steps I took in the deleted page if you need more specifics. Images is the one area where I run into the most trouble in editing, so any feedback you can give on this point would be useful and greatly appreciated. Thanks, Vojen (talk) 01:05, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Vojen. According to our non-free content criteria, we're not allowed to use images of living people, as a free image could (theoretically) be created. This is true even if the subject is inaccessible by being in jail, in a nursing home, etc. We're really strict on this point, so sorry. The best thing to do is to try to contact the subject for an image (though they are not necessarily the copyright holder - the photographer is), or in this case, contact the uploader at Flickr and ask them to change the license on the image from Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC by-NC-SA 2.0) to a CC-by-SA 2.0 or other compatible license. There's information as to how to approach the copyright holder at Wikipedia:Example requests for permission. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:17, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link to sample requests. I didn't know it was there, and it even has a Portuguese page (the subject and Flickr uploader are both Brazilian). I'll see what I can do. Vojen (talk) 15:58, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
- Images and copyright law are both difficult and complex.Thanks for your patience and willingness to learn. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:00, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link to sample requests. I didn't know it was there, and it even has a Portuguese page (the subject and Flickr uploader are both Brazilian). I'll see what I can do. Vojen (talk) 15:58, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
Deletion of shortcut
Diannaa, I'm not sure I understand your rationale for deleting Wikipedia talk:Womensci. There is a shortcut WP:WOMENSCI for Wikipedia:WikiProject Women scientists, and I created this redirect so that WT:WOMENSCI would serve as a similar shortcut for the talk page. A similar practice is used in some other projects (for example, WT:PHYS). RockMagnetist (talk) 04:06, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
- Makes sense. I undeleted it to check traffic statistics, and it is being used, though lightly. Best leave it undeleted. WT:WOMENSCI is actually a red-link; you might like to create that as well? -- Diannaa (talk) 04:11, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick response. I don't know if WT:WOMENSCI needs to be created - as far as I know the prefixes WP and WT are always expanded automatically. I have no objection if you want to create it. RockMagnetist (talk) 04:23, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick response. I don't know if WT:WOMENSCI needs to be created - as far as I know the prefixes WP and WT are always expanded automatically. I have no objection if you want to create it. RockMagnetist (talk) 04:23, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
Pneuron logo
Please restore File:Pneuron logo.png, which you deleted, so that it may again be used in the Pneuron article. Thanks, Wbm1058 (talk) 14:36, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, you left a closure note on this file's talk page, but didn't actually delete the file. Was that deliberate? – Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:11, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
- No, it was a mistake. Thanks -- Diannaa (talk) 09:29, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello
Hi Diannaa, I guess you are doing great. Since you are an administrator I would like if you could help me with something. Can you please transfer User:Tomica/Good Girl Gone Bad to the original article, Good Girl Gone Bad. I would be grateful. Cheers! — Tomíca(T2ME) 08:53, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
- I think you might need a history merge, as the article at Good Girl Gone Bad has existed since 2006 already. I don't know how to do that, so sorry, -- Diannaa (talk) 09:37, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
- It's ok. Thanks anyway. — Tomíca(T2ME) 10:20, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Deleting my article
Thanks for pointing out that five pictures had been removed from Scandrett Regional Park because of "excessive non-free files". I'm trying hard to work my way around the concerns (and mass deletions) of User:Werieth but he/she is simply disagreeing with me and deleting more. This seems to be contrary to the editing protocols of Wikipedia could you please review the "Removed pictures" discussion here:User talk:Werieth and intervene or provide some guidance? Thank you. E James Bowman (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:12, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
- There's two issues here, Werieth's behaviour and the copyright status of the images. Regarding the behavioural issue, Werieth is correct that you shouldn't have any non-free images in the article, but he is going about things in the wrong way in my opinion. I have already tried to talk to him about the way he is handling the use of non-free images, with no success. You might like to post at the discussion on this topic at the main admin noticeboard (Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive825#Threat and deleting pictures w/o getting a consensus), where Werieth's behaviour is already being discussed.
Regarding the images and whether or not they are public domain, please refer to the Hirtle chart, which gives information about when images fall into the public domain. In order to be hosted on this wiki, images must be in the public domain in the United States, or released under license by the copyright holder, or a credible claim made for fair use. The images you had provided do not tell us anything about the park itself, which is the subject of the article. For example, seeing wedding pictures of the founders of the park does not enlighten us about the subject of the article (the park itself), and that particular image thus fails non-free content requirement #8, which states that non-free content must be used "only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." There's no valid claim for any fair use images in the article on Scandrett Regional Park (you had included five), since the park still exists and free images could readily be created by going there with a camera. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:16, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for explaining all of that. I'll check out the discussion you mentioned. Here are two articles about New Zealand historic places with biographies about and photos of the historic owners: Linwood House, The Colonial Cottage Museum. Due to the intrinsic importance of the park's history, doesn't it make sense to have something similar to this for Scandrett Regional Park? E James Bowman (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:23, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
- Those are nice articles and the one on Linwood House is a WP:Good Article. But neither of them contain any non-free files. Note also a second discussion has opened at ANI about Werieth: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User: Werieth and his bullying reverts.-- Diannaa (talk) 22:25, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for explaining all of that. I'll check out the discussion you mentioned. Here are two articles about New Zealand historic places with biographies about and photos of the historic owners: Linwood House, The Colonial Cottage Museum. Due to the intrinsic importance of the park's history, doesn't it make sense to have something similar to this for Scandrett Regional Park? E James Bowman (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:23, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
Discussion
You could help here.----Jionpedia ✉ 15:07, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
Rationalise
If there are two identical files, delete the new one that should not have been uploaded, not the one that existed long before. Thanks. Film Fan 22:08, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
- You're always so quick to point the finger but never acknowledge your own faults. Film Fan 11:31, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Could you help me with these two articles please? I have made a draft templates for the government in exile.Mr Hall of England (talk) 19:24, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa! Happy Friday! Hope you are doing well. I'm working on verifying authorization for the above noted content. In order to expedite the process, I am requesting restoration of the file. I appreciate your help. If you have questions, please feel free to drop me a line. Best regards, Cindy(talk) 15:27, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Diannaa, I trust I find you well! I saw that you had in the past copy-edited the article on Susan C. Aldridge, where I've been trying to remove three years' worth of copyvios. Since you are also listed as willing to do revdeletes, I wondered if I could kill three birds with one stone: ask if in your view the criticism in the article is within our guidelines for BLPs (I've toned it down a bit and added to the references); ask if you think I got all the copyvio; and ask you to deal with the revdelete if you think fit. I'd be grateful. Best regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:46, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
- Hi there. I am not familiar with the criterion for redaction under RD1 and would prefer that decision be left to one of the experts in copy vio (Moonridden Girl and Wizardman, among others). It looks like all the revisions in the redacted zone have to be free of attributable edits for the redaction to go through.
Maybe you have seen the duplication detector tools; the one I usually use is http://toolserver.org/~dcoetzee/duplicationdetector/. In addition to copy-pasting of direct passages of about 3 words or more, another thing to look for is passages that present essentially the same material in essentially the same order. This can be a tricky call when both the source and the wiki article are presenting material in chronological order. When in doubt you can list at WP:CP and one of the specialists will assess. This particular article, as it stands right now, contains no copyright violations. From the BLP point of view, I don't think the term "hush money" should be applied to payments to get terminated employees to leave the university before the end of their contracts; this is not the way the term is normally applied. And it's quite usual for terminated employees to have to sign confidentiality agreements. You might consider using the terminology "overly generous termination settlements". – Diannaa (talk) 21:02, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you, Diannaa. I'll wait for someone else to get to the revdelete in due course then – I've already asked far too many things of MRG. Thanks for the comment about hush money; it's a quote from the sources, so I'll quote it (I didn't write that, btw). Thanks again, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:24, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
- We all ask far too much of MRG. Thanks for helping out in copyright investigations – every bit helps. Laters, – Diannaa (talk) 22:35, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you, Diannaa. I'll wait for someone else to get to the revdelete in due course then – I've already asked far too many things of MRG. Thanks for the comment about hush money; it's a quote from the sources, so I'll quote it (I didn't write that, btw). Thanks again, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:24, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Previous image deletion
Hello, could you go to this file and immediately delete the previous version that was uploaded by The Stick Man before it reverts please? It was marked by LGA after the new one has been uploaded.--HappyLogolover2011 (talk) 03:46, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
- You haven't provided a good reason for replacing the previous picture with your arguably worse one. Maybe you should actually discuss it instead of attempting to block me from reverting it. TheStickMan[✆Talk] 03:51, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
- I talked to you about the reason on your talk page.--HappyLogolover2011 (talk) 03:59, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
- Please discuss this matter elsewhere; no administrative action is needed at this point. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:45, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
- I talked to you about the reason on your talk page.--HappyLogolover2011 (talk) 03:59, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
His behaviour is now getting really troubling. He attacked me thrice at File talk:Back to the Future.jpg here, here and here. I warned him, but he refused to cooperate. Now it's up to you, will you warn him again or simply block him?----Jionpedia ✉ 13:07, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Teahouse Invitation
Hello! Diannaa,
you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse. The Teahouse is an awesome place to meet people, ask questions and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us!
|
Tariqmudallal (talk) 15:42, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
I think the page isn't protected yet! -- L o g X 21:15, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
- Yes it is; it just doesn't have the little lock template added yet. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:16, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
- Sock template goes on the user page, not the talk page -- Diannaa (talk) 21:21, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks -- L o g X 21:22, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Resolved
Hi Dianna! We just received authorization from the photographer for the above noted image. Hoping you are around to restore the file. I sincerely appreciate your help. Thanks! Cindy(talk) 15:17, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Diannaa. Reading this: Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources I believe the following paper (ref #3) fulfils the Wikipedia requirements of a reliable source, but I need consensus. Do you agree that the paper is (A) a reliable/verifiable source for this article: Scandrett Regional Park and (B) one source that establishes notability of the members of the Scandrett family it details?
Here: [[2]] is a PDF from the National Historic Heritage Workshop 2004 run by Department of Conservation (New Zealand), New Zealand Historic Places Trust and Institution of Professional Engineers New Zealand. It contains links to two PDFs of the presentation [[3]] and paper [[4]] presented by Dave Pearson [[5]], Conservation Architect, Auckland, describing the five year project to restore the historic buildings located on Scandretts Farm (renamed Scandrett Regional Park the following month). It contains a History of the farm, and says "It is the personal history associated with Scandretts farm that sets it apart from other places. Without these associations, the buildings could be in danger of becoming just another group of old farm buildings. The story of the people that lived there brings a place such as Scandretts to life". E James Bowman (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:51, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry, I have my own projects on the go right now and don't have the time or interest to get involved on that article. The best place to ask about whether or not sources are reliable is at the reliable sources noticeboard: WP:RSN. If you want to attract more editors to the page, you might like to post a request for comment: WP:RFC (this is good if you have a particular question you would like to pose that the editors already working on the page can't agree on). -- Diannaa (talk) 00:05, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
- Cool, thank you. E James Bowman (talk) 00:24, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
This photo was taken by an anonymous person in the U.S. Army, when Leplin was serving in Europe, 68 years ago. The Leplin family owns this photograph, and has no knowledge of who took it, and whether that person is alive or dead. We know of no copyright issues attendant upon any of the photographs or images in the article Emanuel Leplin. All of these images are in, and have always been in our possession, and there are copies of some images in the San Francisco History Center. Rleplin (talk) 03:58, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Mr Leplin. The original photographer is the copyright holder of the photograph, not the person who is in the picture, or his heirs, or whomever happens to be in possession of a copy. So you are not in a position to release it to us under license. Anonymous unpublished works by US citizens become public domain 120 years after their creation, so this image, taken in 1945, falls into the public domain in 2065. The image doesn't qualify for fair use, either, because prior publication in a location outside Wikipedia is a requirement for that. Sorry, -- Diannaa (talk) 13:22, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
The Pest (Part ???)
Hey, Diannaa! Could we get a range block on 64.75.117.0/24 if it's feasible? Seems like all Voice Cast Vandal garbage and nothing else. Cheers :) Doc talk 02:12, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
- There's no one else on the rage that I can see. 256 possible IPs on this range. Edits started on Sept 10 from this range. What say we start with a two-week range block, and if you could note when the block is due to expire and ping me if the activity resumes on this range. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:22, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Thank you - will do! This clown is so utterly annoying. Cheers :) Doc talk 02:27, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Orphan talks
You just deleted a load of copyvio Pakistani military pictures. Should you not have deleted the talk pages at the same time? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:33, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
- The uploader placed on the talk pages his reason why he thought the images should not be deleted. He has a right to know what the response to his argument was. It seems kinda cold to offer the opportunity to contest the speedy deletion and then simply delete his post without comment when he does so. Sample talk page: File talk:Air Vice Marshal L W Cannon.jpg. If this is not the correct way to go about this, I would appreciate any suggestions. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:38, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
- I agree that he deserves a reply. In a case like this, with around a dozen similar images and almost no text on the file talk pages, an alternative way could be to reply on the user's talk page in the section with the speedy deletion notification template. I'm sorry that I didn't have the time to answer myself before the files were gone. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:45, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
- Such a note could still be left on their talk page, if you have a minute. Just one personal note for the whole batch of images explaining that the copyright holder's written permission would be required for us to host the files. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:48, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
- I agree that he deserves a reply. In a case like this, with around a dozen similar images and almost no text on the file talk pages, an alternative way could be to reply on the user's talk page in the section with the speedy deletion notification template. I'm sorry that I didn't have the time to answer myself before the files were gone. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:45, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
A single, handwritten message on the uploader's talk page was the proper way of doing it and I am very disappointed to find that it was not done. I do not believe for a moment that this person has permission to upload any of these images but, just in case, I have told them what to do. They had done a load of copyvio uploads to the Commons and when those were speedily tagged for deletion, they transferred their activities here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:09, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
- There is also a handwritten notice by me further up under the last {{db-imgcopyvio-notice}} where I incidentally mention the discussion on Commons. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:34, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
- Do you mean a single handwritten note about the nominations, or about the response to his contesting the deletions? And who are you disappointed in, me or Stefan? Or both? -- Diannaa (talk) 21:06, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
I am very sorry, I did not see this edit and I wonder if FSCEM45212 actually saw it. It would have been much better placed in a separate new section at the bottom of the talk page. Indeed it would have been better if Stefan2 had suppressed all the Twinkle-generated db-imgcopyvio-notices and just left that handwritten one. Apart from that it was a necessary and sufficient explanation of the situation and, in my view it gave Diannaa carte-blanche to delete all the images and the talk pages. If Stefan2 had not left that message then Diannaa should still have done all the deletions and left a similar message herself. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:15, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
- What I normally do is put one template, since it gives all the legal information and the relevant links, and then list any additional files underneath. This is probably a lot more useful and easier for the recipient to understand than bombing the user's talk page with templated messages. Example message -- Diannaa (talk) 22:19, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
- RHaworth, take a chill pill. This just isn't that big a deal. PumpkinSky talk 02:25, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
Speedy F5
Hi Diannaa, would you be able to delete the older versions of ITunesRemoteiPad2.png under, I believe, F5. I'm not sure how to tag an old revision without tagging the whole file, so I thought it best to contact someone who knows these things. Thanks! drewmunn talk 13:42, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Sonicdrewdriver. You can tag such images with {{subst:orfurrev}} and the old revisions will be deleted in about a week. I have tagged this file for you. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:47, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
- Excellent, thanks! You learn something new every day... drewmunn talk 16:27, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Banff historic buildings
Just back from Banff, I’ve been uploading some pix to Commons for WLM 2013. I’ve been adding them all to the subject category … but I just noticed that this category’s description ties it to the walking tours. I’d be happy to find another category for the files (or just remove this one), but do you think the scope could be expanded to include other recognized buildings, and the intro amended accordingly?—Odysseus1479 09:07, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
- I initially created the category to house the photos I took in 2008–2010 that corresponded with the original walking tour pamphlet, which is no longer available. It's definitely time to widen the scope of the category to include any/all historic Banff buildings, so I have gone ahead and amended the description accordingly. You don't live in Banff, do you? I hope you enjoyed your visit there. Banff is one of my favourite places :). I look forward to checking out your recent uploads when I get home from work. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:29, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks. No, I live in Edmonton, but manage to spend a week at Banff every few years (although it must have been over a decade this time).—Odysseus1479 16:06, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Oskar Schindler
Hello, you've clearly put a solid effort into the Schindler article, finding sources and making it clearer - but the trouble with the article is, it sides overly with the account in the novel and film, ultimnately with the "Schindler legend". It makes the relationship between those accounts and the WW2 realities of Schindler and the Jews he employed and saved look much simpler than it is. Some - a great deal, really - of what has been written about Schindler is heavily coloured by the film, he's seen as a trickster hero, a pied piper who outwitted the Nazis and came out morally completely clean, and this seeps into some scholarly writing as well. I haven't read Roberts' book,. but from the title, the date of publication and the points you're citing from him I'd hazard that he doesn't exactly highlight where the film took creative licenses with history and biography. Would like to check Crewe too, the title makes it sound like he's really "building on" the image we get in the movie.
The article really chould have at least a "reception history" or "historical retelling and tradition" section, since this is a bit of a modern historical legend. I'm not saying Schindler didn't save those 1.000 or 1.200 jews, but the question how many he saved on balance (as he was producing German army material on a moderate scale, and supporting the Nazi war machine) is trickier. The only one who properly interviwed him, and many of the Schindlerjuden, seems to have been Steinhouse, a few years after the war, and at that point Schindler and everybody else would have been eager to embellish the story a bit. And Steinhouse clearly liked him and wanted the story, so he didn't ask many investigative questions. So one guy who was very eager to get the right kind of story is pretty much our only bridge back to the stories of some of the most important witnesses, including Schindler himself. That makes it difficult, and sort of should be stated in the article.Strausszek (talk) 14:22, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback. I will read your remarks in more detail later but right now I have to get ready for work. Quick answer – Kenneally's book and the movie made from it are fictionalised accounts, and as such they were not used to prepare the article. The main sources used were the books by Crowe, Roberts, and Thompson. Analysis of where the film and book differed from real life (if any reliable sources covering these points exist) are better suited to the articles about the book and the film, not the Schindler biography page.Your ideas on analysis are interesting, but no such material appeared in the available sources, and that's why it does not appear in the article. Any further comments regarding the article should be placed on the article talk page please, not here. Thanks. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:38, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
- I commented at the page for Schindler just before this one, just put this here to make it easier for you to spot the subject. You're clearly a busy editor while I've been away from WP for a while. Will stick to the talk pages for him and the film now that we've made contact. You might like to check out the comment I made three years ago about his years in the Czech area, which is also on the O.S. bio talk page: it develops my argument a bit further, but I guess that's one of the greyest areas in his story - it's both ethically critical and very low on fully reliable, checked sources that would go back to the 1940s. Strausszek (talk) 15:09, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Copyedit check
I just started helping with the GOCE backlog drive, and recently finished up on João Goulart. I went back to the group page and saw the Useful tags section. Would you mind looking over my copyedit (it was a big one), and letting me know if I should have even attempted it? I added the refimprove tag since large sections were unsourced. Thanks for your help. Esoxidtalk•contribs 02:25, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Esoxid, and thanks for your interest in helping out with copy edits. This was a difficult article, not one I would have chosen, so I commend you. The lack of sources alone is not a barrier to performing a copy edit, so I think you did the right thing to proceed with the work. -- Diannaa (talk) 11:47, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks. I had worked on Leonel Brizola right before, who was a related figure/topic, so I figured I would at least be familiar with it. Cheers. Esoxidtalk•contribs 03:06, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
GAR
Hello,
I'm sorry to bother you out of the blue like this. I did the GAR for the Wannsee Conference a couple of months back, and just wondered whether you might be interested in reviewing the related subject, The Holocaust in Belgium, which is up for nomination now? I'm trying to get Belgium in World War II (and related) to Good Topic status and seriously need reviewers, so if you've got time, I'd really appreciate your help!
All the best, ---Brigade Piron (talk) 09:33, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Brigade Piron. I will have a look on the weekend. Do you mind if I do some improvements to the references? I've done one book as an example of what I mean. There's several advantages; in this case the main difference is that the book is only listed once instead of multiple times. There's more information on this style of referencing at User:Diannaa/Citation templates. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:39, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Diannaa, I'm very grateful indeed! If it's OK with you, I'd prefer not to use the template style on this article if possible (Yahil's fine, obviously) because there are very few writers in the field and those that are there produce a lot of separate works. I know it's possible to verify which Steinberg, Saerens, Schreiber or Gotovich article is being referred to, but it's cumbersome in such circumstances to have to check.Brigade Piron (talk) 16:56, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
- Not a problem, and obviously not a GA requirement. -- Diannaa (talk) 17:51, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Diannaa, I'm very grateful indeed! If it's OK with you, I'd prefer not to use the template style on this article if possible (Yahil's fine, obviously) because there are very few writers in the field and those that are there produce a lot of separate works. I know it's possible to verify which Steinberg, Saerens, Schreiber or Gotovich article is being referred to, but it's cumbersome in such circumstances to have to check.Brigade Piron (talk) 16:56, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Similar edits
Similar edits as English Patriot Man. [6] --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 18:42, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
- I know, but it geolocates to New Jersey (normally he edits from England). I am watching closely, and am still not sure it's him based on the behavioural evidence. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:47, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
- Traveling from UK to USA isn't that strange or uncommon.In any case I will submit a report soon, and even if not sockuppet he engages in some extreme OR and Synthesis and removal of sourced information.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 18:56, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
I filled up a report. Some statement are almost identical. the Aryan Certificate said Slavs were Aryan, the Nuremberg Laws did not effect the Slavs. The Ahnenpass mentions both Czechs and Poles (both Slavs) as examples of Aryans"
The Ahnenpass which was to said to actually prove that one was Aryan and everybody in the Reich had to have one included the Slavs in its description Cheers. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 19:53, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking the initiative on this one, MyMoloboaccount. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:10, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Dunkirk evacuation
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Dunkirk evacuation you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria.
User:MyMoloboaccount removing info, editing info and refusing to co-operate with me
I have noticed this user has reported me as I looked at the users contributions and I find this outrageous. If you check this users talk page you will find that virtually all of the sections are about this user removing large amounts of text, reverting without explanation, using poor sources, etc etc.
I do not want to get into an edit war but this user has went into my user contributions and reverted everything I said without explaination but rather how this user is reading things. What can be done to stop this as its malicious and wrong?
I even made a section in the master race see Talk:Master_race#Slavs_were_Aryans_but_not_part_of_the_Herrenvolk and the user is simply reverting but ignoring all of the text and has even reported me simply because some other user has questioned this too! The sources the user is using for his text is not cited and does not go hand in hand with what the Nazis actually said themselves.
His editing is wrong - he claims that "volk" in Nazi terms only meant Germanic but that is not true and even the Wiki's article Volk#Nazi_era "race" "Germanic" "European" as this user is denying what "Thus . . . the non-Jewish members of the European Volk are Aryans. . . ." means... it is quite clear that all non-Jewish Europeans were regarded as "Aryans" but the user is failing to accept this.
I have tried to resolve this via creating a section on the talk page of the article and even on the users but to no avail but rather the user has reported me which has actually upset me, refuses to answer on the talk page and simply reverts back to their version?--198.58.112.253 (talk) 08:04, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
New evidence
I discovered some new evidence, basically almost exactly the same sentences used by IP and previous sock.
Previous sockpuppet:
Note that this seems to be almost exact same sentence as previously. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 00:13, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
I spotted additional same sentence used, probably there are others, but digging through all these socks edits is far too burdensome. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 00:36, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Visual Editor
Excuse me but for some reason I can't use Visual Editor anymore. What happened? Morning stranger going through the Titan Computer! (talk) 07:33, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
- Try this: Go to Preferences --> Editing. At the end of the page, check the box "Enable VisualEditor (only in the main and user namespaces) -- Diannaa (talk) 14:00, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Dunkirk evacuation
The article Dunkirk evacuation you nominated as a good article has passed
Hi Dianna, OTRS permission has been received for the above file, could you please undelete when you get the chance. VRTS ticket # Ticket Number parameter missing.. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:13, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Look at this
[7] The IP makes no effort to conceal it is the same IP user as before, but the location is now in Japan. I am no tech expert but it seems he uses some kind of proxy allowing to switch IP between countries.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 13:56, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
- I have no idea what is going on – the tools I use do not show 106.187.53.216 as a proxy but it does show it as a "cloud hosting" service. Whether a user could use this service to appear to be in Japan when they are actually in England is beyond the scope of my knowledge, but a check-user will know. We need to list all the IPs used so far at the top of the sock puppet report. I have added some; if you could check please and see if I missed any, that would be perfect. The case is not clear-cut so we may have to wait a while for the experts at SPI to resolve it. If you are getting worn out I could semi-protect the favourite target articles but the talk pages cannot be protected except in extreme cases. What do you think? -- Diannaa (talk) 14:24, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
I have no knowledge about IP proxying, but it's clear that IP from Jersey and Japan are the same person(comments, edits and sentences are the same). Semi-protecting the articles is a good idea-as they seem to be frequent targets. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 16:18, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
- Okay, i am doing a batch of image deletions and will look at protection in a bit. We can continue to collect evidence, as he will reveal himself through talk page posts -- Diannaa (talk) 16:22, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
- I am sending you some details via email, per WP:BEANS -- Diannaa (talk) 18:14, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaning this up. Only thing is the 2 May 2013 image is the one that should have been kept, the later ones deleted. File history now shows me as uploader of the current image and original uploader should get credit. I was just undoing an image change that should not have happened. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:00, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
- There's no way to make that happen. If I restore the 3 May 2013 image, then I would "get credit", same like you did. Shallowgravy is still shown in the file history as the original uploader. The May 3 and Sept 20 versions are identical. -- Diannaa (talk) 17:05, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
- OK, thanks for looking into this. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:16, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Question
Can you please explain why you deleted the screenshot I uploaded, File:Microsoft Cloud Apple sandwich.jpg? Since these are non-free television screenshots from commercials, there is no free equivalent. If it's Cloud you're concerned about, there is already a picture of him in the infobox so I don't need these screenshots to show people what he looks like. They were for commentary. I've seen several articles with television screenshots that are used for commentary since I started editing Wikipedia four years ago. For example, X-Cops (The X-Files) has a screenshot in the infobox that shows two actors; this is a featured article. Please explain your rationale (in layman's terms so that I understand). I could understand why you would delete the screenshot if I did this, but I don't get how the non-free screenshot in the X-Files featured article is okay, but the non-free screenshot I uploaded and used in the article on Cloud is not okay. What makes the X-Files one acceptable and the one with Cloud not acceptable? //Gbern3 (talk) 11:23, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Gbern3. A case could be made that the X-Files image is not acceptable, as the image is not discussed in the article. There's plenty of images with tenuous and spurious fair use rationales, especially in articles about TV shows. Many could be nominated for deletion. In fact many are nominated for deletion – please have a look at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2013 July 31, where a large number of Star Trek images were nominated and deleted. The episodes Space Seed and Spock's Brain (for example) no longer have images in their info boxes.
Regarding the image File:Microsoft Cloud Apple sandwich.jpg and its use in the article Cloud (dancer), we are already told in the prose that he has appeared in some commercials, and the presence of the image does not elaborate on this point in any way. The image therefore fails WP:NFCC #8, which states that "non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." it also fails NFCC #1, as the material can be adequately conveyed by properly sourced text without using any non-free content at all. – Diannaa (talk) 14:31, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Email address
Things that Jack
taught me
Hi, Diannaa! I saw something that may or may not be your name, so I'm posting this here. I'm sure that either way you'll know just what to do to fix it: User talk:Jehrentraut contains the text of an email purportedly sent to OTRS; it also contains what appears to be a valid email address. Am I right in thinking that that should be removed and revdeleted as soon as poss? Regards as always, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:14, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- It's not my name or email address, but it should be removed, as there's bots that scrape the internet looking for that sort of thing so that spam can be sent out. I have removed it.
Note to talk page watchers: This is the reason why it's best if you make a special email account for your Wikipedia business, especially if your email address is myrealname@hotmail.com or some such. Make sure it's a gmail account, as Google does not reveal your IP address to the sender, like many email providers do. Watch the video -- Diannaa (talk) 19:10, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, Diannaa! I didn't actually mean it was your address, I think it was probably the email address of Joseph G. Healey. It was just where it says "Dianna, There must be some confusion." that I thought might be a reference to you, since I know you sometimes deal with image deletions. Anyway, it's done, so thank you! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:27, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- I was the one who ended up deleting the image, that's where he got my name. My thought was that you thought I was "Mary", another one of the several email addresses he mentioned in the post. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:31, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, Diannaa! I didn't actually mean it was your address, I think it was probably the email address of Joseph G. Healey. It was just where it says "Dianna, There must be some confusion." that I thought might be a reference to you, since I know you sometimes deal with image deletions. Anyway, it's done, so thank you! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:27, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Canadian Space Agency
Thank you for your help on the Canadian Space Agency navbar. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 23:44, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- Glad to help! -- Diannaa (talk) 23:45, 30 September 2013 (UTC)