This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
2023; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2022; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2021; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2020; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2019; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2018; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2017; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2016: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013:Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec |
Steel1943 ( talk) 04:32, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Thank you so much for your help! You were prompt and very kind. This is all new to me and I appreciate any help I can get! CRFZara 05:38, 5 April 2016 (UTC) |
Thank you so much for this! I did not even know about the requested articles option. I will try that. I have to say though, this has been ANYTHING but EASY money! At this point, after all of the time Iv'e put in, I'm losing money.
Is there anyway to ensure that my article isn't deleted?
MelissBelle ( talk) 23:35, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, again.
I really appreciate you taking the time to explain things to me.
I may end of deleting the article..if it works that way..but I sure have learned a lot, and that is greatly do to you.
Thank you, and best to you.
MelissBelle ( talk) 18:10, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Again, I appreciate your help. and as I have stated NUMEROUS times, I welcome ANY and all input. This is my first article, as I have said, and I am learning as I go. I had NO idea that my creating this article would be such an offense.
Forgive my not being well versed in the semantics, and I will not say 'my' article again. I simply did not appreciate his methods, and there is more that happened between the other user and myself, than you could have been aware of.
I will take your post as I am sure it was meant, and that is help.
Thank you.
Best, — Preceding unsigned comment added by MelissBelle ( talk • contribs) 02:48, 7 April 2016 (UTC+9)
Hi,
I somehow don't see you deleting logos from here, here, here and other teams. Most national team articles use logos of national federations. – Sabbatino ( talk) 15:05, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
You added the template to a file in Special:Diff/714079527. I think that you should also notify the uploader when adding this template as it is a deletion template. {{ Di-missing article links}} doesn't mention any notification template, so I tend to notify the uploader with {{ subst:di-disputed fair use rationale-notice|filename}} as it seems to be the notification template which best describes the concern in {{ di-missing article links}}. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 21:04, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
...why you're not an administrator? -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 06:58, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
This essay I wrote is a little old, and I never finished it, but it has some useful advice that is still relevant. -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 15:10, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
I see that you have deleted all of the embedded links in this page, and I would like you to reconsider. Those links were not intended "as a form of inline citation"—which, as the Wikipage you directed me to makes clear, is disallowed. In other words, they were not there to give legitimacy to the entry but rather to offer the reader immediate access to the works in question. I don't know what is gained by removing them, but much is lost. Yes, a patient reader can find the works on Google (but, in some cases, not easily), but why send that reader through the trouble? I realize that links may "rot", but then eventually everything does. A link that, if only temporarily, gives direct access to a poem or play or short story seems better to me than no link at all. (I check them regularly, by the way, and repair or remove dead ones.) Thank you for giving your attention to this. Beebuk 07:18, 16 April 2016 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Marchjuly reported by User:Bozzio (Result: ). Thank you. ¡Boz zio! 04:43, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at India national cricket team shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. ¡Boz zio! 04:42, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Steel1943 ( talk) 16:09, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
The Coat of Arms removed from Alpha Phi Omega (Philippines) is equally the Coat of Arms for Alpha Phi Omega in the United States (described at Alpha Phi Omega) and Alpha Phi Omega of the Philippines (described at Alpha Phi Omega (Philippines). I'm not sure why it should be removed from one. Naraht ( talk) 02:27, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Is there an English version of bhutan girls football team under 14 ? This one is the French version. Sorry it took so long a text, I'd like to know if you had here. I did not find.
Wikilink to French Wikipedia article about team
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a01:e34:ee0e:abd0:b854:9c74:3c1f:e26d ( talk) 03:27, 22 April 2016 (UTC+9)
Hi Marchjuly, can we get back on the non-free logos uploaded in Wikipedia and the uploads in Commons? I'm still very confused. For example, File:Commission on Audit.svg is uploaded in Commons with a public domain license. The source stated is http://philgovseals.nhcp.gov.ph/commission-on-audit/, but the website contains "Copyright 2013 - NHCP. Languages: English Filipino." So does the official website of the Commission on Audit ("Copyright 2014 Commission on Audit"). Does this mean the seal is actually non-free?
I am very confused. I have already uploaded 5 seals since 2014 and I might have been breaking the copyright law all this time. -- J-Ronn ( talk) 09:50, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I didn't upload the Halifax flag, it was already on the municipality's Wikipedia entry so I copied the file name into the flag page. I assumed it was free since it's been on the Halifax page for quite some time. Maui84 ( talk) 07:15, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello Marchjuly. I'm fairly certain I've identified a Sevcohaha sock (you created the original SPI). Do you think it's worth filing a report (I'm not sure they have multiple accounts at the moment)? Because of their behaviour/attitude, I've also twigged that it's an editor who vanished after being blocked in January 2014 for personal attacks. Number 5 7 21:20, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
@ Number 57: The fact that Sevcohaha has made quite a number of good edits indicates that this is not competency issue. They posted a very sincere sounding unblock request on their user talk and clearly stated they were willing to accept whatever the reviewing admin's final decision turned out to be. They were advised to wait 6 months before requesting another unblock. If they had done that, they would've have been unblocked and could have gone back to editing. For some unexplained reason, they decided to create another account and go back to editing the same pages. Unlike before perhaps, they clearly knew this is not acceptable based upon their unblock request, which unfortunately means any future unblock request is going to be viewed with suspicion. They've just made it a bit harder for a any administrator to remove the block.
It was only a the use of a single phrase that made me wonder about the connection between Målfarlig! and ServcoFraudster. For you, it had to do with the connection between the usernames and Rangers FC. All editors have certain tells that they probably never realize they have until someone points them out. Sevcohaha went back to editing the same genre of articles and making basically the same comments in talk page threads. Someone else would've eventually noticed this and probably checked to verify their suspicions just as you did. It's puzzling why Sevcohaha chose to travel down that path once again and kind of makes you wonder if they were just conducting another experiment (see their user talk) to see if anyone would notice. This Is Spinal Tap should be required viewing for everyone. You can learn a lot from that movie. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 00:40, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
2023; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2022; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2021; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2020; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2019; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2018; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2017; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2016: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013:Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec |
Steel1943 ( talk) 04:32, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Thank you so much for your help! You were prompt and very kind. This is all new to me and I appreciate any help I can get! CRFZara 05:38, 5 April 2016 (UTC) |
Thank you so much for this! I did not even know about the requested articles option. I will try that. I have to say though, this has been ANYTHING but EASY money! At this point, after all of the time Iv'e put in, I'm losing money.
Is there anyway to ensure that my article isn't deleted?
MelissBelle ( talk) 23:35, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, again.
I really appreciate you taking the time to explain things to me.
I may end of deleting the article..if it works that way..but I sure have learned a lot, and that is greatly do to you.
Thank you, and best to you.
MelissBelle ( talk) 18:10, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Again, I appreciate your help. and as I have stated NUMEROUS times, I welcome ANY and all input. This is my first article, as I have said, and I am learning as I go. I had NO idea that my creating this article would be such an offense.
Forgive my not being well versed in the semantics, and I will not say 'my' article again. I simply did not appreciate his methods, and there is more that happened between the other user and myself, than you could have been aware of.
I will take your post as I am sure it was meant, and that is help.
Thank you.
Best, — Preceding unsigned comment added by MelissBelle ( talk • contribs) 02:48, 7 April 2016 (UTC+9)
Hi,
I somehow don't see you deleting logos from here, here, here and other teams. Most national team articles use logos of national federations. – Sabbatino ( talk) 15:05, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
You added the template to a file in Special:Diff/714079527. I think that you should also notify the uploader when adding this template as it is a deletion template. {{ Di-missing article links}} doesn't mention any notification template, so I tend to notify the uploader with {{ subst:di-disputed fair use rationale-notice|filename}} as it seems to be the notification template which best describes the concern in {{ di-missing article links}}. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 21:04, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
...why you're not an administrator? -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 06:58, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
This essay I wrote is a little old, and I never finished it, but it has some useful advice that is still relevant. -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 15:10, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
I see that you have deleted all of the embedded links in this page, and I would like you to reconsider. Those links were not intended "as a form of inline citation"—which, as the Wikipage you directed me to makes clear, is disallowed. In other words, they were not there to give legitimacy to the entry but rather to offer the reader immediate access to the works in question. I don't know what is gained by removing them, but much is lost. Yes, a patient reader can find the works on Google (but, in some cases, not easily), but why send that reader through the trouble? I realize that links may "rot", but then eventually everything does. A link that, if only temporarily, gives direct access to a poem or play or short story seems better to me than no link at all. (I check them regularly, by the way, and repair or remove dead ones.) Thank you for giving your attention to this. Beebuk 07:18, 16 April 2016 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Marchjuly reported by User:Bozzio (Result: ). Thank you. ¡Boz zio! 04:43, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at India national cricket team shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. ¡Boz zio! 04:42, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Steel1943 ( talk) 16:09, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
The Coat of Arms removed from Alpha Phi Omega (Philippines) is equally the Coat of Arms for Alpha Phi Omega in the United States (described at Alpha Phi Omega) and Alpha Phi Omega of the Philippines (described at Alpha Phi Omega (Philippines). I'm not sure why it should be removed from one. Naraht ( talk) 02:27, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Is there an English version of bhutan girls football team under 14 ? This one is the French version. Sorry it took so long a text, I'd like to know if you had here. I did not find.
Wikilink to French Wikipedia article about team
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a01:e34:ee0e:abd0:b854:9c74:3c1f:e26d ( talk) 03:27, 22 April 2016 (UTC+9)
Hi Marchjuly, can we get back on the non-free logos uploaded in Wikipedia and the uploads in Commons? I'm still very confused. For example, File:Commission on Audit.svg is uploaded in Commons with a public domain license. The source stated is http://philgovseals.nhcp.gov.ph/commission-on-audit/, but the website contains "Copyright 2013 - NHCP. Languages: English Filipino." So does the official website of the Commission on Audit ("Copyright 2014 Commission on Audit"). Does this mean the seal is actually non-free?
I am very confused. I have already uploaded 5 seals since 2014 and I might have been breaking the copyright law all this time. -- J-Ronn ( talk) 09:50, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I didn't upload the Halifax flag, it was already on the municipality's Wikipedia entry so I copied the file name into the flag page. I assumed it was free since it's been on the Halifax page for quite some time. Maui84 ( talk) 07:15, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello Marchjuly. I'm fairly certain I've identified a Sevcohaha sock (you created the original SPI). Do you think it's worth filing a report (I'm not sure they have multiple accounts at the moment)? Because of their behaviour/attitude, I've also twigged that it's an editor who vanished after being blocked in January 2014 for personal attacks. Number 5 7 21:20, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
@ Number 57: The fact that Sevcohaha has made quite a number of good edits indicates that this is not competency issue. They posted a very sincere sounding unblock request on their user talk and clearly stated they were willing to accept whatever the reviewing admin's final decision turned out to be. They were advised to wait 6 months before requesting another unblock. If they had done that, they would've have been unblocked and could have gone back to editing. For some unexplained reason, they decided to create another account and go back to editing the same pages. Unlike before perhaps, they clearly knew this is not acceptable based upon their unblock request, which unfortunately means any future unblock request is going to be viewed with suspicion. They've just made it a bit harder for a any administrator to remove the block.
It was only a the use of a single phrase that made me wonder about the connection between Målfarlig! and ServcoFraudster. For you, it had to do with the connection between the usernames and Rangers FC. All editors have certain tells that they probably never realize they have until someone points them out. Sevcohaha went back to editing the same genre of articles and making basically the same comments in talk page threads. Someone else would've eventually noticed this and probably checked to verify their suspicions just as you did. It's puzzling why Sevcohaha chose to travel down that path once again and kind of makes you wonder if they were just conducting another experiment (see their user talk) to see if anyone would notice. This Is Spinal Tap should be required viewing for everyone. You can learn a lot from that movie. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 00:40, 26 April 2016 (UTC)