User talk:Aymatth2/Archive 16

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Aymatth2. 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.

Can you please clean up instances where you've used the word "waterbodies" in templates and article names? It isn't a word, and should be "bodies of water". I've got a few but in case there's any I've missed. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:05, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

• @Premeditated Chaos: Waterbodies is the plural of waterbody and, in my view, more precise than "body of water". See Body of water#cite_note-1: "waterbody noun (pl. -ies) a body of water forming a physiographical feature, for example a sea or a reservoir." New Oxford Dictionary of English. A body of water could refer to the water in a test tube or any other type of container, where a waterbody has a more narrow geographical sense. Aymatth2 (talk) 12:11, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

I apologize. It is a word but it's apparently so uncommon I've never come across it in the wild. I incorrectly assumed it was a mistranslation from the French version of the article, and I should have checked before saying so.

That being said, I'm not sure that the distinction you mention exists in broader usage, and I think it might be better for the articles to remain at the titles I've moved them to. All of the dictionary definitions I found for "body of water" specifically define it as a large or significant accumulation of water, which to my mind rules out small amounts in containers. Wiktionary (I know, I know) lists waterbodies and "body of water" as direct synonyms, and their definitions there are identical.

In addition, "body/bodies of water" appears to be the more common usage. Off-wiki, "body of water" has 226 million hits vs about 2.3 million for waterbody. On-wiki, "bodies of water" appears to be the standard phrasing, with over 3700 uses of "bodies of water" in article and category titles and only 15 uses of "waterbodies" (many of which are redirects and one of which is a band) in the same namespaces. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 12:44, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

When I search Google books for "body of water", the first page gives

• Body of Water: A Sage, a Seeker, and the World's Most ...
• The First Woman: Winner of the Jhalak Prize, 2021
• A Body of Water
• The Exchange of Energy Between a Body of Water and the ...
• A Body of Water: Poems
• Broken Bridge Lies Body of Water
• A Girl Is a Body of Water
• Small Bodies of Water
• Body of Water

. Most of these are poetic or fictional. A search for "waterbody" gives only geographical uses. It is more precise. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:17, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

All that demonstrates to me is that "body of water" is in common enough use that it is used in both technical and literary senses. Again, I don't think the distinction exists to other people the same way it does to you, given the dictionary definitions I've found of the terms. Maintaining consistency with other Wikipedia articles and categories is also important. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 13:30, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

A search in en.wikipedia for "waterbody" gives over 1000 results, although only 26 link to waterbody. Possibly the word is less common with speakers of American English? I see no reason to use the vaguer term just because other editors do. We should aim for greater precision. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:16, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

I was specifically talking about a search in title, which as I stated above gives a comparative result of 3700 vs 15, making it pretty clear that there's an existing standard that ought to be adhered to for consistency. If you want to change that, I think you're going to need a broader consensus. For what it's worth, I don't have an objection to the word being used in-text, but in page titles it really ought to be consistent. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:42, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

@Premeditated Chaos: The correct way forward is for you to undo the changes you made based on lack of knowledge of British English, then start move requests to convert the titles from British to American usage. Aymatth2 (talk) 17:10, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't intend to do that, given that my moves put the titles in line with the standard usage, per MOS:AT: "A title should be a recognizable name or description of the topic that is natural, sufficiently precise, concise, and consistent with those of related articles." (bold mine). ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:25, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

@Premeditated Chaos: It is inconsistent with the related articles on waterbodies in Corsica. The move is controversial. If you are confident it is correct, reverse it and then open it up for discussion. Aymatth2 (talk) 18:43, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

It is completely inconsistent with the standard usage across Wikipedia, see Category:Bodies of water, Lists of bodies of water, and the main article, Body of water. I am not going to revert moves that are MOS compliant. If there are other Corsican articles with "waterbody/ies" in their titles, they are similarly not MOS compliant and should also be moved. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:58, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

@Premeditated Chaos: You thought that "waterbodies" was not a word, and moved the Corsican templates and list articles to "bodies of water" without checking in Google or in Wikipedia. That was a mistake. Rather than scrabble around trying to find justification, you should back up and submit your moves for review. You seem to be confusing "similar" with "related". There are similar lists of articles about waterbodies such as Bodies of water of Azerbaijan, List of bodies of water in Bali, List of bodies of water in Vancouver, List of bodies of water of New Brunswick, List of rivers and water bodies of Montreal Island, Lakes and other water bodies of Victoria (Australia), but they are not related. The articles on Corsican waterbodies, many of which I started, are related. The template and article titles should follow the same variety of English as these related articles. See WP:TITLEVAR. Aymatth2 (talk) 12:23, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I side entirely with PMC on this matter. 'Bodies of water' is the standard throughout category names and article names (and common usage in the UK, where I am). 'Waterbodies' is an idiosyncratic word introduced on a few articles/categories/templates created mostly by Aymatth2 and enjoys no wider support. There are only 24 usages of waterbodies in titles; one is a band and several others are redirects. Oculi (talk) 13:44, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

@Oculi: The terms "waterbody" and "water body" are used in several thousand articles. They are hardly idiosyncratic. The New Oxford Dictionary of English explains that the meaning is more precise than "body of water": "waterbody noun (pl. -ies) a body of water forming a physiographical feature, for example a sea or a reservoir." Aymatth2 (talk) 13:53, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

@Premeditated Chaos: Were you planning to add rivers to the renamed list articles? As stated in Body of water, rivers are also considered to be bodies of water, although they would not be included among waterbodies. The names List of bodies of water of Haute-Corse and List of bodies of water of Corse-du-Sud imply that they include rivers. I am not keen on this change, but if you were to expand the scope to fit the definition I would drop my objection to the new names. I assume you would also adjust the templates and categories to match. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:14, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I've explained very clearly multiple times with the "intitle" searches that although the word "waterbody/ies" may be used in article text in places, the use of "bodies of water" vs "waterbodies" in article titles is over 3700 to 15 (and of the 15, at least one is a band and several are redirects), making "body of water" the obvious standard with regards to article titles. You may feel that "waterbodies" is more precise or specific, but common usage does not match your perception. My interest in the lists was making sure the titles were correct and that the top-level list was de-orphaned; I don't have any intent to edit the content further. If you want to change the scope, by all means go for it. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:57, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

@Premeditated Chaos: So you have changed the titles from a narrow term to a widely used term with a broader scope, but will not expand the scope of the articles to reflect the change of meaning? This is like changing a title from iron oxides to oxides, but keeping the content discussing only iron. Better to move it back to iron oxides. May I assume you will have no objection to my moving the articles back? Aymatth2 (talk) 22:47, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I obviously have an objection, because moving them back will put them out of compliance with MOS, which you continually refuse to acknowledge. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:50, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Okay, rivers are added, copied from the appropriate categories. Hopefully that suffices. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I will try to clean up the mess tomorrow, These may be the only two list articles that comply with the definition in body of water, but accuracy is more important than consistency. The geographers must shudder when they see the sloppy use of terminology in Wikipedia. Aymatth2 (talk) 03:14, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

@Premeditated Chaos: This one has been bugging me. You said above

On-wiki, "bodies of water" appears to be the standard phrasing, with over 3700 uses of "bodies of water" in article and category titles and only 15 uses of "waterbodies" (many of which are redirects and one of which is a band) in the same namespaces.

This gives the impression that "waterbody" is very rare compared to "body of water", although I thought it was a common term for sources like the EPA, WWF etc.. To confirm this, I did simple searches in article text and found that "body of water" is the more common term, but water body / waterbody is also quite common:

• "body of water" 20,956, "bodies of water" 9,634, Total 30,590
• "water body" 1,339, "water bodies" 3,074, "waterbody" 1,002, "waterbodies" 1,111, Total 6,526

I then did title searches, and in the category namespace found:

• intitle:"body of water" 25 results
• intitle:"bodies of water" 3,779 results
• intitle:"waterbody" 0 results
• intitle:"waterbodies" 0 results
• intitle:"water body" 0 results
• intitle:"water bodies" 2 results

Clearly the standard convention for categories is indeed "bodies of water".

But when I search titles in the article namespace, I find, ignoring the moves you made and dropping film, musical, band, redirect and disambiguation pages:

There is no consistent article naming convention relevant to MOS:AT, although for lists by place we get 5 for "bodies of water" and 8 for "waterbodies" or "water bodies". In my view, "waterbodies" is more natural, precise and concise.

When I search titles in the template namespace, ignoring the moves you made and dropping redirect, subpages etc., I find

If anything, the standard naming convention for list-type templates would be "waterbodies". (This contradicts my guess that "waterbody" might be unfamiliar because it was British English.)

@Premeditated Chaos: Am I doing something wrong in my searches? Aymatth2 (talk) 17:07, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

From a technical perspective I don't think you've done anything incorrectly. However, it doesn't make sense to me to have article/template titles be different from the category, which is an overwhelming standard. On top of that, WP:CRITERIA tells us we should use the most recognizable and natural titles, and I think it's clear from your in-text search (And the Google search I posted earlier) that "bodies of water" is the far more commonly-used term. I'm sorry, but I don't think you're going to convince me that a fairly uncommon word is a better choice for titles than the commonly-used and easily-understood phrase "body/ies of water". If you want to get consensus to standardize "waterbodies" instead for technical reasons, you should start a wider discussion, perhaps at WT:GEOG. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:56, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

The "body of water" categories mostly contain sub-categories like "category:Lakes of Foo county" rather than articles. Category names are irrelevant to article names and are not mentioned in MOS:AT, which says "A title should be a recognizable name or description of the topic that is natural, sufficiently precise, concise, and consistent with those of related articles. If these criteria are in conflict, they should be balanced against one another." To recap:

I propose to move the articles back to their original titles. The category changes were justified, but the article and template moves were not. @Premeditated Chaos: You made a mistake and have been trying to justify it with ever more frantic arguments. It is time to drop the stick and slowly back away. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:00, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

No one has a "stick" here but you - I'm not the one who keeps pinging you to increasingly lengthy talk page posts on the matter. You are the only person who feels that "waterbodies" is more standard than "bodies of water". I am not interested in continuing this argument here; I will post to WT:GEOG shortly instead because this is clearly intractable and I think it's time to get other eyes on it. Please don't ping me about it again, I have that page watched. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:25, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

BB King recorded at the club in 1967 with a live album. Can you find what club it is, I can't see anything on here. Is it International Trade Club of Chicago, and is there enough for an article?♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:58, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

I can't find anything, apart from references to the album, Blues Is King. The International Trade Club of Chicago seems very unlikely. Probably not enough for an article. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:07, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Rosie thinks it refers to a club which was in the Drake Hotel (Chicago). I couldn't find anything either. Hope you're well!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:59, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Seems more like a fancy dining club, https://www.flickr.com/photos/thedrakehotelchicago/4615684004, but maybe. I am well, enjoying sunny Costa Rica, hope you are too, Aymatth2 (talk) 18:11, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

They deleted the Italian series. There were only a few scraps in google books I think. Can you find an article or two to stop Category:1890s in Panama being chopped?♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:28, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Good job on the Austrian TV list. I may expand a few like Die Alpensaga given that I'm learning German anyway. Looks quite interesting actually. That they all haven't been expanded at least to start class articles isn't my fault. I wish more people would make an effort to expand what they don't like instead of slopping tags and prods and taking them to AFD. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:46, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Yeah. Some editors find it easier to criticize than to do anything about it. Google Translate does a reasonable job for short articles on another wiki. The TV list was pumped up mainly because it is the rainy season now in CR, plus my kitchen is being renovated, so nothing much else to do. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:25, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

You've previously voted in the discussion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Bengali_songs_recorded_by_Shreya_Ghoshal. Similar article List of Bengali songs recorded by Runa Laila is considered for deletion. Would you please share your views here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Bengali_songs_recorded_by_Runa_Laila. Abbasulu (talk) 03:40, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Frederick John Jackson.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:20, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Precious

Eight years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:13, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Univeristy of Klausenburg and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 21#Univeristy of Klausenburg until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. NotReallySoroka (talk) 16:18, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Viacheslav Petrovich Volgin.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:41, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Sad to see you put up an inactive notice. Hope you're in good health. You've been one of the most prolific editors we've ever had, an amazing range of topics and always top notch. I was going to ask you about the Isotta Brothers! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:09, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I am fine, but have not felt the urge to do much on Wikipedia lately. I will probably get back into it after a break. I don't mind contributing to discussions, but email is best for anything urgent. Aymatth2 (talk) 12:13, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

I tried to pump up the Isotta Brothers, but can't even find their names! Aymatth2 (talk) 21:57, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:1964 in Zaire indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:37, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:1968 in Zaire indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:38, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:1960s in Zaire indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:01, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Lee Stack (born 1868).jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Morgan Colt, artist.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:23, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Mohamed Medbouh.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:17, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:SAIT Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:21, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

The article Lycée Victor Hugo, Paris has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG. Has only one primary source. A WP:BEFORE search does not reveal much that would contribute towards notability: I could only find coverage of a bomb alert caused by a prank, and of student demonstrations suppressed by the police (a very common event; such things happened in lots of lycées during the same period, and before too).

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilletsMauves^€500 18:43, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

The article Jackson Sosthenes has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Notability

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Diallo Telli.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:09, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Glenn E Plumb.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:21, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:CIESM logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:06, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:François Bourdon.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Austin Bruce Garretson.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:02, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Tunisia Peoples Movement logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:41, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Aymatth2,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 03:42, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 03:42, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello. I thought you want to participate in the merge discussion that is initiated for this article. Petra0922 (talk) 04:21, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Aymatth2. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Ghosts in Spanish-speaking cultures, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:01, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	I've long been waiting for something like this. Thanks for making it happen! {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:29, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

That was a masterclass in how to make a proposal on Wikipedia. Well done indeed! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:12, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	You already got one of these above, but you should get another one. Really, really good idea, and the proposal itself was well done as well. Enterprisey (talk!) 04:37, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Aymatth2. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Ghosts in Spanish-speaking cultures".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:28, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Anna Gréki.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:02, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

the pictures of Anna Gréki are free of copyright and they are in the public domain of Algeria

All pictures taken before 1987 and especilly during the french colonisation are free from copyright you can check similar uploaded file here and you can also check the license :

Mostefa Ben Boulaïd#/media/File:Benboulaid.JPG Riad Salih (talk) 15:32, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

@Riad Salih: You should make that point at Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Anna Greki.jpg. But was the picture taken in Algeria or in France? Aymatth2 (talk) 15:36, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

in Algeria she lived and died in Algeria Riad Salih (talk) 15:38, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

She alternated between Algeria and France. She went to university in France, when this picture could have been taken, returned to Algeria, was deported in 1958, returned to Algeris after 1962. This discussion belongs at Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Anna Greki.jpg. Aymatth2 (talk) 15:51, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello Aymatth2,

Hope you are doing well, I just wanted a clarification from you since you have a long experience here, So I would like to ask you about Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Algeria in the "Not protected" section of the article it's mentioned that :

• State works, legally made available for public use in non-profit generating purposes, may be freely used subject to maintaining the work wellbeing and highlighting its source. State works, within the context of this article, shall mean works produced and published by various state institutions, local groups and public establishments of administrative nature.^{[Law of 2003, Art.9]}

Does it mean that the state works is free from copyright and can be shared in commons? If yes can we create an appropriate tag for it?

Thank you very much for your time and consideration. Riad Salih (talk) 18:13, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

• @Riad Salih: I do not think these works can be used. The English version seems to be a poor translation. The French version clearly excludes use for commercial purposes. Les œuvres de l’État rendues licitement accessibles au public peuvent être librement utilisées à des fins non lucratives, sous réserve du respect de l’intégrité de l’œuvre et de l’indication de la source. On Wikimedia Commons we do not allow any conditions on how a work can be used. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:08, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

  Thank you for your response,

  i'm good at both, french and arabic I will try to read the rules carefully and let you know to guide me. Riad Salih (talk) 20:17, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

		The WikiProject Barnstar
		I, Finnusertop, hereby award you The WikiProject Barnstar for your successful proposal, Project-independent quality assessments. As a Wikipedian who sees value in article assessments but have found that the old system is full of unnecessary redundancies, I welcome this new era of content assessment heralded by you. Congratulations! – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:12, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Adriaan Luteijn is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Risker (talk) 05:47, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

The article Estonian Association of Gerontology and Geriatrics has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence this association meets N:ORG. Estonian article of no assistance

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Star Mississippi 20:02, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Business Hallmark logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:07, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Estonian Association of Gerontology and Geriatrics is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Star Mississippi 01:33, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for getting the new quality assessment system up and running; it really simplifies things. However, I notice that the vast majority of pages have yet to be updated with the new system. I'm curious, why hasn't there been a bot- or AWB-assisted mass implementation of this? Or is that already in the works? Thanks! InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:46, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

• There is a plan to run a bot or bots to migrate to the new structure, but the editors working on changes to the templates are finding a lot of minor issues and want to resolve them first. Check Template talk:WikiProject banner shell and its archives for an idea of what is being done. Aymatth2 (talk) 15:56, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
  • I see. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:31, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Switchmen's Union of North America Charm Fob.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 02:23, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Precious

Nine years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:44, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

The article Ifeanyi Ararume has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. jlwoodwa (talk) 18:49, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Aymatth2,

I have a question about Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 198#Project-independent quality assessments closure. Not a complaint about the closure but how this change might affect pages that I monitor. Semi-regularly, I look over WikiProjects and sometimes change the status of the project to reflect an increased or decreased level of activity. Over the years, I've discovered that marking a WikiProject as "inactive" can affect or remove the quality assessment categories from articles. Occasionally, when all of the assessment categories for an inactive WikiProject are emptied, they are sometimes deleted.

Recently, I've noticed a new phenomena that I wonder might have something to do with the quality assessment banner change. To be upfront, I'm not well-versed on the article assessment process and even less so on banner templates, my interest in this subject has to do with the categories. But now I'm coming across WikiProjects where the some previously full categories are now emptied but others have been left alone. I think this will be better explained with an example, Wikipedia:WikiProject Insects/ant task force. Right now, all of the categories in Category:Ant task force articles by quality have been emptied but not the categories in Category:Ant task force articles by importance. And there are a large number of uncategorized by partially assessed articles in Category:Ant task force articles. These "by quality" categories were not emptied before now or I would have run into this issue months ago when I was last reviewing WikiProject categories. Over the past few months, I've run into other examples of where the "by quality" categories were emptied but not the "by importance" ones are not.

A slightly similar case can be found with Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Bangladesh cricket task force where the categories in Category:Bangladesh cricket articles by quality have been emptied but many articles in Category:Bangladesh cricket task force articles. If you look at Talk:2013–14 Bangladeshi cricket season, for example, the tag says that it is ranked as a Stub-class but Category:Stub-Class Bangladesh cricket articles is empty.

Could this be a problem localized to Task Forces of WikiProject? Or is this emptying of categories due to changes in the Talk page banners? Sometimes the status changes can take months to affect the emptying of categories but this doesn't seem to be the issue with the Ant task force or Bangladesh cricket task force. What do you think might be causing the emptying out of these categories, especially when other assessment categories haven't been emptied? Thanks for any insight you can provide or a pointer on whom I should talk to about this or where I might go. I'm really a neophyte when it comes to understanding the ramifications of templates. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:51, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Also the case with all of the "by quality" categories in Category:WikiProject Ethiopia articles but not the "by importance" ones and with Category:Hymenoptera articles, Category:WikiProject Philippine History, Category:WikiProject Monotremes and Marsupials, Category:WikiProject Shaktism articles and Category:Taskforce Jupiter articles and that is probably enough examples for you to check out. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:57, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

• Hello Liz. That looks like a serious issue. I think the problem is that these projects have special logic in their talk page banners, e.g. in Template:WikiProject Insects, which has not been fixed to "inherit" |class= values from the banner shell. But I am guessing. I am going to copy your note to Template talk:WikiProject banner shell, where people with the right expertise can check it. Aymatth2 (talk) 16:43, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:Lists of indigenous peoples of Russia indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 12:04, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Shopsmith logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:52, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

PLesse see my proposal to speedily rename Category:Lists of indigenous peoples of Russia to Category:Lists of Indigenous peoples of Russia. Hugo999 (talk) 01:29, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Benue is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

The Wasp ^{[my nest]} 12:28, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Uncle G (talk) 11:00, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Sheridan Nurseries logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Yeeno (talk) 04:00, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Aymatth2. The new pages patrol team is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles and redirects needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help. I believe that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting. Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines. Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions. If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here. Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around! Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:54, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village_pump_(idea_lab)/Archive_46#Project-independent_quality_assessments? Related to Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)/Archive_73#Improper_handling_of_assessment_for_inactive_WikiProjects? I lost track a bit, but I just stumbed upon Talk:Utility knife, another example of article which became unassessed after pointless deletion. My interest is still focused on restoring those deleted assessments. Didn't we have a consensus to do so? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 23:59, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

I completely lost track, my fault. The move to project-independent quality assessments turned out more complicated than expected, and I could not contribute to the many threads of technical discussion, so dropped out. I think the discussion on inactive projects has to start all over again. There should now be no controversy over retaining quality assessments for inactive projects. On categories, I would personally be in favor of retaining or restoring them for inactive wikiprojects, but dropping them for defunct wikiprojects. Should I start another Village Pump discussion, or would you like to? Aymatth2 (talk) 13:08, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

If you wouldn't mind, please do start as I am very busy IRL for at least a few more weeks due to various raasons. I fully support reforming the bigger system, but as I said, for now I think we should at least try to restore the deleted assessment framework, as it should be as easy as undeleting a bunch of pages/categories. This should be much easier than coding new templates etc. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:56, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello there, thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia! Wishing you a Very Merry Christmas and here's to a happy and productive 2024! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:12, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Hey, I appreciate you upmerging Antarctic stubs into parent articles, but you should really make sure to mark them correctly for attribution purposes. The easy-merge user script may be useful to you here as it redirects the merged article with an appropriate edit summary and adds a merged-from tag to the talk page of the target article. At the very least, if you don't use that, edit summaries ought to make clear that you're merging to and from. Something as similar as "Merged to Holland Range" at the merged article and "Merged in Davidson Glacier" at the target article is sufficient. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 16:56, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Premeditated Chaos:, I am not really merging stubs into parents. What I am doing is taking entries from Alberts, Fred G., ed. (1995), Geographic Names of the Antarctic (PDF) (2 ed.), or sometimes from the GNIS database, slightly reformatting and adding as sections in the parent articles, with attribution of the public domain source. Then I change the corresponding stubs into redirects into the parent if they do not say anything more than the Alberts (1995) entry. The stubs almost always copied from GNIS, which in turn copied from Alberts (1995). I am more comfortable copying from the original than from the stubs, which may have introduced errors.

To get a sense of the process, open Alberts (1995) then search in the text for "Holland Range". You will see 22 entries that refer to the Holland Range, mostly relevant to that article, like:

Alien Young, Mount 83°27'S, 166°52'E
A prominent pyramidal mountain, 2,755 m, standing just S of
Fegley Glacier and W of Lennox-King Glacier in the Holland
Range. Discovered by the BrAE (1907-09) and named for Sir
Alien Young, polar explorer who led the successful search for
Benjamin Leigh Smith in the Arctic in 1882.

Edited, this turns into:

===Mount Allen Young===

83°27′S 166°52′E / 83.450°S 166.867°E / -83.450; 166.867. A prominent pyramidal mountain, 2,755 metres (9,039 ft), standing just south of Fegley Glacier and west of Lennox-King Glacier. Discovered by the BrAE (1907-09) and named for Sir Allen Young, polar explorer who led the successful search for Benjamin Leigh Smith in the Arctic in 1882.^[1]

The corresponding Mount Allen Young stub, now a redirect, said:

Mount Allen Young (83°27′S 166°52′E / 83.450°S 166.867°E / -83.450; 166.867) is a prominent pyramidal mountain, 2,755 m, standing just south of Fegley Glacier and west of Lennox-King Glacier in the Holland Range. Discovered by the British Antarctic Expedition (1907–09) and named for Sir Allen Young, polar explorer who led the successful search for Benjamin Leigh Smith in the Arctic in 1882.
 This article incorporates public domain material from "Mount Allen Young". Geographic Names Information System. United States Geological Survey.

There is a whole lot of copying going on! Aymatth2 (talk) 17:26, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:Lists of Geography lists indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:16, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Aymatth2, If you have time, could you please review my draft article and make any necessary cleanups? Thank you Riad Salih (talk) 21:53, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

@Riad Salih:, the article looks excellent, and seems to fill a large gap. I am a bit tied up right now, and do not have time for a proper review, which would involve going through it line by line and comparing to the sources. But it seems comprehensive and well-sourced. Why not just move it into main space? I can do that for you if you like. Aymatth2 (talk) 17:45, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Riad Salih: sorry for the confusion, but I do think you are being a bit too cautious! I think this is in excellent shape. At some point, you have to "release" it into mainspace and let other editors start to contribute... :-) Aymatth2 (talk) 22:35, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mount Terra Nova, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mount Terror and Aurora Glacier. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 17:48, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tufts Magazine is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

{{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 23:03, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Aymatth2

I appreciate all your contributions to the articles concerning railways. Your work has been truly remarkable. I would like to inquire about the source of your information, particularly regarding the old railway companies based in Algeria (example) during the French colonization. The information you have provided in these articles are not even available on the French Wikipedia I'm intrigued to know where you acquire such extensive knowledge and passion for railways.

Best regards.

Riad Salih (talk) 03:46, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

• @Riad Salih: Thanks, but that was a long time ago. I think I was following a thread where I was researching large companies in the (then) European colonies. The sources were those listed in the articles. I would have just searched on the web for the company name, and seen what came up that looked like a reliable source. I don't think I took any articles beyond a fairly basic and incomplete outline of what they did, where and when. The available online records are very fragmentary. But again, that was a long time ago. Aymatth2 (talk) 19:45, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

  You've done an exceptional job, honestly. Your contributions to those articles were truly commendable. They proved immensely helpful to me during my research, and I sincerely appreciate your efforts. Thank you! Riad Salih (talk) 01:42, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Frank and Reuben Bottrill with Big Lizzie.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:23, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Frank and Reuben Bottrill with Big Lizzie.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:16, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Aymatth2:! I was looking at some Wikipedia pages for New Jersey cities and noted that they weren't categorized under Category:Cities in New Jersey so I started the process of adding the category to each of them. However, a few articles in, I noticed that the category is actually a diffused parent category so the cities go under the county-level category and that you had added this infobox. New Jersey appears to be the only state category in the US with a pattern like this. Every other state has the cities listed at both the state-level and county-level. Is there a reason why it is this way or can I remove the infobox and add in the rest of the Jersey cities? Aurangzebra (talk) 07:47, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

@Aurangzebra: I think that was just a mistake. I was ploughing through hundreds of geographical parent categories and for some reason flipped this one from non-diffused to diffused. I have corrected the infobox so it is consistent with all the others. Aymatth2 (talk) 12:40, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Appreciate it. Aurangzebra (talk) 20:01, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

And would this would apply only to cities in New Jersey, but other municipality types (boroughs, towns, townships and villages), as well? Alansohn (talk) 20:16, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Oh yes, that makes sense. City/county cross-listing appears to be the standard across all municipality types. Does anyone know a way to bulk add categories to specific subcategories? Aurangzebra (talk) 20:19, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:Lists of outer space lists indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:55, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:King Bell 2.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Dear Aymatth 2
You uploaded the image file using a copyright license, but I don't think the image can qualify for copyright protection because the photo was taken more than 120 years ago. Therefore, the status of the photo is in the public domain. Files you upload to Wikipedia English will be deleted because they do not meet copyright protection requirements. Thank You. Langsa Putra (talk) 16:59, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

• @Langsa Putra: there have been arguments about whether we can assume 120-year-old works are in the public domain. In a PD-70 jurisdiction, if someone made a work when they were 20 and lived 60 more years, the work would be protected for 60+70=130 years. That said, photographs are usually protected for shorter periods, and I see someone has uploaded this file to Commons, so the subject is moot. Aymatth2 (talk) 23:09, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

  Even though you include the source and the author's name, I don't know the author's death date. Therefore the license uses {PD-old-assumed} which indicates that the death date of the image creator is unknown, but the photo was taken more than 120 years ago. Don't worry, the file is already on Wikimedia Commons because it has public domain status. Files that have been uploaded to Wikipedia English will be deleted and articles that use your files will switch to files originating from Wikimedia Commons. If you know the name and date of death of the photo's photographer, please reply to my message. Thank You Langsa Putra (talk) 00:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Aymatth2. You have new messages at Talk:Mount Morning.
Message added 17:14, 29 February 2024 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:14, 29 February 2024 (UTC)