This is an archive of past discussions with User:Hey man im josh. 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.
Hello, Hey man im josh. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, move subpages when moving the parent page(s), and move category pages.
Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving a redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when suppressredirect is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.
If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! Primefac (talk) 09:53, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
reason for removal
I’ve removed it on her behalf, a new page will be uploaded.
@Gmailuserwiki, someone's request to remove content is not a valid reason to remove content. You're welcome to update the article and expand it, but there's no reason to leave the page blank.Hey man im josh (talk) 12:49, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Brady
Hello! Props to how well you are handling the deep conversations on the Tom Brady talk page. It isn't easy to have that deep of a conversation on a topic where there are different sides. Appreciate the great work on here as a whole. Red Director (talk) 13:44, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Hey @Steven Walling, thanks for reaching out and sharing that source, I was wondering where the number came from. Since he implies he'll be #23, and the Eagles list him as #22, it's hard to tell what his number will actually be. This seems like one of those situations where we're just going to have to wait and see what number he's wearing in practice since people making changes based on either source aren't technically wrong. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:27, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
A discussion is open to define a process by which Vector 2022 can be made the default for all users.
An RfC is open to gain consensus on whether Fox News is reliable for science and politics.
Technical news
The impact report on the effects of disabling IP editing on the Persian (Farsi) Wikipedia has been released.
The WMF is looking into making a Private Incident Reporting System (PIRS) system to improve the reporting of harmful incidents through easier and safer reporting. You can leave comments on the talk page by answering the questions provided. Users who have faced harmful situations are also invited to join a PIRS interview to share the experience. To sign up please emailMadalina Ana.
Arbitration
An arbitration case regarding Conduct in deletion-related editing has been closed. The Arbitration Committee passed a remedy as part of the final decision to create a request for comment (RfC) on how to handle mass nominations at Articles for Deletion (AfD).
The arbitration case request Jonathunder has been automatically closed after a 6 month suspension of the case.
Miscellaneous
The new pages patrol (NPP) team has prepared an appeal to the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) for assistance with addressing Page Curation bugs and requested features. You are encouraged to read the open letter before it is sent, and if you support it, consider signing it. It is not a discussion, just a signature will suffice.
Hi, Just wanted to confirm why you put the SD tag on my user page. The image of the man is not myself - been on the Commons for a while and I just picked it up since looked so amusing. Also just enjoy the Karelo-Finnish Soviet Socialist Republic flags too so though it would be quite fun to have a bit of a silly tongue-in-check page! I have had an account in the past with over 10k edits but vanished it legitimately since don't have much intention to actually return to significant editing. 59abcd (talk) 17:19, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
I don't really understand how it fails that. None of the content is mine - it's all from the Commons (and has been there for a while) and it certainly is not extensive (just a few pictures). 59abcd (talk) 17:32, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
I'm not really a great person to ask about this, as it's still something I'm gaining more experience in. I see that they've been proposed for merge as of now, so I'd just let that play out. Hey man im josh (talk) 23:22, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Hey man
Hey Hey!
So I noticed that you edited after my Beyoncé redirects that I made and I have concerns. In my opinion because "Cuff It", for example, is only one song its unnecessaryCuff It (song)disambiguationCuff It (Beyoncé song) redirects don't also need to be 'R from songs'. Because its only one song, not three. Let me know what you think!😌
Hey @Tree Critter, in my opinion, it can be both. I personally see no issue with a redirect having multiple tags. Thanks for reaching out to talk about it though, just in case I am making some kind of mistake =P Hey man im josh (talk) 11:43, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
Taken Jersey Numbers (NFL)
I just want to let you know that you reverted my edits about taken jersey numbers, and just because that jersey number is from a team website, doesn’t mean it’s 100% true. Injuries are no exceptions for taken jersey numbers, because usually when they come off IR, they usually switch numbers unless the player that took his number has been waived or traded. One person can take one jersey number during the regular season, not two. Thank you for understanding. ReaganHoang10 (talk) 22:12, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
@ReaganHoang10, regarding your claim of players usually changing numbers when they come off IR, that's completely untrue. Players on the main roster, including IR, have priority over practice squad players.
How do we know? One time in 2021 Lynn Bowden Jr. was on IR for the Miami Dolphins and his number was #6, but it was taken by Trill Williams, so when he came off IR the next season, he switched to #3. So 75% of the time players switch numbers when their number is taken because they are injured, unless the other player that took the number gets waived, traded, or retired. ReaganHoang10 (talk) 14:52, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
Where are you getting this 75% figure from? You have one example of this happening. I'll happily yield if you can find something official that states a player on the practice squad has priority for numbers over a player on IR. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:00, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
And preseason jersey number rules are different, because 2 players on the same side of the ball can’t have the same number, but in the regular season only 1 player can have a number. ReaganHoang10 (talk) 14:58, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
Players on the practice squad are not considered part of the roster. Players coming off IR typically go directly to the roster or they end up being released and then added back to the practice squad. So players on IR are, essentially, on the regular team while players on the practice squad are not. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:01, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
The 75% part is approximate. And how do we know practice squad players could choose any number they want, despite the number being taken? ReaganHoang10 (talk) 15:02, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
It's unclear to me where you're getting this approximation from.
Usually the goal is to avoid it in case a practice squad player is elevated to the main roster. However, because of pre-season roster numbers, sometimes players end up keeping the same number until they are called up. Also consider that there's a very large price to pay for players to change their jersey numbers. Players on the regular roster, and IR, will usually have jerseys for sale whereas practice squad players are much less likely to have them for sale. This makes it easy and free for a practice squad player to change their number while players on the regular roster cannot do so without a heavy fee associated with it. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:08, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for supporting the NPP initiative to improve WMF support of the Page Curation tools. Another way you can help is by voting in the Board of Trustees election. The next Board composition might be giving attention to software development. The election closes on 6 September at 23:59 UTC. View candidate statement videos and Vote Here. MB03:28, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
User:ReaganHoang10
I see you've had some problems with this editor as well. The "reliable" Twitter account this editor is referencing is this one. You're an experienced enough editor that I'm sure you can see it's clearly not reliable. I actually advised that editor back in July on my talkpage to stop using this Twitter account and they apparently didn't get the message.--Rockchalk71704:56, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Yeah exactly, and the editor doesn't seem to be understanding the point I'm making either. I'm hoping eventually that changes.--Rockchalk71719:29, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
How is being correct not constructive?
It was one change to one player on Arizona's practice squad. It was one minor correction as Andrew Brown is a 3-4 defensive end Sagatorium (talk) 14:14, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
That was the third time you made that change after I reverted it with an explanation and sources. I provided multiple sources for Andrew Brown's position but you have failed to provide any. You did not communicate, you just kept making the change while I tried to tell you why that change was wrong. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:15, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
Hey @Adakiko. Honestly, I'm glad you asked Deepfriedokra, because I'm not entirely sure on this one (I don't claim to be an expert). It's definitely something I'll follow to see the outcome of to better educate myself. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:13, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
Sorry to disturb you I didn't understand your point.I mean why shouldn't we blank it when the discussion has already been concluded??Is there any rule like that. If there is any rule then can you please share it to me. I joined Wikipedia just few days ago so I do messed up some things with my knowledge. That is the reason why I blanked it so that outsiders don't see it. Bheri Giridhar Kartikeya (talk) 14:24, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
Hey @Bheri Giridhar Kartikeya, the common practice is to archive a discussion instead of deleting it. See WP:ARCHIVENOTDELETE. Per WP:TPO, you shouldn't delete other user's talk page posts but you're welcome to delete your own when removing them doesn't break up a conversation (such as when someone replied to your comment).
The idea is that someone else may come along wanting to start the exact same discussion as what was deleted, or may find an explanation as to why something is the way that it is. By leaving previous discussions you allow for other users to catch up or base new discussions on results of old discussions. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:32, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
In this case, because you asked a valid question and someone replied to, I'd leave that for others to see in the future. The two lines which someone did not respond to I would say isn't a problem to remove. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:38, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
With this edit, you are correct in that Piffled used a weak argument for removing the material. However, the material in question was weak to begin with, having no sources whatsoever, so I would agree with its removal regardless of the family's concerns. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!!13:28, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Hey @WikiDan61, I agree that the unsourced material being removed isn't an issue, which is why I didn't revert it when they only removed that material. I was reverting because they were blanking the entire text, not just a portion. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:38, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
@Shannonkramer, that is a bad idea. Wikipedia is a collaborative effort and edit warring to get your way is inappropriate and unproductive. Read the referencing page and don't keep trying to add links in paragraphs. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:01, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
I was adding the link so whoever does the citations can reorganize it, I assume there's someone that takes the link so they can cite it? Shannonkramer (talk) 16:41, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
I didn't know how to add things as a citation, I didn't see the button. I thought someone else would help because as you said, "Wikipedia is a collaborative effort" Shannonkramer (talk) 16:47, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
Hey @173.233.87.157, thank you for pointing this out to me and I'm sorry for the inconvenience. I wasn't aware that those templates were sandboxes, so I learned something new today. I'll remove the warning from your page. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:44, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello, thank you for your very quick attention to edits made for Bodour Al Qasimi.
I have in the past, executed significant work on Sheikha Bodour's biographies in English and Arabic, where I am given updates on new developments by The Executive Office of Bodour Bint Sultan Al Qasimi based in Sharjah, in the United Arab Emirates.
Today I was asked to remove reference to children's publishing and this will be as a result of growth into broader genres. Equally I was asked to add a more recent photograph. I could add this information to add more substance.
It seems to me that you may have a conflict of interest if you're being asked to make these changes. I encourage you to read over that link on conflict of interest editing. Additionally, please don't remove infoboxes from pages, as that's why I reverted your edit and sent a warning your way. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:05, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
I did review conflict of interest and I do expect that I have provided a balanced, fair and up to date biography. I shall check again.
Earlier this year, we did make a number of changes as a result of official consulting work. This was paid, however we did reference significantly to ascertain balance and objectivity. Constant sun (talk) 18:06, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Thank you. I have made one change to the photograph and am looking for references for another edit. I have disclosed the client and have removed the warning banner as long as I now conform to the rules. Thank you again for the guidance as I continue to become a better editor I hope. Constant sun (talk) 20:27, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
@Theredmother, this was an action using anti-vandalism software called WP:Huggle. When someone using the program reverts an edit, it typically reverts all of the most recent edits by the user. As mentioned in the edit summary and message left on your talk page, you removed content (the article's infobox) without explaining why. Please feel free to re-add the citation, but do not delete the infobox. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:02, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleting redundant info
Hello, my apologies that I was not clear about my edits. I am deleting redundant information from the causes section of the gynecomastia page. The second paragraph of the causes section is discussed in the later sections under drugs and chronic disease. Mitac10 (talk) 18:03, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Hey @Mitac10, no problem, these things happen. To someone unaware of your intents, it just looks like you're deleting content without a proper explanation. Try to add a more detailed edit summary so that others know why you're doing something that an outsider might see as not an improvement and you should be fine moving forward. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:28, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Tags can be added to talk pages without completely filling them out. There's nothing inappropriate about that. What is inappropriate is starting a talk page thread the way that you did here. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:30, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Daylight Savings Time
Hello, Hey man im josh,
I've been off of Wikipedia all of today but I just noticed that the hours no longer need to be adjusted when looking at potential CSD G13s. I see by your User page that you are in Canada and I believe Canada also observes Daylight Savings Time, like in the U.S. So, at least in the U.S., the time changed on March 12 and today we are looking at drafts that became or are becoming stale stale on March 13/14 UTC. We are still in Daylight Savings Time until November 6 so you don't have to add an hour to the last edit times to tag them for deletion. But we only have about 6 or 7 weeks of this continuity until we change time AGAIN in November when we'll deduct an hour from the last edit time. It's hard to explain but it's easier to see if you install the UTC clock gadget to appear in the upper right hand corner of the page because the UTC time, which is what SDZeroBot uses, doesn't change over the course of the year.
If you already noticed this change today while editing, well, sorry for telling you something you already know! But since you tag so many expiring drafts and you also live in the Northern Hemisphere, I thought I'd pass a note about this change along to you. Have a good week! LizRead!Talk!01:13, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
Hey @Liz, I appreciate you reaching out to me about this. We do observe DST in Canada. I hadn't noticed that the 1 hour buffer isn't necessary anymore. To be honest, I usually only notice time changes when the sun isn't where it's supposed to be on my drive to work (my phone's alarm auto adjusts, I just go with it).I've made sure to remember one of the earliest lessons you taught me about the banner that indicates if a page is eligible for G13 (so long as it has the AfC submission template). This is what I'll be referring to to make sure I catch the changes.
It's not often that people reach out to be as helpful as I feel you have been. I appreciative constructive criticism and the helpful pointers you offer. Even if I might already know something, I could always use a refresher to drill it in. So please never hesitate if you're feeling in the mood to post on my talk page. Hey man im josh (talk) 01:28, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
Jenifer Rajkumar Photo Edit
Hi, We are from office of JRK and she authorized this edit as it is the latest picture of JRK. Please do revert it back to what it was Kunalgoel25 (talk) 18:55, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
Thank you very much for this warning, and well-spotted as I didn't do so myself. It is a breach of WP:CIVIL anyhow which an editor of his epexerience should have known, and it is the second time he called me a "Slavic manlet" (Slavic yes, but where he gets manlet from I don't know as I am over 190cm and I wrestled semi-professionally when in my 20s). Here is the first. I am now certain to prepare a noticeboard complaint, but do I go AN/I (incidents) for this, or edit-warring where I went before. The key problem is that hours after a protected page was lifted, he restored a version that he was constantly putting up, which I believe is WP:Gaming the system. We were both warned prior to that for edit-warring. The fact is that none of us can work constructively with an editor who takes this attitude. I only invited him to self-revert, and I am told "get the fuck off" the talkpage and so he obviously has no intention of heading the edit-warring warning. In my situation, would you go edit-warring noticeboard? Or AN/I? Or do you recommend something else? --Coldtrack (talk) 18:45, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
I'd suggested you go to WP:ANI instead of the edit warring noticeboard, based on the fact they're being uncivil and making personal attacks. It's not okay to speak towards other editors or edit war the way that they are. Be patient when you make the post, let ANI take its course, and don't be discouraged if the user isn't dealt with immediately. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:50, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
Thank you Josh. It's gonna take me ages all that going through old revisions. I'll welcome your comments there if you so wish. Kindest regards. CT. --Coldtrack (talk) 18:56, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
Definitely, and thanks for your encouragement and advice. The user was blocked for edit-warring two weeks (initially) without even a nod toward the personal attacks. Though as it is clear, someone is out there to promote a point and will open new accounts to push this position. The person in question didn't seem worried about being subtle or obeying rules. Shame really. If he conducted himself more humanely and appropriately from the beginning, he stood a good chance of never being discovered. I know it's considered wrong and that one's appeals should always be from the "sockmaster account" which in his case was deemed to be User:Prim96, but if his is going to be the attitude of (what the community believes to be) one person, then it's best he's removed from the picture altogether. Regards, and good luck in your wider efforts of patrolling activities! --Coldtrack (talk) 05:22, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
I'm sure the admin saw the personal attacks. It's just that, while they are personal attacks, they're not exactly extreme ones. The edit warring is the much bigger part of it, and that alone was open and shut, so I'd imagine that's why they used the edit warring template over the personal attacks template.
It may get to the point where, if they continue, then you request page protection. Admins usually extend the protection length each time they have to do so. To a point that they may either set it to permanently protected or pending changes protected. It may take a few protections, but the admins at WP:RPP/I know what they're doing, and they'll put it to that level when appropriate. If you, briefly, explain that a sock is repeatedly returning and request pending changes review they may be inclined to escalate it faster.
The problem is that admins don't like to permanently ban IPs. You typically have to ban an IP ranges and that's potentially banning extra users who did nothing wrong. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:57, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Oh, and I read your WP:ANI and the responses. Next time, post the warning to their page even if they forbade you from ever posting there again. They need to be made aware and if they lash out inappropriately when you're following procedure then it's something that will likely be noticed during the discussion. I subscribe to the premise of Wikipedia:Give 'em enough rope.
Sometimes there is a discussion about whether an editor should be blocked or warned. When in doubt, a warning is probably sufficient. If a block is needed, the editor will soon prove it.
@Hey man im josh: I hope you are doing well. I know, I know, it was too much to take to articles for creation. Would you please mind redirecting all these pages to the article Demons Protected by Angels? This is the tracklist with alternative writings too.
@107.128.58.52, is there actually a limit on how many redirects you can request at once? I'd prefer if you could request it there, just so that I can lazily use the script to automatically create them. If you'd rather not I can take care of these tomorrow, too busy watching American football at this moment. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:33, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
@Hey man im josh:,nice to see a fellow football fan. By the way, you cannot ping IP addresses. But, yeah, it stops you after like five or so and something like a bot starts bugging out all the time, so you have to change IP addresses and it is not worth it in driving. So I am reminding you to do it ASAP so you do not forget. Thank you. 107.128.58.52 (talk) 00:36, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Yeah I knew the ping didn't work for IPs, but it's a habit at this point to use the reply to template lol. Alright sure, I'll take of them tomorrow.
I see that you edited your original post to use the ping template. It took me a while to learn this, but editing an existing reply to include that template does not actually ping the user. You must do so in your original or another message to actually ping the user. Ironic that we are both giving valid tips to one another about pinging! Hey man im josh (talk) 00:38, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
@Binksternet, I'm sorry, but perhaps I'm missing something here. Their ban expired and they began editing again. None of their article edits from today appear problematic, they all appear to be in good faith and productive.
The only IP listed under suspected sockpuppets for User:Rishabisajakepauler is User:64.125.216.50. That IP and the IP you're accusing belongs to different network blocks and geographical regions.
Okay, but still, different editors can hop on the same IP address. You do not have to say that it is block evasion just because one user decided to do that.107.128.58.52 (talk) 02:13, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Oh I hadn't realized you made one. Sorry, I wasn't intending to stop anybody from doing so, I just felt they were a better choice to do it over myself. Not saying there's an error at all @Magnatyrannus. Hey man im josh (talk) 02:52, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
first-team vs first team
I've noticed a number of edits like this one in which you are introducing grammatical errors. The usage of "first team" vs. "first-team" depends on the context of usage. In situations where "first-team" is used as an adjectival qualifier, it is hyphenated. For example, Bill Smith was the first-team quarterback on the 1992 All-America team. However, where it is not used in an adjectival manner, the hypen is inappropriate. For example, Bill Smith was named to the first team. If you have questions, let me know. Cbl62 (talk) 17:05, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Geez well that's concerning. My goal, when I set out to make these "corrections", was to "fix" any reference to the first-team all conference or league teams. Reviewing that edit, it's one that I would have felt very comfortable hitting the save button on.
English is full of nuance, so even native speakers like myself can find themselves in a situation it makes perfect sense, but it's technically wrong. I've always considered myself pretty decent with grammar and spelling, but I guess I need to read up on this.
I'm feeling a sense of dread and self-disgust over the amount of mistakes I've possibly introduced. It's bene probably a month or so that I've been slowly chipping away at it, but I had about 7,000 pages left for AWB to parse through of the original ~25,000 articles I started with... Plenty of those were skipped by AWB and some by me manually, but damn, that's still a lot of potential problems introduced. How do you suggest I move forward, aside from abandoning this task? Hey man im josh (talk) 17:26, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Thank you. Your hyphen usage feels like a bit of comic relief that brought a grin to my face. I'll read up on those and try to get my head right, then re-read them several more times before even considering picking up where I left off. Thankfully I have the AWB settings, including the remainder of the list, saved if and when I do decide to resume the project. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:46, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Edit on wikipedia page for "nigger"
Was there a second sentence that got cut off in your edit notice? It just says "Not an improvement. The" and i would like to know if there was a second sentence i was supposed to read but got cut off or something Pythiaesque (talk) 19:31, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Hey @Pythiaesque. Yes it did get cut off, sorry about that. Your intention with the edit was good, but sometimes we over explain things. The "may" in the sentence that you added to I think does the job just fine. Alternatively, if you feel the need to make it more clear, might I suggest changing neutral meaning among African Americans to neutral meaning among some African Americans? In the future, it's usually not a good idea to put a secondary thought in brackets in a paragraph and we should instead aim to rewrite a sentence or paragraph to avoid such use. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:36, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I appreciate your input but I don't believe that the inclusion of the Tribby Arts Center as a point of interest is at all controversial, nor did the external link violate any norm/guideline. I'm going to revert the change but leave off the external link for the time being. Regards, S. Sswebrc (talk) 17:12, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nominations have been resolved. Categories were empty because of an AWB task that extended further than it was meant to. Pages re-added to categories. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:30, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
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. LizRead!Talk!01:09, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
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. LizRead!Talk!01:09, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
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. LizRead!Talk!01:09, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
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. LizRead!Talk!01:09, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
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. LizRead!Talk!01:10, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
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. LizRead!Talk!01:10, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
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. LizRead!Talk!01:10, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
NFL templates
I was working with an automated batch in AWB, so it's entirely possible that I may have accidentally removed some categories that did exist -- so where that happened, you can readd the category as needed. For the other ones, however, know that we can't leave content filed in categories that don't exist, so you'll have to create any others that you want to use if they don't already exist yet. Bearcat (talk) 02:18, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for getting back to me @Bearcat, I appreciate it. I thought that's what had happened, and I wanted to be sure given your experience that it wasn't intention and was just a mistake. I understand about the redlink categories you did remove. Hey man im josh (talk) 02:19, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
No problem. Unfortunately, mistakes can happen in AWB sometimes; there's no easy way to reverify an edit in AWB once a batch has started running, so if I'm cleaning up a batch of mostly nonexistent categories there's no easy way for AWB to identify exceptions to the rule if they weren't already caught in the initial preparation of the batch. Technology, ain't it grand? Bearcat (talk) 02:28, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi Josh. Kristin Eklund has targeted two sound artists in England whose names will be protected, via email stalking with threats of violence, persecution, and terrorism, false allegations and defamation. Eklund has waged a campaign of vile defamation against one of these artists for years now. The emails have been sent to authorities, local and otherwise. Eklund is a con, a fraud and a criminal. VMDeMolay (talk) 12:08, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Josh,
Please don't protect Kristin Eklund. She will be dealt with the law, she is a criminal and dangerous.
Right now she has threatened not just one human life but a few families. Can we think of the children please.
Also, google Kristin Eklund deeper, there are mentions of her in illegal dealings with minors.
I will be available to any clarify if you request. VMDeMolay (talk) 12:18, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Your comment is helping foster hatred against innocent civilians. Why do you support these lies and falsity? You must really deplore the value of human life. Children have been targeted on the threats. THERE ARE CHILDREN INVOLVED. What kind of criminal are you defending. Anyone who defends this is criminally insane. VMDeMolay (talk) 13:08, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Do not resort to personal attacks during times of content dispute. I'm not sure reverting your unsourced addition of "Kirstin has been traced as author of stalking and violent threats against sound artists" is doing the damage you're suggesting, but you need to cite sources, as you were told when the edits were reverted. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:16, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Some of the accusations in the emails refer to at least two years of harassment which tantamounts to literally thousands of emails, but these were never there as 'evidence'. As a matter of fact they don't exist, or, more correctly, if they do, they're forged in its entirety. This is a fact.
The fact that also the linked image of defamatory nature, is the only thing used as 'evidence' any harassment happened.
It was also grossly decontextualized from the real facts happening that day, reverted to the favour of the perpetrators and against one of the targeted victims.
It's been manipulated enormously for defamation's sakes. It's a massive personal and group attack on the victims.
That is what I use for the players' primary positions. Additionally, Shepley and Watkins, according to reports from practice from Cowboys reporters, spend most of their time at G and DT respectively. RevanFan (talk) 17:40, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Hey RevanFan, I think this is a discussion that would be better to have at WT:NFL, since it can affect a wide range of players. I find no mention of Shepley when searching the sheet and only a mention of Watkins once, where he was signed to the team as a free agent DT. As I mentioned, positions change during camp. What do we ultimately go off of and prioritize when they don't submit notes for practice squad players? We can't just go based on reporters. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:43, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Sounds good, we'll resume it there. For reference though @RevanFan, I want to be clear that I'm not trying to get into any sort of fight or argument. I just believe there's an issue, not just in this instance, in consensus on what sources to prioritize for some things. I've noticed it when trying to update player positions and, in my opinion, we need a hierarchy in what to trust when positions don't line up.
I did scroll down to find Shepley on the Cowboys' roster page, but I used CTRL+F on the PDF you linked. Are there known issues with searching it where some of the text isn't properly searchable? Hey man im josh (talk) 17:48, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
It's a PDF so there might be some weirdness there with searching. I don't know. And I am also not trying to argue. I was getting a little annoyed, I'll admit, but I apologize if I was rude at any point. I care very deeply for this (really frustrating) team haha. I do agree that it is a discussion worth having. But in general, I've always gone by: 1. Game notes. 2. Reports from respected team beat reporters. 3. The official team website. 4. Other sources (NFL.com, etc.) RevanFan (talk) 17:51, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
In the past, the roster posted on dallascowboys.com was HIGHLY inaccurate. They wouldn't note jersey number or even some roster changes for WEEKS on end. It was so annoying. They're better at it now, but I stopped trusting them as a primary source due to how late they were on updates in years past. Some teams are better than others at timely updates to their roster. RevanFan (talk) 17:53, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Nah don't worry @RevanFan, you didn't come off rude. I'll admit I was slightly annoyed as well, and I should have followed the 1 revert and discuss, but I reverted twice instead. I'm just glad the conversation is being started because I'd always prefer to reference the better sources and this will, hopefully, help determine what sources are best.
I find the NFL website itself is just awful for updating positions. They all have their flaws, and some teams are definitely better than others about updating their information. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:54, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
It feels odd to reprimand you since you are such a good contributor but the empty category CSD notices clearly state Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Page creators can remove PROD tags if an article or file is tagged for Proposed Deletion but it is against policy for page creators to remove CSD or AFD/RFD/CFD/etc. tags from pages they have created and that rule goes for everyone, from new editors up to arbitrators.
There are several editors/admins who regularly scan Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion throughout the day and remove categories that are no longer empty. It happens frequently that empty categories are only temporarily empty, that's why they sit for 7 days before they might be deleted. You don't need to worry about a no-longer-empty empty category being deleted. So, please do not remove speedy deletion tags from pages you have created in the future, okay? Thank you. LizRead!Talk!21:22, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
I'm not special, I deserve to be reprimanded when I do something boneheaded like this. I know better which makes it worse, but I guess I wasn't thinking when I removed the tags. Shaking my head at myself about this one.
Hello, I don't actually add band chart graphs unless it's by virtue of reverting an edit. Could you be specific on which page this happened at? Hey man im josh (talk) 11:50, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
A Barnstar For You!
The Invisible Barnstar
Thank you for all the behind-the-scenes page/redirect reviews you do! After a spent a long time creating close to 100 redirects, you reviewed every single one. Thank you for your work on Wikipedia! Elijahandskip (talk) 15:25, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
I did leave an explanation as to why that detail was removed. My friend Sol, who has passed away, Was never affiliated with Jeffrey Epstein. I find it inappropriate that the page lists as such.
Hi @AligarhStaars, please do not overwrite existing pages with an entirely different article. I understand that the name Monty may be appropriate for your article, but such a page already exists. The existing page is meant to point towards all the different pages that Monty could be referring to, and your edit had wiped that out.
@AligarhStaars, in this case, I'd say no. An article would have to basically be the default somebody thinks of when they hear the name "Monty". This argument would often be supported by pageview statistics, but your page would have to exist first. There's just too many other subjects that involve the name Monty for it to direct to a singular person in this case. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:53, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deletion notice: Oweniw/Historic of Ezhionum Kingdom
Hi Josh,
Kindly delete the above mentioned page you earlier buzzed me about. Though I'll live to edit it to meet your requirements but Wikipedia's UI is such a complicated spool, difficult for a basic user to use.
Hey @Oweniwe, I see what page it was now, it was Draft:Ezionum (Ezhionum) and it was because it had been over 6 months since the page's last edit. I didn't delete it, I just nominated it based on that criteria, as drafts that have not been edited in 6 months are eligible for deletion. If you ever feel like you wait to resume work on it again you should head over to WP:Refund to request it be restored. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:38, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
"NPOV" templated warning
Do you use twinkle? Which warning was it from the twinkle drop down, if so, that you just used on that last edit to make the NPOV templated warning? TY. —Moops⋠T⋡16:09, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, I did mean the nomination on 28 September. The issue is not with timezones, but with me - the {{RFD notice}} template defaults to the current UTC day and I forgot to override that. Thryduulf (talk) 13:40, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Hey @Karl Twist, in the future, if you want to overwrite a redirect, please remove the redirect template. In this case, the template was #REDIRECT [ [Magic Management ]]. Because that template was left in place, the page you mentioned, Peter Francey, still redirects to Magic Management. I've removed the redirect template for you. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:44, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi, Hey man im josh. Thanks for the advice. I also wanted to check with you first. I'll remember that in the future. Cheers. Karl Twist (talk) 03:42, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
Following an RfC, consensus has been found that, in the context of politics and science, the reliability of FoxNews.com is unclear and that additional considerations apply to its use.
The Articles for creation helper script now automatically recognises administrator accounts which means your name does not need to be listed at WP:AFCP to help out. If you wish to help out at AFC, enable AFCH by navigating to Preferences → Gadgets and checking the "Yet Another AfC Helper Script" box.
Arbitration
Remedy 8.1 of the Muhammad images case will be rescinded 1 November following a motion.
