User talk:GreenMeansGo/Archive 14

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

Thanks for uploading File:Inazuma Eleven Ares 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) 02:38, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Hie sir! Recently you've reverted complete deletion of History from Bodo people page. It's manipulated version by Editor Bhaskarbhagawati. If you can help then kindly revert it before Bhaskarbhagawati edits. And warn him for manipulating cited content. Bhaskarbhagawati is behaving jealous & personal enemity towards a community in Wikipedia. Kindly teach him some lesson.

Thank you sir . 2402:3A80:DE4:2F2B:45D9:8249:EE0D:25DF (talk) 10:09, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

I don't know what your fued is with this user. I just know you were removing apparently well cited material. GMG^talk 10:22, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

? He is a real notable musician, known in the metal/punk scene. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DaniKali46 (talk • contribs) 00:29, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

@DaniKali46: I am moving this thread to GMG's Talk page from my own. Back in 2018, when the article for Ra Diaz was created, GMG redirected a version of the article to the band he was a part of, Suicidal Tendencies, per WP:NOTINHERITED. For the moment, I am questioning the reliability of two of the three sources provided on the article, which has now been moved to draftspace (the Loudwire source seems okay, though it's just a passing mention). If you can find enough WP:SIGCOV about Diaz to satisfy independent notability, then we can justify an article about him. Jalen Folf (talk) 16:59, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you JalenFolf — Preceding unsigned comment added by DaniKali46 (talk • contribs) 17:02, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		For stepping up with the only reasoned and reasonable deletion rationale at the Commons lunatic farm in the affair of the "Grandpa has a Ding-a-Ling (for those who care)" deletion debate. You had it right. See: https://chicago.suntimes.com/crime/2019/8/27/20835378/pornographic-childrens-book-charges-michael-christianson. Thanks for being a voice of reason in a place that needs more of it. Carrite (talk) 03:27, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Gee fizz. What a mess that was. I'll admit, while I knew the content was highly immoral, I hadn't figured that it was actually illegal. I suppose they left the most salacious bits out in their uploads. Anyway, there's one office ban nobody's gonna lose any sleep over. GMG^talk 10:09, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Good work. You and Foamboy made this thing [i.e. wikipedia] look almost worth saving. Qwirkle (talk) 15:53, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) - For my own curiosity, can any of you (kindly) link the debate? ∯WBG^converse 07:47, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

@Winged Blades of Godric: c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Grandpa has a Ding-a-Ling (for those who care) by Dr. Michael A Christianson 01.png. Probably a trigger warning in there somewhere. GMG^talk 12:10, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Looks like I'm going to get to go to WikiCon NA again this year. For anybody who's gonna be there, feel free to shoot me an email or something and we can exchange numbers and meet up. GMG^talk 20:30, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

I like a good history podcast. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 21:50, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

@Barkeep49: I've been listening to Revolutions. One of my privates recommended it when I told him I listened to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History podcast. I highly recommend them both. GMG^talk 22:22, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

GreenMeansGo, I was wondering if that was it. I've enjoyed the whole podcast and also recommend his book. I am looking forward to his book on Lafeyette. Mike Duncan's page could use some love but it's never been close to the top of the list for me. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 23:17, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

As far a books, I'm currently reading The Earth Is Weeping by Peter Cozzens and On the Psychology of Military Incompetence by Norman F. Dixon. GMG^talk 00:00, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

1877 St. Louis general strike I'm ready if you are? Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 21:00, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Oh yeah. I guess we are most of the way toward a good topic. I wonder whether we should merge/redirect Battle of the Viaduct while we're at it to tidy everything up nicely. At any rate, still need to wrap up Eagle Woman, to get the pending DYK out of the way, and then the GA should be all but a rubber stamp. I've been travelling the past few weeks, and doing it the Army way, which generally involves sleeping in places that weren't meant to be slept in and eating things that are generously described as "legally food". I'm sure I'll have stupid amounts of things on my desk once I get back to the office, but I'm hoping to get back to some Wikipedia work by the end of the week. GMG^talk 13:26, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Well, clearly I greatly over estimated the free time that I have... Please do let me know if you are still interested, and I think I can make the time to work on it. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 20:54, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

@Eddie891: Yes, for sure. Just a lot of bad timing really. I'll be travelling again to meet with a bunch of nerds next week. After that, yes. Time to dive into some content creation again. GMG^talk 21:12, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

On 27 October 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Eagle Woman, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Eagle Woman (pictured) is credited as the only woman to become a chief among the Sioux, and the first woman to sign a treaty with the United States? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Eagle Woman. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Eagle Woman), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 03:32, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		I'm awarding this barnstar because of your 150+ edits to Eagle Woman and your amazing efforts to improve the article to where it is now. Clovermoss (talk) 12:57, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

All due credit to User:Originalmess for all her hard work and to User:RebeccaGreen for all her meticulous checking of absolutely everything in minute detail. GMG^talk 21:17, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

I also gave Originalmess a barnstar earlier today, shortly after I added this one to your talk page. Clovermoss (talk) 00:24, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

What's the copyright status of the sketch (of Chandranath Basu) over the second page of this thesis? ∯WBG^converse 09:39, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

We'd probably need more information about where the image came from. It looks like a badly copied photo or etching rather than a sketch. Since he died in 1910, it could plausibly be public domain. But the copyright for the photo would be separate from the copyright for the thesis. Se we'd need to know where the researcher got the photo from, ideally who took it and/or when. If they are a practicing academic, we might be able to find contact information online and send them an email.

If this is just hands-down the only surviving image of this guy, then we can probably still use it locally under a claim of fair use, based on the ambiguous copyright status. GMG^talk 10:22, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

To the best of my knowledge, the author of the thesis has expired and I don't find it feasible to retrieve more details about the ambiguous copyright status. I can't confidently vet about this being the only surviving image of Basu -- I mean, how do I know, whether some of his heirs do have some other copy of his photograph or not?! ∯WBG^converse 12:30, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Well, we really just need to make a good-faith argument to satisfy NFCC#1. Basically, this guy has been dead for 110 years, and so we've had 110 years for any alternative photo whatsoever to surface. The only thing we can find anywhere is a single poor-quality photo from an obscure 40 year old thesis, and the only person we can identify to even ask the question to is dead. The photo is very possibly public domain anyway, since it's probably from around the turn of the century, but again, the only person we can identify to even ask is dead.

It's at least convincing enough for me to !vote keep at an FfD. GMG^talk 12:54, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/User_talk:GreenMeansGo/Block_request --VerdeEsMovimento (talk) 20:39, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Is that vandalism? Some of it looks like fixing places where people tried to put a million exclamation marks randomly into articles. GMG^talk 21:34, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Mutant Football League video game logo 2017.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) 17:42, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:The Legend of Heroes Trails of Cold Steel III video game logo 2017.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) 18:42, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Hey, you removed Murray Energy content in this edit. I was surprised but Murray Energy is just a redirect to his page, so I'm not sure that your edit summary is accurate. tedder (talk) 15:57, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Hmm...wait one. GMG^talk 16:05, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for doing the work! I'll try to contribute if/when I can. tedder (talk) 16:50, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for pointing out my mistake. Probably good enough for the article to stand on its own two feet for the time being. GMG^talk 16:53, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:There There cover art 2018.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) 18:53, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:18, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

You chipped in on a prior COI request on this page, so I thought I would see if you had a minute to consider my comments here. It looks like the editor I pinged isn't really very active anymore. CorporateM (Talk) 20:40, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Well it ought not be arranged as it was, but I've shuffled things around. Your point that the criticism takes up about a third of the lead...eh...the criticism takes up a pretty substantial portion of the body too. As to the specifics of what's true here or not? I'm not really a tech guy honestly. Looks like my old bourbon buddy User:BarrelProof has been around the talk page a bit. Any thoughts? GMG^talk 20:50, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

I appreciate the ping. A few comments from a quick look: 1) This "criticism" in the lead consists of only three sentences, and doesn't strike me as obviously excessive. 2) One of those three sentences (about half of the content of that paragraph) is not really a criticism of Yelp itself, but of the vulnerability of Yelp's system to the submission of fake reviews by third parties; that is a problem that is inherent in any system that invites reviews submitted by anonymous or unverified members of the public. 3) The placement of paid ads about competitors' businesses and the former practice of "featured reviews" (and the blaming of some problems on "rogue salespeople") seem sufficient to say that the company has acknowledged some practices that are vulnerable to criticism. Trust is a fundamental issue for any company that offers reviews as their primary business. —BarrelProof (talk) 04:35, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@BarrelProof: Would you be against something like this?

"The company has acknowledged these some practices like allowing businesses to advertise on competitor pages to some degree, while denying certain behavior any manipulation of reviews based on advertising spend.

The phrase "these practices" was intended to refer to "unfair practices." However, since an entire sentence is put into "e.g." it reads like "these practices" is referring to manipulating reviews, of which there are no aspects Yelp has acknowledged. Alternatively, removing the "e.g." portion would make the whole statement general enough not to be misleading and would make it more clear that "These practices" is referring to the prior sentence. CorporateM (Talk) 13:15, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

What source are we using for this? GMG^talk 13:17, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

:::::Hmmm.... Oh... I see now I did not read the e.g. portion closely enough. It clearly states two different things: manipulating reviews and allowing you to advertise on competitor pages. The acknowledgement was intended to refer to advertising on competitor pages, while the denial was intended to be for the reference to manipulating reviews. It could make this more clear. However, I do not see the fact that they allow advertising on the pages of competitors mentioned as a criticism anywhere in the body or positioned as a controversy anywhere in the sources.[1] I believe allowing advertising on competitor pages is something that frustrates some small business owners, but a quick Google News search does not reveal any sources for characterizing it as a controversy Yelp would "acknowledge" as opposed to a routine feature. Maybe you guys will see something I missed. CorporateM (Talk) 13:51, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

It looks the current content in the Lead regarding advertising on competitor pages may be referring to the content "Journalist David Lazarus of the Los Angeles Times also criticized Yelp in 2014 for the practice of selling competitors' ads to run on top of business listings and then offering to have the ads removed as part of a paid feature" (source) in the body of the page. I'm not sure what "The company has acknowledged these practices to some degree" would be cited to. It's a stretch to use the same source. Removing it as uncited for now might also work, until someone finds a citation and adds Yelp's acknowledgement to the body of the article. I'll post over there. CorporateM (Talk) 14:58, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Have they really denied all "manipulation" of reviews based on affiliation status or only denied alteration of the content of reviews? In my opinion, the "featured review" practice that was discontinued in 2010 is a manipulation of reviews – giving some review much greater prominence than others in exchange for payment. —BarrelProof (talk) 04:41, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Thinking more about it, I don't think that sentence really says very much (at least not very clearly), and so I just removed it. However, the article does say that some of their sales reps have used questionable tactics, and I added a mention of that in the lead. —BarrelProof (talk) 05:08, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

could you elaborate what this means ? Guy had a good point. --DBigXrayᗙ 12:46, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

At the time, I had just a few hours earlier finished tidying up q:WQ:VfD, and was cleaning up after one of our beloved LTAs. GMG^talk 13:17, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Appreciate your kind reply. In addition to the above, in past you had also helped me with my helpdesk query on commons. Clearly you have your hands full. --DBigXrayᗙ 10:59, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Jack of all trades and a master of none. But feel free to stop by any time I can help. GMG^talk 12:18, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

I have decided that Draft:House guest will be my next effort, if you're interested. Cheers! BD2412 T 15:32, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

I'd like to. I'd also said I'd help rework 1877 St. Louis general strike. But it seems I've not had sustained time for much lately other than a few comments and some random cross-wiki tinkering. Hopefully things will clear up soon and I can get back to some concentrated content work. GMG^talk 22:30, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

I don't see anything particularly wrong with the strike article. What's missing? BD2412 T 23:47, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

It's not a GA, and we've gotten close to a good topic on the 1877 strikes. GMG^talk 23:52, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:British Naturism logo 2018.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) 03:27, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Can I remove that template? The template clearly says: "You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to deletion for any reason." Uranarse doesn't seem to understand what "or" means. And the template says: "If this template is removed, do not replace it." I don't wanna break the three-revert rules, but isn't this an exception? And I suspect Uranarse of being a sockpuppet/alternate account of Jude1313. Israell (talk) 17:16, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

NinjaRobotPirate removed it. Thx for intervening earlier. Israell (talk) 17:39, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

@Israell: Just a note on filing SPIs, since I see yours didn't go the way you though it would. But when looking for sockpuppets, a lot of what you're looking for are mannerisms that no one thinks to hide. So, for example, if I were filing an SPI on myself, I had a bad habit for a long time of saying "talking across purposes" rather than "talking at cross purposes". I also have a habit of using rhetorical uncertainty, saying things like "I don't know I see how" or "I don't quite understand why" as a way of saying "I think you're wrong". You can also look for idiosyncratic use of punctuation, people who like to use ellipses a lot, or use semi-colons or em dashes in a way that most people don't. Also idiosyncratic use of templates, like always using Template:Yo to reply to users, or always using <i></i> to italicize text rather than using the double colon.

These are the kinds of things that people don't necessarily think to hide when they're thinking about hiding something. Lots of people may share a topical interest out of happen stance, but something like how you use edit summaries, formatting or punctuation often become habits in ways that we don't recognize even when we're paying attention to it. GMG^talk 11:52, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Damon Runyon's short story "Dancing Dan's Christmas" is a fun read if you have the time. Right from the start it extols the virtues of the hot Tom and Jerry This hot Tom and Jerry is an old-time drink that is once used by one and all in this country to celebrate Christmas with, and in fact it is once so popular that many people think Christmas is invented only to furnish an excuse for hot Tom and Jerry, although of course this is by no means true. No matter what concoction is your favorite to imbibe during this festive season I would like to toast you with it and to thank you for all your work here at the 'pedia this past year. Best wishes for your 2020 as well GMG. MarnetteD|Talk 11:45, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks @MarnetteD:. There's been a bit more sadness in my holiday season than I'd like. It's good to have a bit of cheer. GMG^talk 23:46, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

I am glad to have been even a small bit of help. My very deep sympathies and best wishes to you! MarnetteD|Talk 00:00, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Interstellarity (talk) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks @Interstellarity:. All the best to you and yours. GMG^talk 00:00, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for continuing to make Wikipedia the greatest project in the world. I hope you have an excellent holiday season. Lightburst (talk) 23:19, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

I wish that you may have a very Happy Holiday! Whether you celebrate Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Hogmanay, Festivus or your hemisphere's Solstice, this is a special time of year for almost everyone! May the New Year provide you joy and fulfillment! Thanks for everything you do here. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 10:12, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Coffee/Holidays}} to your fellow editors' talk pages.

Hmm? I think I've been visited by a ghost of Christmases past. To you also Coffee. Hope everything is well. GMG^talk 12:38, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

I just truly want to thank you for your help with these images! The only one thing we need these days is a person to scratch your back when you need it. Have a good rest to everything you do!--Ελ Γκρέκο (talk) 22:17, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

No problem at all @Ελ Γκρέκο:. Sorry if the process was frustrating at first. It can take a little while to get used to the way you have to document things to make sure the images are really free. If you're ever looking to upload something new and you'd like a second opinion on it, feel free to stop by my talk page and I'll give it a look. GMG^talk 22:30, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Oh I will surely do that as long as I am still getting the hang of documenting things. And the only frustrating thing was my arrogance when I uploaded new images without even knowing how to do it the right way. Have a happy new year and I wish you the best!--Ελ Γκρέκο (talk) 22:42, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

GreenMeansGo,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 17:13, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

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

And you to also Eddie891. GMG^talk 17:36, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Dear mister GreenMeansGo! Here I am again, in need of your help! I wrote a Greek page about Father Sir Charles Dilke, 6th baronet. I want to upload a photo of him in the infobox and the only one I found is this one. Could I crop the photo so as to be only him in the photo and upload it to the Commons? I have no idea how to do it the right way (not having any issues with copyrights). And it would mean a lot to me if you could upload it yourself WHENEVER and IF you get the time to do so. Always in your debt!⟵El Greco^{♔Go Ahead♔} 22:51, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Hey Ελ Γκρέκο. It looks like that photo isn't free. You can tell this by the bit on Flickr that says "all rights reserved", while free photos will say "some rights reserved" and will have a link to the license. So unfortunately, no matter how you crop it, it will still be unfree. Newer media is much more likely to be unfree, as we can't count on the copyright expiring because a great deal of time has elapsed. Unfortunately, sometimes we have to write articles without media, with the expectation that long after we are gone, someone will come back and add media once it falls into the public domain. This may qualify for a low qualify fair use version, but that would depend on the Greek standards for non-free media. So I'm afraid you'd have to ask someone there familiar with the local policy. GMG^talk 22:58, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Well I understand. I might just have to wait for our offspring to settle this! Thanks anyway sir! Take care!⟵El Greco^{♔Go Ahead♔} 23:45, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung/Evidence. Please add your evidence by January 28, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, CodeLyoko^talk 05:08, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello. You are invited to join the Dr. Blofeld CCI cleanup effort, a project which aims to cleanup and resolve the largest copyright investigation on the site. Directions on how to help are at the main cleanup page. It is ok if you choose not to assist, as a large number of people are already helping out – but your contributions would be appreciated, even if you make just a few. 💴Money💶💵emoji💷Talk💸Help out at CCI! 00:39, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

I'd like your thoughts on this topic, as I have another editor who has attempted several times to delete the article now there and copy-and-paste the old disambiguation page over to this title. The baseline question is whether there is an encyclopedic concept of "potential" that can support an encyclopedia article. BD2412 T 20:15, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

@BD2412: It may be better to write Human potential and turn Potential into the dab. The whole #In science and mathematics section tries to be a dab and probably doesn't belong. There seem to be quite a few sources to choose from on first glance, but we'd probably have to be careful about weeding out "woo" and self-help touchy-feely stuff. But there is [2] [3] [4] just in some initial poking around. GMG^talk 21:27, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

I tend to think, actually, that the primary topic of the term is a general scientific concept encompassing all of the senses in science and mathematics. There are many actual uses of the term in the encyclopedia where a generic scientific potential is intended, without specifying which one. I had previously made a stab at a separate "human potential" article, but would be glad to give it another go. BD2412 T 21:51, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Inappropriate truth to save lives, its genocide love, like it or not, sorry

No bother, at least I'm trying

I'll probably just read art in future, more words in that, that's why I use to like this website

sorry

jonny abet — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:30D2:7000:E88D:1F12:2833:8E6C (talk) 20:34, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Wikipedia is not a place to right great wrongs, even wrongs that we may all uncontroversial agree on. It's purpose is merely to be an encyclopedia. Nothing more. Nothing less. GMG^talk 20:36, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Community view before Friday.

Only 100 or so words. It should be fun and serious at the same time.

All the best,

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 23:50, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

@Smallbones: Are you asking for someone to review the current draft or suggest additions? GMG^talk 00:40, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Please add a "nomination" - what article do you consider to be "th most important since November 1, 2105"? Smallbones_(smalltalk) 00:42, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

A friendly talkpage gnome showed up in your garden overnight, and started pruning the bushes. It seems it's here to keep an eye out for pesky kids with spray cans. --moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 16:51, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm confused. Or did I really get that many pings overnight that I didn't notice something? GMG^talk 16:53, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

GreenMeansGo, Its more that I thought "Why am I not watchlisting this talk page, GMG has the full potential to be a frequent target"

I usually watch my watchlist /very/ closely, so it never hurts to add an extra page to it. moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 16:55, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Also the overnight thing was me just making fluff. I showed up just around.. now. moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 16:55, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Well, feel free to stop by if I can ever be of help. GMG^talk 17:58, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

OK, I agree, it's enough. He knows now. But the obsession by you-know-who is far beyond "enough". 23 edits on a Rfc? He needs to leave GT alone. 86.187.233.204 (talk) 16:44, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

You are more than welcome to contribute to discussion there constructively if you wish. But if your intention is to "defend" the subject by repeatedly posting off-topic aspersions, you will likely lose your technical ability to edit that page. GMG^talk 16:46, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

OK thank you. 86.187.233.204 (talk) 16:50, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello! I had made an article which is now showing redirecting issues. I tried to do as per instructions regarding redirecting and also post the template on my sandbox but there are no changes or else I am not getting it. Can you please help me to understand what should I actually do? I am an amateur at this community, so an easier description and guidance will be helpful for me. I am seeing the following message on my user page:

Symbol redirect arrow with gradient.svg This page is a redirect: From a page move: This is a redirect from a page that has been moved (renamed). This page was kept as a redirect to avoid breaking links, both internal and external, that may have been made to the old page name. When appropriate, protection levels are automatically sensed, described and categorized.SSR1989 (talk) 15:40, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Hey SSR1989. The software automatically leaves redirects behind when pages are moved. If you click on your sandbox, you'll be redirected to the other page, but there will be a link in the upper left that says "Redirected from User:SSR1989/sandbox". If you click on that link, you can edit your sandbox and remove the redirect.

Having said that, there is a lot of language in your article that is not appropriate for an Encyclopedia. "Passion and commitment", "pioneered", "instrumental", these are all meaningless puffery. An encyclopedia generally only uses dry language, and only as much as is necessary to convey the basic facts. There is also a lot of text there than has no source for the information. Either there should be a sourced provided, or the content should be removed. GMG^talk 15:54, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. Working on the issuesSSR1989 (talk) 16:07, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Hii, You gave reviewed my new created page Ashish Rudhra. Ashish Rudhra is a popular Influencer and Entrepreneur from India. Please tell me more about how can i do it to move this article on live space. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trishneet Arora India (talk • contribs) 14:23, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Hey Trishneet Arora India. In order to qualify for a Wikipedia article, a subject needs to meet Wikipedia's standards for notability, which requires sustained in-depth coverage in independent, reliable, published sources, usually things like books, magazines and newspapers. Poor quality sources like official websites, press releases, and advertorial content on blogging platforms like Medium do not contribute to this standard. If these are the only types of sources that are currently available, then the subject does not yet qualify for an article.

Unlike standards that may exist on other platforms, notability on Wikipedia is based solely on the existence of these high quality sources, and is not related to popularity, fame, or importance. GMG^talk 15:00, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello, GreenMeansGo. Elizabeth Willing Powel, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. EnterpriseyBot (talk!) 12:01, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

... sorry. Trapped on a conference call but your FTN comment made me chortle to the point of needing my mute button.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4657810/

Julietdeltalima (talk) 22:35, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

You...occasionally find people on Wikipedia who may benefit from professional mental health services. But I'm told it's considered uncivil to recommend them, even if it's intended as genuine advice from someone with a background in mental health, and not as a personal attack. GMG^talk 22:50, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Heh, this has never happened to me before. I almost published my version of this article on February 1st but was distracted by real life events. I actually had it pasted into the wikipedia article editor but had to leave my office early and closed the window before submitting. I logged in today and saw the article alert. I've been researching this family in my spare time for the last few years. The family had an important role in early American history. Much of it is untold. Thank you for posting the article. I will merge my work with yours a few weeks after the DYK nomination has concluded. DavidDelaune (talk) 00:45, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Hey David No worries at all. Quite the opposite. We'd love to have your input, especially if you've been researching the subject, and ideally before it gets featured on the main page for lots of people to see for the first time. None of us own the article. The more the merrier, especially if you have access to sources that the rest of us don't. GMG^talk 01:01, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:33, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

On 21 February 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Elizabeth Willing Powel, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that it was reportedly Elizabeth Willing Powel (pictured) who asked Benjamin Franklin whether the United States was to be "a republic or a monarchy", to which he responded: "A republic ... if you can keep it"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Elizabeth Willing Powel. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Elizabeth Willing Powel), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

--valereee (talk) 00:01, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Netherlands national football team logo 2017.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) 03:39, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Russia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Don't revert the pages, I strictly added the accurate information needed. Enough is enough, cease these action or I will take action. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IntercontinentalEmpire (talk • contribs) 16:52, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Go for it IntercontinentalEmpire. I believe the correct place for you to report me would be at WP:ANI. GMG^talk 16:55, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Warning a user. Amaury • 17:03, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

I foresee this going well for them. GMG^talk 17:04, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

WP:WIKIPROPHET petroglyph awarded, —PaleoNeonate – 06:22, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Please refrain from threatening me from correcting misinformation. Thanks. If you would like to discuss what you feel is wrong with my changes by all means but please dont try to intimidate me from making changes which I know are correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cypriot Chauvinist (talk • contribs) 20:37, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

That wasn't a threat; it was a warning, and one you should probably take seriously. You been edit warring on that article for weeks now and you're liable to be blocked for it. GMG^talk 20:46, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team

Following up from elsewhere. No objection to DOE all-caps, but lowercase 'o' is used frequently within agencies. E.g. the GPO Style Manual and Department of Defense Manual for Written Material specify DoD, plus the latter specifies DOE. One can easily find examples of DoN, DoD and DoE in official documents as well as all-caps versions of the same. It's interesting that our MOS flatly says all caps for intialisms, but then we acknowledge this isn't the case for example at Ministry of Defence (United Kingdom) - Bri.public (talk) 18:03, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Well, the Government Publishing Office recommends XOX for everything other than DoS and DoD (formerly Department of War). I suspect this is an artifact of these being the oldest executive departments, and a hold-over from 18th century styles. Well, with the exception of Department of the Treasury (the other 1789 dept), which ends up getting shoved over to USDT, presumably because of Transportation. GMG^talk 18:26, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Just to keep things interesting, I noticed that Navy sometimes thinks it is DoN, sometimes not. E.g. "Vision 98" from Secretary of Navy glossary and Naval Postgraduate School thesis style guide capitalization reference sheet both specify DoN, but the official correspondence manual itself refers to DON. And – uh oh – another official acronym list has no lowercase 'o' departments at all, including DOD. For its part, the Army usually uses USA, so *shrug*. - Bri.public (talk) 21:11, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Do we? I'm pretty sure we mostly just use "U.S. Army". USA would be a terribly confusing abbreviation in that context. And anyway, the "Department of the Army" is a little different than "the Army". When you reference the "Department of the Army" you're normally talking about the Chiefs of Staff and bureaucrats above major command level. You wouldn't normally talk about the 82nd Airborne Division being part of the Department of the Army, but simply part of the Army. GMG^talk 21:24, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, USA is "United States Army" according to the Joint Chiefs dictionary, page 354. It also specifies DOD in contravention to some documents above. And uses DA for the department, which I have literally never heard used. Also referenced as such at United States Army lede. However I would not recommend that we use that widely, because as you say, it causes confusion with the nation. Bri.public (talk) 22:30, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Well, that may make sense in the context of the Joint Chiefs, where their primary purpose is the differentiate between branches of services at the highest level. It's not something that's regularly used in correspondence at the boot level, or in public-facing correspondence. GMG^talk 22:38, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

You guys disappoint me. You shoulda been able to work in EAR at least once by now.

One reason USA has lost ground is that it used to be a meaningful differentiator between Regular and Reserve, which is no longer a meaningful distinction. It left, so to speak, with AUS. Qwirkle (talk) 16:16, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Well, ARNG (Army National Guard) and USAR (U.S. Army Reserve) are still things that are used. Thinking about it, ARNG/USAR/USA side-by-side in a drop down menu or something is probably the only case where I would expect to see USA used. GMG^talk 16:20, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Simplify. ;-) Buffs (talk) 19:38, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

To be fair, they are the second largest air force in the world. GMG^talk 19:59, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I ask that you stop vandalising my writing specifically to do with Cyprus (As the country) and Operation atilla. I believe you are misinformed about the situation.

The UN considers the invasion as a ceasefire armistice as shown here:

https://unficyp.unmissions.org/supervision-cease-fire

Additionally, with regards to Cyprus, the reason I had removed turkish Cypriot was that now the de facto state has been set up, they are no longer a minority as they have set up their own de facto state and it has a wikipedia as shown here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Cyprus

So I ask that you stop vandalizing my work given that I live in Cyprus and know the history a lot better than you do unless you have any proof that I am wrong. If you continue to vandalize my work I will simply report you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cypriot Chauvinist (talk • contribs) 15:29, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

I believe you've already reported me. Feel free to do so again. Given that your only purpose here appears to be the advancement of some particular nationalistic narrative, I don't expect you will be with us for very long. GMG^talk 16:21, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

That was a good monologue! Oddly enough, you edit-conflicted my apology to CAWylie, which included blaming the heat, sniffles and delusion on "sweet crack cocaine". Also oddly enough, I was seriously considering taking seven years off and heading west, anyway, strictly for lucky love (I don't even do crack IRL, much less sell it). Also, that mysterious IP last showed up ten years ago to edit the Umrah and Organ transplant articles. Also, I intentionally namedropped Donnie, Elizabeth and Frank as an allusion to another post-9/11 movie about a rebel and a plane. And I'd edited Ezekiel 25 last night! And your talk page is watched by ancient spirits this afternoon! And they aren't buying my story, but it's true! I'd heard the title of that movie before, but had no idea there was a fucking Frank in it, especially one so frankly fucking the fear system. His old girl even has my old girl's name (to an extent). I don't know what it all means, but it's all coming together regardless. Any advice on what to watch next? InedibleHulk (talk) 19:07, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm afraid I'm kindof a boring person to ask. Honestly, they got Lincoln (film) on Netflix and I've watched it like five times now, mostly because I really like 19th century period pieces. GMG^talk 19:18, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Fuck Netflix! Thanks for the suggestion, though. Did you get the five stories I referenced in my non-answers to you earlier? InedibleHulk (talk) 19:34, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

I admit I'm not the sharpest tack at the moment. Currently going through my semi-annual ritual of reminiscing about he good old days when I had a back. GMG^talk 19:38, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Mine's going, but not gone yet. Maybe I'll watch that, just to be sure. Have a pleasant and safe trip down memory lane, and if the rest of you is still here in seven years, I'll fill you in on what went down! InedibleHulk (talk) 20:39, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Sad part is I'm just 35. But then again, all I have to do is get over to Afghanistan and screw myself up real good, and I can edit Wikipedia full time, not that the Army didn't do it to begin with. GMG^talk 23:00, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm 37 and haven't re-adapted to society in any meaningful way since listening to the voice in my head that said 26 wasn't too old to escape through college. Just wound up down here, making neither love nor war, only cheap textual representations of the general themes. But I learned something today: the only thing capable of screwing myself up is myself. Others may try, but in the end, the choice on how to process lemons is 100% internal. You can cry if you want to, die if you want to, but I can't live here anymore. I'm dying alone in 63 years, and so can you. Fuck science! It failed our mother, Earth. Spirit moves through all things. (Or so I still hear the voices say.) See you at 42, and thanks for all the fish! InedibleHulk (talk) 21:28, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Heh. Well. You're entirely more ambitious than I am. As a guy who for some reason just paid an old man cut a hole in him, stick a tube in, and sew it shut, I have more modest goals at the moment, like making it to the weekend. But I have been thinking about writing a book. Or at least attempting to write a book again. GMG^talk 21:48, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Just got a hernia repaired Friday. I don’t actually feel your pain, but I have a reasonable simulacrum of my own available handy... Qwirkle (talk) 23:00, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Us lot, we're just fit for the nursing home already aren't we? GMG^talk 23:03, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

We're a rare breed. You know, people who could be using their time to make money, but instead they use it to make this thing they give away for free. We should all probably get our heads checked, but at least we're in good company. If that sounds derivative, it should. The novel inside you that never gets out has always been part of The Neverending Story. Don't feel bad about a lack of royalties, you can't spend them on the paper they're printed on anyway, the rate the common moneymakers are retiring today. Just remember what you wished for, Bastions, and give your childlike empresses their names. They're immune to this Nothing killing Fantasia. They'll know how to honour us sick and dying. Through song, locked away in symbols, free on Spotify. That's what Agent Stone and Colonel Parker must've meant by "Freedom isn't Free". Publishers charge a hefty fucking fee. But still $6.95 cheaper than Netflix. Fuck Netflix. Go chill! Go Lincoln! Go mean green machine! But do not go into the light or the darkness, gently or otherwise. The Twilight Zone still needs you both. Find your third wheel, quit buying and keep trying! InedibleHulk (talk) 02:10, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Re: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alex_Jones&action=history

Hi, I'm relatively new to Wikipedia and don't understand why you reverted my recent edit. I appreciate your experienced input! Does there need to be a consensus for anything added to Alex Jones's page?

I am certainly no fan of Alex Jones, but thought it still pertinent to note he was driving (barely) within the legal alcohol levels on the DWI.

I'm not sure how that is controversial. Would there be a better way to include this information? Thanks! ..... Reference:

Wikipedia discussion: "Don't revert due solely to "no consensus" it is noted "We're not saying "don't revert", just "give a better reason than 'no consensus' " https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Don%27t_revert_due_solely_to_%22no_consensus%22 Beth Timken (talk) 15:47, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Hey Beth Timken. The real issue is complying with Wikipedia's standards for biographies of living persons, which requires that these article be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. That goes across the board whether you or I happen to be a fan or a detractor. There is an open discussion about the content on the talk page, but it does not look like there is currently a consensus to restore the material. GMG^talk 15:49, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

..."It is original research for any editor to write that this novel virus is the same in this specific regard as the earlier viruses described in the literature, and therefore sources published before December, 2019 should be excluded from this article"

No one is talking about SARS-CoV-2. The debate at the article is on the claim of the church that the Cup is sterile, since it is God himself. A 1998 scientific publication says that it is not sterile and bacteria or viruses can pass from person to person. (and cites other scientific articles/experements). That's why the sentence I am proposing is not about the novel Coronovirus. It is about the ritual of Common Cup. Cheers, Cinadon36 16:08, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@Cinadon36: I believe you have me confused with @Cullen328:. GMG^talk 16:11, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Oh, that's embarrassing! lol, sorry! Cinadon36 16:13, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

No worries. You know. We're both so witty and good looking it happens all the time. GMG^talk 16:15, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

We spend a lot of time updating https://coronavirususamap.com/ with information for the public and link back to Wikipedia. We have gotten many thank yous from visitors.

This is not SPAM and you need to stop removing links, who do you think you are?

What is your problem?

GolfEditorUSA (talk) 19:31, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

@GolfEditorUSA: I'm the guy who just reverted every link you've ever added, and if you add any more links to these garbage Morton Technologies LLC websites, I'm the guy who's going to have you blocked. GMG^talk 19:33, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Ok tough guy, I will undo every change you ever made. Fucking idiot. GolfEditorUSA (talk) 19:35, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I foresee that working out well for you. GMG^talk 19:37, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. GolfEditorUSA (talk) 19:44, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GolfEditorUSA (talk • contribs) 20:16, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Here @GolfEditorUSA: Let me help. Click here and fill out the box. Don't forget to sign your post with four tildes like this: ~~~~. Then press the button that says "publish changes". Someone will attend to your complaint shortly. GMG^talk 20:19, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. GolfEditorUSA (talk) 19:45, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello GreenMeansGo. I am not sure what this editor is up to but, as I type this, they have not started a thread at either the EW or the ANI pages. Regards. MarnetteD|Talk 19:58, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps they are carefully crafting their arguments. GMG^talk 20:00, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Anything is possible in these strange times that we are living in :-) Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 20:02, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Well, what I was considering, though I'm not sure how feasible it might be, is whether we could have a blacklist entry for any site that contains the string Morton Technologies LLC regardless of the domain. GMG^talk 20:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Seems like a good idea but my grasp on that kind of programming is minimal. MarnetteD|Talk 20:19, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Eagle Woman you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CaroleHenson -- CaroleHenson (talk) 20:41, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

The article Eagle Woman you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Eagle Woman for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CaroleHenson -- CaroleHenson (talk) 15:02, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

The file File:Co-Op Academy Swinton (The Swinton High School) logo.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

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

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

The article Eagle Woman you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Eagle Woman for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CaroleHenson -- CaroleHenson (talk) 17:02, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		Just wanna say thank you for all the work you've put in! :) originalmessbusta rhyme 10:19, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

FYI, this is a fun one. Cheers! BD2412 T 03:46, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Template:Uw-copyright-img2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:35, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Precious

Three years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:48, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hey GMG and @Andy Dingley:, I don't if you remember this fun discussion, but BMK is back again with a new trick up his sleeves: Calling some a Nazi and thereby claiming WP:NONAZIS, allowing him to do what he wants. He has not learned from the previous discussions and continues to push for his view. This is honestly really tiring. You both previously expressed a desire to take it to ANI, still interested? Skjoldbro (talk) 06:39, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@Skjoldbro: Sigh. Do I have the time at the moment to dig up all the relevant diffs from months ago and file a detailed report? Unfortunately no. But I guess if you do I can be bothered to say "this is dumb as hell"...because it's exactly as dumb as edit warring over whether an image is in sepia or black-and-white, because one or the other glorifies the subject. GMG^talk 10:54, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

I have created a list of all the diffs, spanning from the first following ANI to the most recent (Yesterday). Unfortunately, I don't have the same way with words as you do. Skjoldbro (talk) 08:54, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi GreenMeansGo, I wanted to make you aware of the deletion and salting of a page.

Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2021_June_17

Your recent edit had this summary: you asked to avoid inline references on talk pages if possible and use external links instead. Can you explain what you meant by that? I checked on Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines and it says this: "Keep the layout clear: Use standard formatting and threading. If you include references, add reflist-talk or sources-talk after your comment, to keep citations within your thread. See Talk page layout." Forich (talk) 17:22, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Hey User:Forich. No worries. Using inline citations on talk pages can be confusing because of how the software works. The latest {{reflist talk}} just catches everything above it on the page, regardless of whether it's relevant, and if there is none, then everything just stacks a the bottom of the page. Most of the time it's just easier to use external links, like saying Well According to the Atlantic... such and such... It's not required by policy but is just kindof used generally as a popular convention. GMG^talk 18:46, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi GreenMeansGo, you are receiving this notice because you are listed as an active Articles for Creation reviewer.

Recently a list of reviewers by area of expertise was created. This notice is being sent out to alert you to the existence of that list, and to encourage you to add your name to it. If you or other reviewers come across articles in the queue where an acceptance/decline hinges on specialist knowledge, this list should serve to facilitate contact with a fellow reviewer.

To end on a positive note, the backlog has dropped below 1,500, so thanks for all of the hard work some of you have been putting into the AfC process!

Sent to all Articles for Creation reviewers as a one-time notice. To opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Regards, Sam-2727 (talk)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on File:Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism Logo 2017.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused duplicate or lower-quality copy of another file on Wikipedia having the same file format, and all inward links have been updated.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. – BrandonXLF (talk) 04:46, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello,

I am writing to you today because you write at m:Requests for comment/Should the Foundation call itself Wikipedia that Wikimedia should not be renamed. Now It is possible to take part in an official online survey until June 30th. Please take your time and save Wikimedia!

Thank a lot and best regard! --JohnDoe06.2020 (talk) 11:27, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Not sure if you actually can help. It's fine if you don't want to. But sent this to the arb committee for review.

I have issues with MarkH21 and Loksmythe

I've been watching a page on Adrian Zenz. Those two have honestly been gaslighting and are not being neutral to the topic. They should be reasonably aware that what they are doing is wrong. They have been given sources and clear evidence but they refuse to acknowledge it. Then they just lock the topic and tell other people that Adrian Zenz never endorsed hostile homophobia.

One of the sources is literally excerpts of his book. Could not be more objective.

Any idiot can read the pages in source below and clearly see that his book indeed claims that the decriminalisation of homosexuality in modern society, as something he is firmly against. Not that surprising considering he's a christian fubdamentalist. HIS owm book is literally the source that backs it.

Source https://books.google.com.au/books?id=lRtSQB3HHJcC&pg=PA31&lpg=PA31&dq=Worthy+to+Escape:+Why+All+Believers+Will+Not+Be+Raptured+Before+the+Tribulation+homosexual&source=bl&ots=svggzXNAy1&sig=ACfU3U2WRU34VvXkhgM9GT47foYdUJmiCQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj10eiCt6zqAhV8wTgGHf1nCvwQ6AEwAHoECAQQAQ#v=onepage&q=Worthy%20to%20Escape%3A%20Why%20All%20Believers%20Will%20Not%20Be%20Raptured%20Before%20the%20Tribulation%20homosexual&f=false

Other sources mention it too.

It's only because Adrian is also hostile to China. They are motivated to hide his skeletons. Which isn't right.

Because they wants people to have zero awareness of his already very public stance on homosexuality and gender equality. They delete all mentions of it. Except wikipedia doesn't do this kind of public relations and it ideally shows all major facts.

That Adrian is a christian fundamentalist who pushed a published book that warns about the anti-christ and telling other christians to help oppose laws that protect gay people and gender equality. They know these are facts but they hide it as they don't want people to see that side about him.

Except I'm not gay myself but still oppose homophobia and Adrian is a guy who published a solid selling book advocating for laws to discriminate against gays. And I can't turn a blind eye to that. MangoTareeface9 (talk) 16:36, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Hey @MangoTareeface9: First off, sorry that you seem to have had a frustrating experience. I'm not sure I can fix everything but maybe I can help explain a little better. Full disclosure, I've never heard of Zenz, and there's like eight pages of discussion on the talk page, and I have admittedly not read the whole thing.

As far as the meaningfulness of "his own words", this is often one way that Wikipedia can be different then writing in almost any other context. If you're writing for a magazine for instance, "his own words" is gonna be the best thing possible, right? What could be closer to the source? But on Wikipedia, his own writing is a primary source when he himself is the topic, and we can't engage in original critical commentary on his primary writings, because we get into trouble with original research. What we need instead is a secondary source, someone looking at his writings, and engaging in their own critical commentary that we can then attribute and cite.

One example where this tends to come up a lot is with racists of pretty much every flavor. Very seldom do you have someone who fires up their word processor and says "I'm a huuge racist. Seriously. Super racist." No, normally they'll come out and say... "I'm an identity traditionalist." ...Or whatever the trendy euphemism for racist is these days. So we often end up with these debates where we have say, 10 secondary sources on one hand saying dude is a literal Nazi, and dude himself saying "This is slander! I'm a [insert euphemism]." Obviously we can see how it would be problematic there if we were to prefer to get our information straight from the horse's mouth, and that's why we have a pretty across-the-board policy that makes us prefer secondary sourcing.

I'm not saying this guy isn't a homophobe. He may very well be. But that's not something where we can connect the dots on Wikipedia. We have to find secondary sources that connect the dots for us. Hopefully that makes some sense. GMG^talk 11:39, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Good thing you aren’t grabbing for the mop again; I can just picture certain parts of that being selectively quoted.... Qwirkle (talk) 15:47, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Let's be honest, if I did ever run for RfA again and the fact that I already have mops twice over isn't sufficient, then it doesn't matter anyway. GMG^talk 16:26, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Heh. Moplettes, you mean.

Point taken, though. Qwirkle (talk) 18:57, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

I really do appreciate you taking the time to read and reply to my post. I am however aware of "original research" prior but there are certain cases where it's obvious. And it's not "original research" but merely quoting the author.

Adrian Zenz own book stated that laws that protect gays from discrimination. Are what is destroying the world. It's not exactly purely original research to cite his book and the specific page when it's just not that disputable and very clear.

I am grateful for your decent explanations. It teaaches me a few things and made me understand wikipedia better. If adrian was promoting himself, then I can agree that his book would not be a reliable source. However when he explicitly opposes gay people in the book. As long as there is a reliable source to back it and an educated but Neutral lot of wiki editors to review it. I feel that in those "obvious" circumstances. Critical thinking will judge his book being an acceptable source. MangoTareeface9 (talk) 06:39, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

@MangoTareeface9: I realize that it probably seems silly and obvious to anyone who's used to writing for any other format. But you have to keep in mind that when we're constructing policy for a crowd sourced project like Wikipedia, we're trying to make rules that we can mostly apply across-the-board. When you scale that up to the largest encyclopedia in the history of the world, with hundreds of thousands of contributors, what seems "obvious" to some can actually wind up getting pretty crazy sometimes. But most of the time, if something like this person's view on homosexuality, is actually really obvious, then you're probably not the first person to notice it, and we can usually find pretty good secondary sources. GMG^talk 11:51, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello My name is Natasha Sikah nee Natalie Sicka. My Mother Gillian Sicka married Alex sanders on twentieth December 1982 in East Sussex and remained Alex's wife until his death Alex was my Stepfather and he lived with us in Bexhill on Sea. I have a copy of the marriage certificate as authentication I amended the Alex Sanders Wikipedia page below about two weeks ago to reflect the marriage however this was taken down within a couple of days https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Sanders_(Wiccan) Can you please amend the page to correctly reflect my Mother's marriage to Alex, my stepfather Many thanks Natasha — Preceding unsigned comment added by Natasha Sikah (talk • contribs) 16:06, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Hey @Natasha Sikah:. This is a little tricky. We can sometimes use primary sources for fairly mundane personal details. But we can't really use sources that are entirely unpublished. Is there something like a Wiccan organization that has previously put this information out to the public? GMG^talk 12:34, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello GreenMeansGo. FWIW, today I have learned that "dissection" has a second meaning. So I thank you for that. Xeriphas1994 (talk) 14:29, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

That essay is a beautiful thing. Qwirkle (talk) 15:18, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Glad you enjoy it. Maybe one day it will catch on. GMG^talk 15:37, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Why am I the last to hear about these things? Brilliant essay, next time I type "peanut gallery" in a discussion I can link to this :-) Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:37, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm not here to attack anyone and I'm not pro trump or biden I literally could care less about political parties ,I'm asking for sources because I want to see where you got the information of Stella Immanuel in regards to the alien dna and demon stuff because the only source I've found is daily beast and yahoo which constantly upload fake articles. She was born in africa and people are making fun of her beliefs and it's coming off pretty racist and judgmental during these times. Like I said not stirring a pot I just want to know the source not that it would effect my knowledge of hydrachloraquine treatments because I personally know doctors and friends in Algeria that were treated the way she has treated covid and they literally tested negative within days. I've survived cancer 2009, I currently have transverse myelitis and human swayback disease , I can no longer have vaccines like flu shots and something as simple as a stomach virus could trigger my immune system and I'd be rendered paralyzed again or worse....so vaccines aren't an option for me sadly,nor people with similar situations as mine. Hydrachloraquine has been my only saving grace during this pandemic and I fear more people dying because of media manipulation. So I'm just asking for your help ,I just want to see the source behind the alien dna and demon sex rumor. Rallomy38 (talk) 13:54, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Type Stella Immanuel into YouTube to see her sermons. O3000 (talk) 13:58, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Hey @Rallomy38: Welcome to Wikipedia. Sorry you seem to have jumped in into a fairly controversial area. Contrary to popular opinion, most of Wikipedia is actually completely non-political content about history and science and such. I'm a hopeless political moderate, so I get where you're coming from.

The way our rules work here is that we, as Wikipedia editors, don't really "get to have an opinion". We kindof just record what the sources report. If the sources are biased, then Wikipedia will be biased and if this is the case, then it tends to correct itself over time. But the stuff about the alien DNA seems to have been pretty widely reported. It's possible that this is totally wrong, and over time, we would expect sources to retract statements that they find are erroneous. That is, so long as they are truly reliable. This kind of thing happens all the time, and Wikipedia follows suit.

Until then, like I indicated, Wikipedia is not a publisher or original research and we as editors don't really get to have a personal opinion. The same goes for contemporary topics as it does for the Boer War or the chemical properties of Carbon. We kindof just follow whatever the sources say. GMG^talk 14:02, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Rallomy38 (talk) 14:17, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Do you think we are ready for FAC? --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 04:27, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Hmm. I suppose it couldn't hurt to give it a try. Though I"ll be honest, it's been like three years since I did an FA, so I'm probably a little rusty. GMG^talk 10:12, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

One thing we should handle first is the sentence beginning with "Similarly, historian Richard Beeman...". It seems out of place since the paragraph is about the pre-Revolution Continental Congress, but Beeman is referring to the post-Revolution Constitutional Convention. I think you added that sentence. Do you have an idea of how to deal with this? --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 12:43, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Well, "similarly" should go, as that's a bit of editorializing, commenting on the content itself rather than simply presenting it plainly. I honestly don't know whether I added that bit or not. We can remove it entirely if you wish. Not gonna hurt my feelings any. I probably need a bit to re-familiarize myself with the article. I've had a couple GAs in the meanwhile. GMG^talk 12:59, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

• Just noting @Coffeeandcrumbs: that if the nom doesn't seem to be getting much traction, it may be worth posting to Women in Red to see if any experienced/uninvolved FAC reviewers are willing to give it a look. GMG^talk 15:55, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Greetings, FYI I filed a request at WP:ANI titled "CIR-based community-imposed site ban re: RTG". In providing a basis for my request I mentioned you and your prior dealings with this editor. Your input at ANI is optional, i.e., invited but not specifically requested. Thanks for reading. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 12:56, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. But I'm not sure I have a strong opinion. I haven't to my knowledge interacted with this user in several months, and had entirely forgotten the situation in which I'm referenced. GMG^talk 13:02, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

		The Userpage Barnstar
		By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this barnstar in recognition of your classy and engrossing user page. I am sure that I am only one of very many who have spent an enjoyable half hour browsing through it. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:17, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Hey thanks. I'm glad someone found it entertaining. GMG^talk 19:25, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Think you just salvaged my sanity. Best wishes. S. SiJoHaAl (talk) 20:57, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Hey @SiJoHaAl:. Welcome to Wikipedia. Feel free to stop by any time I can be of any help...or you know...if you hear any good jokes or anything. GMG^talk 23:38, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi @GreenMeansGo: I came to start a new Thank You section and saw this one already here, different thread, similar sentiments. I wanted to say thank for your feedback on the draft outline of Movement Strategy Transition events and for taking part in the office hour. It's valuable discourse and greatly appreciated. -- MPourzaki (WMF) (talk) 21:09, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Hey @MPourzaki (WMF):. No worries. I mostly got lucky and happened to be available for the meeting. I hope the Foundation and the volunteers involved take it to heart that many of the most important parts of accessibility are not at all fancy, and not the type of thing we get to really brag about. So long as there's only 13 of us in the meeting, we're not really "being accessible". GMG^talk 23:46, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	Not even a day later and I already find myself referencing your essay—not even to give to a newbie to demonstrate how to format their suggestions, but to formulate my own points. Great work! GorillaWarfare (talk) 04:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Hey thanks. I'm glad someone found it useful. GMG^talk 10:16, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Can you help the page for being correct and meet the criteria? I mean at least help me further to correct it. Or just look though this draft and correct by yourself — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thecganosis2 (talk • contribs) 13:16, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Hey @Thecganosis2: The short answer on what you do going forward is to first explicitly disclose your conflict of interest according to instructions at WP:PAID. Then write an original and neutral article based on coverage of the subject in independent reliable secondary sources. Unfortunately, doing so is often exceptionally difficult for those who have outside conflicts of interest, which is why conflicted editing is strongly discouraged, and undisclosed conflicted editing is not permitted at all.

I do not otherwise have an interest in "fixing the article for you". I have no interest in this individual, and certainly no interest in helping them in their self promotion. As I said previously, it is unfortunate that the subject seems to misunderstand that Wikipedia is not social media, and not a means of promotion. But this misunderstanding on their part does not constitute a crisis on ours.

Your efforts would be entirely better spent on Facebook, Twitter, or... basically literally anywhere else other than here. Not to be rude, but that's kindof the lay of the land here. GMG^talk 13:26, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Hey @GreenMeansGo: He doesn't want to promote his biography here. He just want his bio being here.Just please show us solidarity and help us to imrpove the reallity — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thecganosis2 (talk • contribs)

@Thecganosis2: I am thankful they appreciate the value of Wikipedia, and the role it plays in public knowledge. But the standard-for-entry is sustained coverage in independent reliable published sources, and that is not related to how much the subject would wish to have their own biography here. When they meet this standard, a volunteer will likely write an article for them. Trying to recruit others to circumvent this process does them no favors, and may actively make it less likely that they eventually get their own article.

The only thing they need concern themselves with is doing the kind of things that get them the type of independent coverage that qualifies them for an article. So long as the most we have to offer is social media and user-generated sites like IMDB, then they don't yet qualify.

That can be frustrating to those who recognize the value of Wikipedia, but it is also the reason that having an article here is valuable, and normally having a LinkedIn profile is much less so. GMG^talk 14:02, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

@GreenMeansGo: I see.So at least can I keep it ass a draft and without deletation? For next time have it ready and add realable sources— Preceding unsigned comment added by Thecganosis2 (talk • contribs)

@Thecganosis2: As a general rule, no. It is copied and pasted from elsewhere online and there does not seem to be any indication that it is free for public use under a compatible license. But...I mean...that's okay, because content from the person's self-authored biography isn't really appropriate anyway. The source, even if it were free, is neither independent nor secondary, and is barely considerable as "published". So it would most likely need to be entirely rewritten regardless.

I can understand how that might be confusing or even offensive to someone who is used to posting content on social media, where non-free, non-neutral, self-published content is allowed, and even encouraged. But...that's just not the way Wikipedia works. GMG^talk 14:24, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi again GMG! It's been a minute, and it was great to see you pop up at Powel's FAC and my RFA (where I was very much humbled by the support). Anyways, now that I've got my time pretty freed up, would you like to get back to work on the 1877 Strike? My content-writing has hopefully improved, and I've got access to all of Syracuse University's library (through a very kind relative and a very generous alumni program). Anyways, I'm ready to write some good content! Let me know what you think, and best wishes, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 00:24, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm glad everything went so well. Thank you for the review also. I'll at the very least have to wrap up the FAC first. At least for a little while, I'm working at home with the family which is...how to say...not bad for leaving commentary, but not super at sustained reading. Good luck with the mop. If you need any help on the tools, especially when it comes to some of the more annoying cross wiki issues, feel free to drop by. GMG^talk 00:50, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm largely stuck at home right now, but have a surprising amount of time to spend on-wik (though really perhaps that's not so surprising :P). I've not tried to do any real content writing, so I'm curious to see how it goes... I think I can work more on St. Louis by myself- I'll keep checking in over here, and please let me know how your time looks. I just may take you up on that offer of help—though I hope to avoid much of the dramah and ease myself in. Best, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 01:03, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

I keep saying something similar and then some LTA pings me 35 times on like the Danish Wikibooks and tells me how much the love me. GMG^talk 06:53, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

For my next trick, I will be working up Draft:Obliviousness. Feel free to any resources you may have handy. BD2412 T 21:19, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@BD2412: I'm afraid I'm about armpit deep in an FA at the moment. It seems it's been a few years since my last FA, and I may or may not have forgotten exactly how much work is involved. GMG^talk 00:53, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

No worries, I can completely understand that! BD2412 T 01:02, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello there, GreenMeansGo. I have noticed that on an archived section of a sockpuppet investigation that one of your external links came out bad (i.e. I knew it was an external link, but it did not come out looking like a blue text with a box with a diagonal arrow coming out of it; instead, it came out with the website without an "https://" and the word "userpage"). So, I decided to go to the archived page and added an "https://," and it worked; "userpage" was blue with a box and diagonal arrow next to it. Am I allowed to do this on an archived page? I just wanted to let you know, nothing more. T^{fess up?}_{or down?} 12:33, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Yeeeah... I've done that on accident quite a bit actually. It's a problem with using Chrome. If you single click the url it gives you a shortened version, and you have to double click it to get the full https bit. I wonder if this has been a change in functionality since I seem to mess it up so much intuitively.

At any rate. I wouldn't sweat it too much in project space. It's all factory-floor sausage-making anyway, though I would definitely sweat it in article space. GMG^talk 12:55, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

I see. I have been using Chrome on an old operating system that, as you mentioned, has that double-click function. Thank you! T^{fess up?}_{or down?} 13:10, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:06, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

On 2 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Stella Immanuel, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Stella Immanuel claims that space alien DNA is used in medical treatments, that reptilians run the United States government, and that she uses hydroxychloroquine to cure COVID-19? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Stella Immanuel. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Stella Immanuel), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

G'day everyone, voting for the 2020 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2020. Thanks from the outgoing coord team, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:18, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

That case at DRN has been closed, because it is an appeal of a speedy deletion, and those go to Deletion Review. (So if the filer shows up at DRV, the merits can be argued.) Thank you for trying to reason with an unreasonable editor. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:50, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't mean to be overly harsh. But at some point it just becomes a bit silly. GMG^talk 23:43, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Chinese Football Association logo 2018.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) 17:26, 13 October 2020 (UTC)