User talk:C.Fred/Archive 19

Wikipedia

This is wikipedia is losing its popular because of people like you!! i have request wikipedia to create a wiki page for almost 4 months but it keeps deleting my page !!! even i meet all the requiments !! My wikipedia page Mustapha Kamel — Preceding unsigned comment added by MustaphaKamel (talk • contribs) 16:46, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

@MustaphaKamel: I don't see where you've made a request at Wikipedia:Articles for creation. You've tried to create an article at Almost There Records, but you never demonstrated that the company is significant or important per WP:CORP. Really, because of your conflict of interest, you should not try to create the article; if you can show the company is significant, make the request at AfC and let an independent editor start the article. —C.Fred (talk) 16:50, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Click i already requested to create a wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requested_articles/music/Performers,_bands_and_songwriters&action=edit&section=3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by MustaphaKamel (talk • contribs) 16:55, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

@MustaphaKamel: You haven't saved it, though. —C.Fred (talk) 16:59, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Amendment: You haven't saved it. Trying to track down the original request. —C.Fred (talk) 17:02, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Now Go and create the wikipedia page!! you know now that i've requested it!! so go and create it !!! or you also can't even i meet all the requiement — Preceding unsigned comment added by MustaphaKamel (talk • contribs) 17:00, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

@MustaphaKamel: It's been at least two months that the article hasn't gotten created. What makes you think it's suddenly changed now? —C.Fred (talk) 17:02, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Actually, almost three months. [1] —C.Fred (talk) 17:04, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

And I just looked at the request. No independent reliable sources, just directly listings at Spotify, iTunes, etc. —C.Fred (talk) 17:05, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

I saw Many Wikipedia pages with no fucking reliable sources! and no external sites!!! --MustaphaKamel (talk) 17:15, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Other stuff exists. I would say to focus on your article, but another administrator has determined that you (as a person) have already been blocked before and revoked your other account's access as well. —C.Fred (talk) 17:18, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Images on Kim Yoo-jung

I was going to remove the images again, but saw you were letting them stay. I don't know why the uploader is saying they can get permission for these images in two days, because that is never going to happen. I am 99% sure this is a sockpuppet of a blocked user, who has no understanding of copyright. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Yujufan. Random86 (talk) 19:13, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

@Random86: I'm letting them stay mainly because they're in that gap: I'm not convinced they're copyright violations, although I have a strong hunch. Now, if this is a sock of a blocked user, that changes things—and means the pictures can be removed much more quickly. —C.Fred (talk) 19:15, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

The image in the infobox is a still/screenshot from a television advertisement, and there is no indication it is in the public domain. The second image is from Kim Yoo-jung's Instagram, and that blog just reposted it. Kim's Instagram is not in the public domain. Random86 (talk) 19:22, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

@Random86: Good point. I just confirmed it with GIS. Doing some deletions. —C.Fred (talk) 19:25, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Billy B. Van

Hello- Brand spanking new newbie at Wikipedia talk and editing. Apologies in advance for the errors I shall surely make as I learn the Wiki ins and outs. I see that you helped out by properly inserting a clarification I made on the page about Billy B. Van at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_B._Van- thanks very much. And wow! That was fast! I could try to provide further citation info, but the article is behind the NYT member paywall. Let me know if you would like further backup of the clarification. Also, I would like to add more to the page in the future- I am a film archivist and am attempting to flesh out his filmography and locating, possibly, some of his films. I do have one poor quality transfer that is clearly in the Public Domain and may post clips from it shortly- I presume adding links to this material is ok? I notice that one editor added a link to a YouTube video which seems to be no longer available. In the mean time I will attempt to write and properly format more entries about Billy B. Vans film career- maybe you could take a look and make sure I'm not making too much of a mess. My thanks. WikiJohnTpedia, 07/09/2016--WikiJohnTpedia (talk) 22:51, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

TopTopic Speedy Deletion

Greetings Fred. Can you please help me understand why my submission was so swiftly deleted? The issue of social media users and moderators being monetarily rewarded for their content is important. It is on the back of us content creators that the Facebooks, Twitters, etc.of the world have achieved such astronomical valuations...which sadly mostly benefit their shareholders while leaving their users with little to show other than a few Likes, re-tweets, etc.. Per the referenced article from GeekWire, TopTopic has introduced a unique, and in my opinion, compelling revenue model benefitting content creators and moderators. Please help guide me as to how I can go about getting a page created for them. Thanks in advance Fred. BernieSocialist12 (talk) 00:36, 10 July 2016 (UTC) July 9, 2016.

@BernieSocialist12: One of the problems is that the article, at the time it was deleted, did not cite that GeekWire article. I'm not sure that coverage in GW alone would have been enough to assert that the site is significant or important. Yes, it's a different model, but being different isn't enough to make a site notable. —C.Fred (talk) 01:04, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

@C.Fred: I appreciate the speedy reply. I guess that what is "notable" (or not) is subjective and within a mods authority to determine. Can I work further on the submission (add meat on the bone so to speak) and re-submit it for consideration/review? Thanks.

@BernieSocialist12: Yes. I'll restore the article into "Draft" space for you to work on it. It'll be located at Draft:TopTopic. —C.Fred (talk) 01:22, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

@C.Fred:Very cool and open-minded of you. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BernieSocialist12 (talk • contribs) 01:54, 10 July 2016‎ (UTC)

Richard J. Monocchio bio

Hi I greatly appreciate your input, could you please help me, I am new to this — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrzej Sisson (talk • contribs) 02:57, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Shijousa (why you delete the pages created by me ?)

why you delete the pages created by me ? answer me ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Br. Nijwmsa (talk • contribs) 01:04, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

@Br. Nijwmsa: Because you keep create articles about bands that are not notable; the criteria for speedy deletion say such articles can—and should—be deleted without hesitation. You're lucky you haven't been blocked yet. —C.Fred (talk) 01:52, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Marathon

I don't understand why you deleted my thing "Missoula Marathon" Showtime Cole (talk) 03:30, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

@Showtime Cole: I deleted it because there was nothing to indicate that it was significant or important. Not every marathon is important. —C.Fred (talk) 03:33, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Ok but I had the option to create the page and in my town it is an important marathon, so just because my town isn't big doesn't mean it's not irrelevant Showtime Cole (talk) 03:36, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

@Showtime Cole: There's no curve for size of town. Every article must meet the WP:Notability guidelines, and that's measured at the national or global scale, not local. Plus, all the article said was that it's a marathon. That's a clear absence of any assertion of significance or importance. —C.Fred (talk) 03:41, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

If it's measured at a national or global scale, then why are there Wikipedia entries for business that are only local or for a town that isn't national Showtime Cole (talk) 03:44, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

@Showtime Cole: Because they probably meet WP:GNG. Besides, just because other stuff exists is no reason to allow another article. —C.Fred (talk) 03:53, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

The Creature's Cookbook

No, no objection to this article being speedied, I assume they won't be back if this was a failed attempt at viral marketing and they're embarrassed about the author's real name being sourceable. --McGeddon (talk) 08:25, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Please kindly paste this below words.. this page is aboit a band please.. sir!

[copy of old article removed]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Br. Nijwmsa (talk • contribs)

@Br. Nijwmsa: And where in any of that is there even a shred of an assertion that they are a significant or important band? That's why the article was speedy deleted. —C.Fred (talk) 17:50, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

yes this is a important band..! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Br. Nijwmsa (talk • contribs) 17:53, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

@Br. Nijwmsa: Which criteria of WP:MUSIC do they meet? —C.Fred (talk) 17:54, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

C.Fred, I have a feeling it's the "I am a member of it, therefor it's 'important' " 'criteria'. 220 of ^Borg 21:43, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

C.Fred, I'm concerned that this user is not communicating effectively... they simply blank all the notices they get on their talk page, such as my notice about using multiple accounts, without any indication they're addressing said concerns. --Jasper Deng (talk) 22:10, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

@Jasper Deng: Blanking is equivalent to acknowlegement. And I know the other account that's been acting in tandem with this one, but I haven't seen anything that really crosses the line to be abuse of multiple accounts. —C.Fred (talk) 22:12, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

I maintain that it's about time he was blocked, per the below thread, and the fact that he already received a warning about making inappropriate pages on his talk page.--Jasper Deng (talk) 15:05, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Jewish Patriot1

This very nice gentleman needs his talk page access yanked ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:04, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

174.109.202.56

Might be time to block the IP again, they have been recently blocked and back at it again (I sent the warning a bit too late after they made more edits that you reverted). nyuszika7h (talk) 16:22, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Kristin Kreuk

Hi, I don't really understand all the codes and stuff, but I had a reference for what I added but it wouldn't let me put in the link. But reference aside. I know for a fact that she is living in Toronto. WD82 (talk) 20:32, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

@WD82: How do you know she lives there? Where did you see it published? —C.Fred (talk) 20:40, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Iistal

This editor is more trouble than worth still ignoring all warnings, which the user deletes from their page and then believes they no longer apply. Mlpearc (open channel) 18:09, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Based on his behavior since you unblocked them, I think they should go back to an indefinite block. There's a clear pattern. They add material to BLPs. At least some of it is unsourced. A couple of different editors revert and leave warnings on Iistal's Talk page. Iistal "fixes" it, by either sourcing the material or removing the unsourced material. They then blank their Talk page. Even putting aside that, which is bad enough, much of the sourced material Iistal adds is unnecessarily precise (e.g., exact dates instead of months, also time-consuming to check and make sure the date is correct and sourced) and other times gossipy nonsense (I just removed some of that a moment ago from Goldie Hawn). Drmies had the right idea, at least in my view.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:24, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

@Bbb23: I agree, and I just reblocked them. I've also left a pretty detailed message about why I blocked them on their talk page (which I expect they'll probably blank at the first opportunity *sigh*). The ball is in their court, but I'd push for a BLP topic ban as a condition to an unblock. —C.Fred (talk) 19:03, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, in particular for your detailed message at the user's Talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:07, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

C.Fred, be careful moving forward, my revert is apparently sourced somewhere on the page. Hope our readers are willing to hunt for it. Mlpearc (open channel) 19:04, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

@Mlpearc: No need to hunt, it's right beside the date. I saw the block and assumed it was for other edits, not that particular one. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:04, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

• Bbb23, I'm not aware of having had any ideas; I'll try not to let it happen again. I just looked at the message I sent them with "advice"--it pointed them to the ANI discussion where they could reread the reasons for the block, and suggested they address those points. I suppose they wrote a pretty decent unblock request (I just looked at it), but yeah, continued edit warring, and this lack of communication, never a good thing on a collaborative project. Drmies (talk) 03:00, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

U.N.Academy, Barpeta Road

please make semi-protected this page from edit and move. because I want to protected from non-autoconfirmed users.!Nijwmsa Boro (talk) 15:44, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

I think this request has already been declined elsewhere, with explanations given, but I do not recall the details. MPS1992 (talk) 19:11, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Oh, now I recall, it was right here. Br Nijwmsa, please see User talk:C.Fred#U.N.Academy, Barpeta Road further up this page. MPS1992 (talk) 19:12, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Still not done. @Br. Nijwmsa: There has not been any vandalism or abusive moves that would warrant protection. —C.Fred (talk) 23:18, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

July 2016

Well, in that case consider sending warnings regarding the three-revert rule to both parties. Otherwise, your neutrality is questionable. Horneeek (talk) 13:43, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

@Horneeek: Given that the other user is an experienced user, I didn't need to break out the template. I went for a more subtle wording. —C.Fred (talk) 23:15, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

@C.Fred: Not really, I strongly disagree to call the user with 9 reverting edits as more experienced. But your neutrality remains questionable as said, so I don't really mind your opinion on that matter either. Horneeek (talk) 23:42, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

User:JohnnyTestOfficial

When User:JohnnyTestOfficial creates an article about JohnnyTest, and you tag the article for speedy deletion, would you think the user might in addition need blocking as a role account? Edison (talk) 02:25, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

@Edison: Or for a username violation. I'm looking to see how they respond to the tagging first. —C.Fred (talk) 02:27, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Tomato, tomahto. Regards. Edison (talk) 02:30, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

72.128.72.213

Please block user:72.128.72.213. 2602:306:3357:BA0:452:5D96:439C:C31C (talk) 14:46, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Already done. —C.Fred (talk) 14:54, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Not conflict

Hello, I want to inform you that I am not having any conflict. I only want to clear some edits based on personal point of view. The other editor, for example, insist that Ethiopians has to be removed BUT Ethiopia is not even member of the Arab League. Also, denying the right of these people to be included as Black Africans and instead labeled them as multiracial people. Routs verdi (talk) 17:46, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Reply on your talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 17:47, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

call.center app page

Hello, I would like to understand if there is anything I can do to keep the page I created live? The reason I am asking, is because I have seen many other similar pages, that have even lower encyclopedic value, than this one, for example, other softphone for macOS only. What is the criteria for notability in this case? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by DIDWW (talk • contribs) 00:29, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

@DIDWW: It's the notability criteria for products (I don't know the shortcut for that off the top of my head) or the general notability guideline. The big failing of the article currently is that no independent sources are cited. —C.Fred (talk) 00:31, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Fred, will look and add for more references. Also, requested to rename DIDWW, thanks again for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DIDWW (talk • contribs) 00:50, 17 July 2016‎ (UTC)

YouTube CD Creator

Hello, you just rolled back a change, from mark as deleted to possible advert. I was following the wiki instructions to ask for help so that it does not read like an advert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelbarry147 (talk • contribs) 19:55, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

@Michaelbarry147: Which means you missed the instructions in the speedy deletion box that say that you may not remove a speedy delete tag from an article you created yourself. —C.Fred (talk) 20:31, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

See TV

I thought I should let you know, I have filed SPI report here. Sro23 (talk) 01:28, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

@Sro23: Yeah, I was already on that angle. I don't see where they are currently abusing multiple accounts or evading a block. If I missed one, though, let me know. —C.Fred (talk) 01:29, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

==Company Profile==

[spam removed] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saaduddin2016 (talk • contribs) 01:48, 18 July 2016‎ (UTC)

@Saaduddin2016: You can't just repeat the same material that looks like it was copied from a directory over and over. You need to discuss the situation with us and explain how this is a second company. —C.Fred (talk) 01:51, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

~~hi, she just Twitted recently about being in Toronto. I would have put the reference in but Twitter links aren't accepted by Wikipedia I guess. And I'm friends with one of her friends, so I know she's in Toronto. Winston July 22~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by WD82 (talk • contribs) 18:31, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for adding Homework to Namrata Shrestha. सरोज उप्रेती (talk) 03:10, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

23 July 2016

Hello C.Fred, Can U say that how to upload Google file in wikipedia commons. सरोज उप्रेती (talk) 03:33, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

@सरोज उप्रेती: Short answer: don't. If you found a picture via a Google search, you probably can't upload it to Wikimedia Commons. —C.Fred (talk) 03:42, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Can we Upload that photo on English Wikipedia? सरोज उप्रेती (talk) 03:46, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

@सरोज उप्रेती: Probably not. There are pretty strict rules about non-free images. Now, that said, an image of the poster of Homework could be uploaded for the movie article. —C.Fred (talk) 03:51, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Can U say the process of keeping license in movie article photo? सरोज उप्रेती (talk) 04:04, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Need Barnstar

Hello C.Fred, I have provided you a barnstar. Now it's your turn to Provide me Barnstar. Please Give me Barnstar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by सरोज उप्रेती (talk • contribs) 05:38, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

@सरोज उप्रेती: Barnstars are given as awards, not as items to be trading back and forth. At such time as I see you've done something that warrants one, I'll give one, but I'm not going to hand one out on demand. —C.Fred (talk) 13:52, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

…Though it seems your actions warrant an indefinite block for sockpuppetry, not a barnstar. —C.Fred (talk) 13:56, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

remote control

You are wrongfully deleting my contributions to remote control. It is sourced information — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.114.78.47 (talk) 20:06, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

It's irrelevant. Your account was blocked; you may not continue to edit without logging in. —C.Fred (talk) 20:08, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

What is irrelevent? It made the article more accurate. I have been wrongfully shut out — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.114.78.47 (talk) 20:26, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Then you need to appeal your block. —C.Fred (talk) 20:52, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Lowering protection level

Hi C.Fred. I saw that you placed long-term protection on several articles such as New York State Court Officers to fight off an IP vandal who's been disruptively editing law enforcement articles. Would you mind if I remove some of these protections? I recently blocked the range that this vandal was operating from, so the disruption should be gone or greatly reduced. I'm also placing these pages on my watchlist, so if he returns with another range (I've noticed he uses one other, but very infrequently), the protection can always be restored. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 05:00, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

@BU Rob13: Go for it. Like I said, it just got to the point where the volume of disruption was so great that protection was in order. The rangeblocks should help there, and we can reprotect later if it's needed. —C.Fred (talk) 16:43, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

S Aishwarya

Hi Reg my page ... Can you pleae let me know what more informations required

[rehash of article deleted] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lathaayappa1982 (talk • contribs) 22:51, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

@Lathaayappa1982: You need coverage of her in independent reliable sources. —C.Fred (talk) 22:53, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

I did add other reliable external links which talks about S. Aishwarya and her performance, Some links from news papaer and reviews from blog - Please do let me know what more information is requored — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lathaayappa1982 (talk • contribs) 23:12, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

I Do have few more links to add which i'm waiting to receive from S. Aishwarya, Please do let me know if you need more — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lathaayappa1982 (talk • contribs) 23:23, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

@Lathaayappa1982: What do you mean by receiving the links from Aishwarya? Are you editing the page at her request or on her behalf? Sounds like you might have a conflict of interest. —C.Fred (talk) 00:02, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

As you requested for more relevant resources, Have requested Aishwarya to provide more such links - Its me who wanted to create a wiki page . Please do let me know , Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lathaayappa1982 (talk • contribs) 00:05, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

@Lathaayappa1982: Still, you shouldn't be needing to request the information from her. If she's notable, there should be published information out there already that you can find through your own searches. —C.Fred (talk) 00:23, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

yes, I agree .. they are already available online and here are few. http://www.thehindu.com/features/friday-review/music/in-the-big-league/article386947.ece http://www.thehindu.com/features/friday-review/music/all-in-the-family/article4077301.ece http://tpanand.blogspot.com.ar/2015/01/saishwarya-rising-star.html https://carnatictimes.com/portfolio/the-musician-makers/ http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bengaluru/MS-was-simply-our-great-grandmother/articleshow/50050678.cms http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bengaluru/Great-granddaughter-to-perform-with-MS-Subbalakshmis-favourite-tamburas/articleshow/42649037.cms https://indianraga.com/product/maithreem-bhajata-online-module/ As i know Aishwarya personally and its more easier to gather information and which would be more relevant. Do let me know if you need any information

Hello fred, I have added more information to the page , please do let me know, the page is yet work in progress Thanks, Good weekend - :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lathaayappa1982 (talk • contribs) 04:13, 24 July 2016 (UTC) JFYI - I have also linked MS SUBBULAKSHMI (from wiki) who is the great grand mother of S.Aishwarya Thanks :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lathaayappa1982 (talk • contribs) 00:31, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Why is the page deleted ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.18.41.214 (talk) 03:34, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

The deleting administrator felt it was unambiguous advertising. —C.Fred (talk) 03:38, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Our Company Profile again edited by someone else.

Hi Cfred,

As i already discussed and debate on the matter regarding "LABEL" section in our singer celebrity profiles you have deleted the section few days ago when you didn't find a suitable resource for it, now its again added don't know from whom but added you can check it in the below mentioned profile of our singer celebrity please have a look.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_to_Eye_(Taher_Shah_song)

Hence we are too much disappointed with this label "BLUE NOTES PRODUCTIONS" as we don't have any connection with this PRODUCTION HOUSE and its services and don't even know about it according to our prospective its just to cash our singer popularity and nothing kindly take a strict action against this and lock our profiles as these both songs ANGEL AND EYE TO EYE solely the property of EYE TO EYE LTD media production company that has been registered in GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN and we have all the legitimate proves of both songs copyrights if required so we will show you for your record and confirmation but the company mentioned in this LABEL is totally fake and unauthentic company even don't have any record we have found in social media.

Due to this reason we again request you to kindly remove or replace this company with our legitimate company EYE TO EYE LTD and lock our all three profiles relates to our celebrity to make them secure in future the profiles are mentioned below for your record.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_to_Eye_(Taher_Shah_song)

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel_(Taher_Shah_song)

Also share you the legitimate EYE TO EYE LTD company prove of registration in GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN DEPARTMENT.

http://www.secp.gov.pk/ns/company.asp?COMPANY_CODE=0068955&id=

I hope this is enough for you but still you required any further evidence so we will provide you the copyright copy. But delete this fake and unauthentic company from our profile.

Looking forward for your response,

Regards, Syed Affan — Preceding unsigned comment added by SyedAffan1 (talk • contribs) 22:49, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

@SyedAffan1: Addressing each of your concerns in sequence:

First, I have removed the label from Eye to Eye (Taher Shah song). While your request brought the situation to my attention, that's not the reason I removed it. The reason is that no independent reliable source has been presented to show that the song was released on that label. So, it's been removed for not being verifiable. I've added the page to my watchlist, so I'll see future edits as they are made.

Second, no independent reliable source has been presented that Eye to Eye Ltd. is the label on which the song has been released, so it has not been added as the label.

Third, there has not been enough vandalism or other disruption of the articles to justify protecting any of the articles you listed.

Fourth, if you have independent reliable sources to show that Eye to Eye Ltd. holds the rights to those songs, please provide, if possible, links to where they can be verified online. Please note that, since the label is in dispute, the sources really need to be independent; the publishing company's webpage and press releases will not suffice.

Fifth, the registration of the company only shows that the company exists. It does not show what the company does, what it owns, or who it represents.

Finally, based on your repeated use of words like "we", "our singer", and "our profile", it is clear that you have a conflict of interest with these articles, and your future edits are subject to the guidelines on editing when you have a conflict of interest. In short, you should not edit the Taher Shah article, and you should not edit any articles about his songs, albums, or other media. —C.Fred (talk) 23:14, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

@C.Fred: Reply of your Message:

First of all thanks for your editing as this is my main concern to remove or replace the Label into another one.

Secondly, are you asking about the evidence of song production by EYE TO EYE LTD well there is no paper proof i have in my hand right now but i can show you the valid and authentic proof that publicly defines about the production of ANGEL Song that belongs to EYE TO EYE LTD. Please click a below mentioned link of the video and see song credits "Produced By: EYE TO EYE LTD" hence it clearly mentions about the production company, its label and so far all the work done for this song under the supervision of EYE TO EYE LTD. Have a look:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoCrbuM8wmc

Further, an image of song credits is also attached with this message for your confirmation:

File:EYE TO EYE LTD-credits.jpg

— Preceding unsigned comment added by SyedAffan1 (talk • contribs) 23:47, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

@SyedAffan1: As I said before, it really needs to be an independent source. The video is a self-published source, and there is the theoretical risk of the YouTube link not being authentic. That's why an independent source, with no tie to either company, is preferred. —C.Fred (talk) 00:53, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello , reply please?

Hello C.Fred ,

I sent you message on Tafila Technical University page and waiting your reply , thank you. --Thelaststory99 (talk) 07:03, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

@Thelaststory99: The last time I looked, I saw the tag. I didn't think further reply was needed. —C.Fred (talk) 14:56, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

FYI

Hello C. Looks like another one is at it. The talk page may need temporary protection if this keeps up. Thanks for your work with the previous troll. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 01:33, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

@MarnetteD: I don't like protecting user talk pages, but sometimes our hand gets forced. —C.Fred (talk) 01:55, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

I completely understand. It is always a pain when a troll sits at their computer and just keeps creating new accounts when the current one gets blocked. Thanks again. MarnetteD|Talk 02:26, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Vengaboys

Hi C.Fred, I have all good reason to believe that the IP 67.140.*.*, the users Wario7936 and KimSasabone are actually all the same person, the creator of the "museum" (even stooping so low, impersonating a band member). Hence I requested a CheckUser. --ChrisHamburg (talk) 07:47, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

@ChrisHamburg: Good call. Something felt off about the edits. I was pretty sure Wario was overlapping with the IP; I wasn't sure yet about the new account. Glad to know there's other eyes on the article. —C.Fred (talk) 14:56, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

I've also advised KimSasabone to contact VRT; unless they verify her identity, her username is a violation of WP:Username policy, because it's the name of a member of Vengaboys. —C.Fred (talk) 15:06, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

kimsasabone, wario7936 etc are all the same sock puppet... Vengaboys appear to have had problems with the creator of that museum before, who appears to have multiple fans working in it under a cult-like control, probably the socket puppet was some mind controlled museum follower! I have used the DMCA to take out his museum today too to give them and us a little break from his constant tactics and spam, he should have no reason to post his museum in the Vengaboys article because his website is no longer available due to a DMCA request :) (Terminated Museum) --40.142.129.233 (talk) 01:26, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

As I expected, the CheckUser investigation confirmed that the users are identical. I too believe, that the user above, 40.142.129.233, might also be involved in this, taking his choice of words into consideration. Not only is the "museum's" website closed, all its social media channels as well (tweets are protected, its facebook page is suddenly deleted). I don't know what that guy is trying to achieve, first creating sockpuppets, blaming himself for spamming, deleting references to his own website in the article and then nuking the "museum" after his scam was exposed over here... We should watch carefully. --ChrisHamburg (talk) 10:11, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you!

Just wanted to say thank you for your assistance regarding the Fred Lynn WP:COI! --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 18:15, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Request for opinions and comments

Hi there fellow Wikipedian. I came across your page in search for some outside opinions and comments regarding an ongoing dispute on the talk page for the country Eritrea [[2]]. The issue involves what naming is prefered to describe the location of the country Eritrea in the lead and the geographic section of the article. I have argumented for restoring the use of the term East Africa or Eastern Africa which used by international organization such as United Nations, African Union and African development bank to mention a few, East Africa was also recently used in the article until the other part in the dispute changed it to Horn of Africa. I have suggested using both since Eritrea is part of both East Africa and Horn of Africa, even though the latter being a less recognized region and a less used term to describe the country's location by international organizations and media. At the moment it only mentions Horn of Africa. I think it could mention both or only East Africa. It would be great to get some opinions from an experienced admin like you. Would you mind taking a look and leave some comments.. FYI ive also opened up a case on the disupte resolution notice boarding in trying to resolve this. See [[3]]. ThanksRichard0048 (talk) 20:01, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

References

Father Saturnino Urios University

Hi C.Fred. Would you mind taking a look at Father Saturnino Urios University. A lot of content was just added by a fairly new editor, and I can't remember if this was same stuff removed as a copyvio back in May of this year. Quite a number of revisions were deleted, but perhaps you can see them since you're an admin. FWIW, I am asking you since I saw from the article's edit history that you were involved in removing some of the copyvios back in May. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:02, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Your hunch was right: it's the same text that was revdel'ed back in May. I've deleted it and issued a warning to the account that added it. —C.Fred (talk) 16:39, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for checking. Do you think there may be a connection betweeen the accounts which added that content? Ronald Galope Barniso, who originally added it, was indef'd back at the end of May and Anitnovic2016, who re-added it with his third edit, was created shortly thereafter. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:32, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Mariah Carey

The other sites like www.imdb.com and www.famousbirthdays.com say that Mariah Carey was born in the year 1970. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gamerman1990 (talk • contribs) 21:52, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

@Gamerman1990: Neither of those sites is a reliable source. —C.Fred (talk) 22:36, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

my edit for Mr. Faris Al-Rawi

Hello there I think my edits were reliable .If you actually checked the links for my sources you would realize that Facebook is also a reliable source as most of its information was extracted from the other websites I mentioned. You don't have to take such drastic measures and just delete my edit. I spent a lot of effort for my edit. You could have simply talked to me on my talk page about the matter before undoing my edit. I am well aware of Wikipedia's policy pertain to articles about living people and I have given adequate information and I stated my sources. So I request that you think of your actions and know how other people feel when just want to make a Wikipedia Article better but was undone by people like you.😒

Pnmforlife (talk) 23:07, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

@Pnmforlife: You might want to check the article history again. I didn't revert your edit. What I did was welcome you with some pointers to guidance on things like reliable sources. —C.Fred (talk) 23:09, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Redirect Tiny Rascal Gang to Tiny Rascal gang

Hello C.Fred. Would you be able to allow editing of the locked Tiny Rascal Gang so a redirect can be made to Tiny Rascal gang. Page seems to cover notability criteria. Thank you.Calaka (talk) 12:37, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

@Calaka: I agree about the notability criteria. That's why, since the article used Tiny Rascal Gang as the name of the group, I've moved it. —C.Fred (talk) 15:56, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for that C.Fred. Kind regards.Calaka (talk) 23:18, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

bridges

Why are you removing history for tied arch bridges? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.114.71.24 (talk) 22:00, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Because blocked users may not edit. It's clear that the person currently using that IP was previously blocked. —C.Fred (talk) 22:02, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

I made one edit. What are you talking about? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.114.71.24 (talk) 22:03, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

The edit history of Tied-arch bridge speaks for itself. —C.Fred (talk) 22:05, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

I am attempting to re-add useful information that has been removed. I have never been blocked. The fact that this information has been added before and the history shows it does not mean that this information should forever be blocked from entering Wikipedia. That is misleading and unjust. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.114.71.24 (talk) 22:07, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

If you think it's unjust, log back into your original account and appeal that block. —C.Fred (talk) 22:08, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Do you really think that we are all so stupid that we cannot recognise your socking? Andy Dingley (talk) 22:09, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Why am I getting attacked? I noticed that useful information had been removed before so I added it. This is ridiculous. Is this information not allowed on wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.114.71.24 (talk) 22:12, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

I can't really say whether the information is allowed on Wikipedia. I can't get involved with the content of the article while I'm dealing with the behavioural issue of sock puppetry. —C.Fred (talk) 22:16, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

I don't really understand but it seems Wikipedia is extremely unwelcoming at the moment, to say the least. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.114.71.24 (talk) 22:19, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

You were banned for your editing.

You come back, not logged in WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Filipz123.

You obsessively push the same stuff.

We're not fooled that it's still you. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:53, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Moved from your user page

Give me my information back. I spent hours working on it. I have plenty of information I can use to site as credible resources. How do people expect to feel comfortable using this site? Answer that. If you were monitoring how often it was being updated, you'd notice I was still working on it and had only taken a momentary break to go pay a bill. It says "click on the contest button" but there is not contest button. So, how about you give me back what I spent hours working on. Yes, yes, I know "you should have used Mypage". That's about all that could be said. Ease up on ruining peoples afternoons. SMH. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Originalgoat05 (talk • contribs) 02:15, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

COI is once someone write about own company. I am writing about another company which have lots of referencing. Please allow open source content as open source. I have read all Wikipedia guidelines and my article is meeting all of these. That is worst action to delete a content instead of guidance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by E.Zahid (talk • contribs) 15:53, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Please restore my previous page. I spent a lot of time and effort to make that. I do not copied any content from somewhere else. Please restore this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by E.Zahid (talk • contribs) 16:00, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Talk page privs?

[4] Toddst1 (talk) 19:18, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

@Toddst1: I see it's already been dealt with. Thanks for the heads-up. —C.Fred (talk) 20:20, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you so much for editing my page! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helper1192 (talk • contribs) 20:11, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Coven (band)

Can you please have a look at this? If you search for Coven at Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection/Rolling_archive you'll see the history. 2602:30a:c001:5dd0::/64 is not stopping. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:41, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

@NeilN: At one incident a day, I'm not quite ready to pull the trigger on protection, but I've got the page on my watchlist. —C.Fred (talk) 02:49, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I was thinking of a rangeblock as it's one person not communicating but watching is fine. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:53, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

@NeilN: Oh. Rangeblocks are outside of my wheelhouse. I'll support them if I see they're warranted, but I wouldn't do the rangeblock myself, because of collateral damage concerns. —C.Fred (talk) 02:57, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

A /64 block is like blocking one "regular" IP but I understand. Thanks for looking into the situation. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:01, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @NeilN: Blocked. A /64 rangeblock makes perfect sense here. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 03:13, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

DalltalaMcShields

Hi, CFred. I went to indef DalltalaMcShields for adding crap to BLPs, but saw you had already done so, for "long-term abuse". So is it somebody you recognise? Bishonen | talk 02:06, 4 August 2016 (UTC).

@Bishonen: Yes, it is. There's a history of abuse on sportscaster articles like Lee Corso and Steve Levy. Looks like Jaredgk2008 is the master account. —C.Fred (talk) 02:09, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! Sports? No wonder it meant nothing to me. Nice catch. Bishonen | talk 02:12, 4 August 2016 (UTC).

WP:RFPP

I don't suppose there's any point in copypasting this message I left elsewhere. Help! Please! Thank you! Sorry! RunnyAmiga (talk) 23:49, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for updating the speedy delete template I placed, a silly mistake of mine :) DoomLexus (talk) 00:22, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Jericho Summer

Why was Jericho Summer page deleted, what is missing here, there were links to reviews, they have been published in the press etc etc, everyone in this band is already recognised and most on wiki already. Glideman 11.20 05.08.16 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glideman2015 (talk • contribs) 09:18, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

@Glideman2015: There was nothing new in the article over what was there the last time the article was discussed for deletion. The consensus then, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jericho Summer (2nd nomination), was to delete. Since no new assertions of notability were added, the article was deleted as a recreation of an article previously deleted via deletion discussion. —C.Fred (talk) 17:21, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Morad Chiri

Maybe you want to SALT the page as it is being recreated after being CSD'd multiple times.--Cahk (talk) 09:51, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

@Cahk: Done. Hopefully it dissuades the user from creating another page on Chiri, which would likely get them blocked. —C.Fred (talk) 13:25, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Jericho Summer

Hello Fred, there was new links, since I saw the last article the group have beed reviewed by The Rocker.co.uk, Also Metal-hammer, and there was another link to an article by Funkywellies I found on the net. They have also had radio play on the uk and this link was added. They were also published in the UK press and this link was added. Please can you come back to me? With the line up of artists here, I really think we should put the page back, there are many pages with a lot less external links. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glideman2015 (talk • contribs) 10:07, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Can you help with this COI issue?

In response to the COI template flagged at the top of the article on Diner en Blanc, which I edited, I started a Talk page that lists the small edits made (fact changes), along with the addition of the Company info table. I will not be making any more edits to this page, and have instead listed things that public editors may consider adding to the page. Can you help me remove this tag, since I feel the issue has been addressed? I tried to proceed according to Wikipedia's guidelines, but the COI template was re-added by a bot. Let me know if I should add anything else to the Talk page for that article, or if you can help me out, being a third party editor. Thanks! Diner en Blanc International (talk) 13:59, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Macedonian Language

Hello C.Fred,

I looked into your contributions and origin, you're Canadian am I correct. Beside your rights of an administrator what drives your assumption that what I edited in the page about the Macedonian Language is false? You have no knowledge of Balkan History.

I am a Bulgarian, in due time I can provide you many historical documents supporting my edit, including such of Byzantine Empire Historians. But if you ask me to gather all that data, I'll have enough data to negate all claims that the Former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia (or simply Macedonia) has anything to do with the Greek State of Macedonia during the time of Alexander the Great. I really wonder if you've requested such reliable sources from the "Macedonians" who wrote those articles in Wikipedia.

Simply by looking at the pages of Wikipedia about the Ancient Greece, The First Bulgarian Empire, Byzantia (Eastern Roman Empire), The Second Bulgarian Empire, Russo-Turkish War of 1877–1878, Treaty of San Stefano, Treaty of Berlin (1878), First Balkan War of 1912–1913, the reason of the Second Balkan War of Second Balkan War, Incident at Petrich, Abecedar.

You'll understand that: 1. Macedonia (today, F.Y.R.O.M.) has nothing to do with the Macedonia (the Ancient Greek State). This claim is falsely done so that they distinguish themselves from their real origin - Bulgaria/Bulgarians.

2. Macedonian Language is in fact a south-western dialect of Bulgarians that populated Macedonia Region, if you take a look at the maps of the First and Second Bulgarian Empire, as well as the betrayal of the Triple-Alliance and refusal of the Serbian and Greek troops to pull out of Macedonia Region after the war against the Ottoman Empire (First Balkan War). Hence, leading to the Second Balkan War. And after the Incident at Petrich, the Greek in an attempt to assimilate Bulgarian population in the lands that were split between Serbia and Greece created a false textbook that first designate appearance of a Macedonian Language, before that time it was a dialect of Bulgarian Language. In support to that I would ask you to investigate the dialect of south-west Bulgaria and compare it with the so called Macedonian Language, you'll find little to none difference besides the Serbian Influence because it was part of Yugoslavia for many years. Does that mean that south-west Bulgaria was part of Macedonia??? This is absurd, prior to the Second Balkan War there was no such thing as Macedonian State or Nation or Language for that matter.

If you deny my edit then you deny the information provided in these other Wikipedia entries. I suggest you investigate deeper any entry created for "Macedonia" and it's "language".

Oh, and about my edit about the Glagolitic Alphabet, prior to the aftermath of the Second Balkan War, and the Abecedar textbook, there is no mentioning of Macedonian Slavic people or Macedonian Language. Therefore since Glagolitic Alphabet was created by St. Cyril and his Brother for the sole purpose of use for all Slavic and Bulgarians to distribute the Christian Religion. In that Article the term "Macedonian Language" must be removed as FALSE, it did not exist at that time. As there was no Macedonian people at that time.

In fact the origin of the so called Official Macedonian Language should be considered the time when FYROM got its independence from Yugoslavia. Before that time it should be considered as Dialect of Bulgarian Language. Because before that there was no Macedonians, there were ethnic Bulgarian in the territory of Greece and Serbo-Yugoslavia. Just like the ones in the area of City of Pirot in Serbia where still live Bulgarians.

Best Regards

ZArchivo (talk) 03:03, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Call-girls-in-India spammer/s

Hi C.Fred, and thanks for your message.
I am keeping a record, that I guess I should post into my userspace so wiser heads than mine can determine whether it needs an edit filter.
To the best of my knowledge, there is a computer science thingummy-bob called "regular expressions" which would catch this spam.
I don't think it's a big deal, though: the spam is usually easily caught and deleted.
PS: just between you and me, though I'm a WP:SYSOP... things start with lots and lots of teeny tiny magnets that are either I or O, yeah? and end up with the internet coming out of a coaxial cable from a plug in the wall into my computer. Whatever happens in between, well, it may as well happen by magic, for all I know. Shhh, don't tell anyone I said this. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 11:07, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar

Thank you for the help it really means a lot! We wanted to ask you a question. Someone edited the page and our follow up edit was a mistake. We are trying to input the original image that was there before the edit. It is from the teams official website, with the team roster and individual pictures. We have all the necessary copyright permissions, which were originally imputed and accepted before the image itself was erased by the upload which posed the violation. Could you possible help or recommend a solution? Thank you! DrewJordanRosenhaus (talk) 00:07, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Radio DJs

Can you explain your edit here? Until yesterday, Crane was included at [[Category:American DJs]], but that was removed by Bearcat with the edit summary: "Category:American DJs is for the kind of DJ who is an EDM or hip hop musician, not the kind of DJ who is a voice on the radio." I didn't agree with that - but it happened anyway. So, what I am now doing is merely re-categorising the biographies affected by Bearcat's changes, as [[Category:American radio DJs]], which is a subset of [[Category:American radio personalities]]. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:05, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

@Ghmyrtle: My bad. I thought you had changed it back to the American DJs category; I missed the word "radio" in there. I've self-reverted. —C.Fred (talk) 20:24, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Three footballers

Hi, Martin Jõgi, Kevin Rääbis, Martin Miller (footballer) all fail WP:NFOOTY Estonian top flight is semi-professional these three play in the only club that has no professional players. WP:Fully professional leagues. --Klõps (talk) 22:04, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

@Klõps: Thanks for the heads-up. That wasn't immediately clear looking at the club's page. —C.Fred (talk) 22:14, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Official page / website

The links I have edited are official sites even if they dont appear to be. i have authentication from the artists with the permission to make these changes and represent their social media. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thefinalmiracle (talk • contribs) 05:40, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

@Thefinalmiracle: some of the links you have added do not work, and others have been added to articles which already have an official website listed. We do not need multiple "official" websites on a single article. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a social media site like Facebook or Twitter. If these people have employed or authorized you to manage their social media, you should be doing so on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter or other such suitable sites. Not forgetting MySpace and Bebo of course. MPS1992 (talk) 10:58, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Learn online

Hello Can you advise me on how to improve Learn Online by listing out the problems--Derek Leiro (talk) 18:42, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

@Derek Leiro: What don't you understand of what I said at Talk:Learn online? —C.Fred (talk) 18:44, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

I do now thanks for your help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derek Leiro (talk • contribs) 18:48, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Jericho Summer

Hi Fred, please can you comment why Jericho Summer was removed, last time I asked you said because there was nothing new. I replied stating that there was and you have not got back to me. The band were listed on the UK new release charts on 12th August, is this enough for you, seems to be on the notability list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glideman2015 (talk • contribs) 13:18, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

@Glideman2015: The new release charts won't be enough. They'll need to make it into the main singles or album chart. You might want to create a new version of the article at Draft:Jericho Summer. If there's enough material to show they're now notable and overcome the concerns raised at WP:Articles for deletion/Jericho Summer (2nd nomination) (and the first nomination), then we can move the article back to the main space. —C.Fred (talk) 17:52, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Flagged image on copy right status

We have submitted further evidence on the discussions page for nomination. Could you possibly take a look? We are trying to get everything into the correct format, with all the necessary copyright material to get its approval. We would like to incorporate this skill in future page editions/or violations. Any help would be of great assistance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DrewJordanRosenhaus (talk • contribs) 20:17, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

@DrewJordanRosenhaus: I did take a look, but I don't see a link directly to a page where the club says they have released the image under a Creative Commons license. That communication must come directly from Roberto Sacca, as owner of the image, either by adding the license to a page at the club's website or by emailing Wikimedia Commons directly, from his email account (club account is fine) to confirm the release. Even though De Abreu is the subject of the image, he doesn't own the rights to the image and cannot license it. —C.Fred (talk) 20:25, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

P. V. Ramana

I reverted P.V.Ramana only to referenced information only unlike others who are tending to provide false information. Research well please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvsaraswathi (talk • contribs) 02:16, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

@Pvsaraswathi: Whether your edit is true or not is not the issue. The main issue is that you've repeatedly made the same edits. The secondary issues are your legal threats and personal attacks. —C.Fred (talk) 02:17, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

First you see who made such personal attacks and then talk sir. I did not start by calling anyone names. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvsaraswathi (talk • contribs) 02:19, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

@Pvsaraswathi: The edit history of P. V. Ramana suggests otherwise. —C.Fred (talk) 02:21, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Sorry sir please carefully follow news papers in all Indian languages and then carefully look at all the 1 billion people falsifying the truth. These thugs work for politicians. This is a news that is trending now. I am only by myself in the world of false history. Thanks again and good bye and enjoy such people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvsaraswathi (talk • contribs) 02:23, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Sir, and you are taking sides with this User: Net Neutrality who is the same as User:2602:306:3701:3e20:b55a:44f2:1d2e:5a40 who has been trying to remove referenced information so that their agenda becomes true. Look at that faceless losers names and actions. Have fun with such friends. Thanks and have a wonderful Crest of the year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvsaraswathi (talk • contribs) 02:28, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

@Pvsaraswathi: I am not opining one way or the other on the content of the article. I cannot get involved in making content-based decisions because I am acting as an administrator in this matter. To that end, I must caution you that referring to other editors as "thugs" or "faceless losers", as you have done above, will be dealt with as a personal attack. —C.Fred (talk) 02:32, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Sir if you are not opining on eway or the other, why are you only blaming me on my talk page that i reverted my article. Have you taken time to see how many times others have reverted my article. I have never put anything is not referenced. That guy threatens me to begin with by saying that the P.V.Ramana wanted to have privacy with his info. Every newspaper has a history and every 1 sec it is trending and this guy threatens me on my talk page. Thanks for being such a wonderful admin. I do not know why i keep wasting my time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvsaraswathi (talk • contribs) 02:38, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

User is also making legal threats. Mlpearc (open channel) 02:40, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

@Pvsaraswathi: The conduct of others is not the issue here. The issue is your conduct: your violation of WP:3RR, your personal attacks, your legal threats.

The conduct of other users is a separate matter that will be dealt with separately, as warranted by their situations and possibly by different admins. —C.Fred (talk) 02:43, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Sir you have a name, I have a name, but the guy doesn't even have a name his name which is User:Net Neutrality was changed from gibberish just to threaten me. He is telling Net Neutrality while there was nothing but reference stuff and he says P.V.Ramana wanted Privacy. Do you believe in that. You think every thing is a threat. Then what is not a threat. Isn't giving false info or deleting info not a threat in the world of knowledge in this century. Thanks I could not but resist from asking this question. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvsaraswathi (talk • contribs) 02:52, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Sir one more question, that User:Net Neutrality fellow who changed his usernames 4 times at least for that article, has threatened me with "‎(This article needs Neutrality. Wikipedia team will revise shortly, User Pvsaraswathi shall be flagged for posting false and irrelevant information)". Who is he to call me as posting false information when I only referenced the information. Isn't it a personal threat to me. Please in the whole world I am not understanding the rules set by Wikipedia. I do not know if I am wrong or if the world is gone wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvsaraswathi (talk • contribs) 03:02, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Seriously sir the world is gone wrong and I am sorry for saying so to a person who has threatened me first. And I am sorry to you as well for your understanding. And what kind of threat do you think the User: Net Neutrality made towards me. Is "This article needs Neutrality. Wikipedia team will revise shortly, User Pvsaraswathi shall be flagged for posting false and irrelevant information)" not a legal threat? It is my fault for creating an article and helping the wikipedia grow. I am sorry for that as well. If I missed anymore sorrys, please leave another message on my talk page and I will be more sorry. Thanks. I think I have answered to your question that you posted on my Talk page. Now let me please remove it. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvsaraswathi (talk • contribs) 03:14, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

@Pvsaraswathi: to clarify your queries, a legal threat is one where someone threatens another user with legal action, for example, by going to the police, or filing a court case, etc. A personal threat includes attacking other users with uncivil language. Both are not allowed on Wikipedia. There is no question about bickering about "who did it first" or "she/he/they did it as well". You don't do it, period. If you find someone else violating this, then contact an admin or post on the admin noticeboard. MikeLynch (talk) 08:07, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

MikeLynch, I have to tell you something and also I am going to reference more authentic information for the article from events that happened few hours back. You removing the information from the article is just same as what the other users have been doing. I have referenced information and did not writeup something by my own. At least C.Fred did not remove the authentic information from the article. The reason that this article was being edited so much is because it was India's first olympic silver medal won by a family that belonged to Region1 which was divided from Region2 on the basis of political drama. The politicians of one region do not Region1 to come to limelight, that is why various people have trolled and removed the information. If you have utilized the same amount of time that you spent deleting and writing comments here researching the subject you would have not removed the information from the article. Here is a latest video link v=2cjUWhfhUgw in which the family of P.V.Ramana is being felicitated in Region1 and the whole family is on the stage and the host is mentioning at min 1:05 on the video that her father belongs to Eluru in West Godavari and mother belongs to Vijayawada both in Region1. If you are not satisfied have a translator do the job for you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvsaraswathi (talk • contribs) 12:08, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

MikeLynch, How would Mike Tyson of US feel if he were to be told that he belonged to UK and so his laurels? That is how I feel. So my kind request is please do put that P.V.Ramana belonged to West Godavari and his wife belonged to Vijayawada. The article seems to be semi protected by you. You are wasting as much time of your life as I am by removing reference and authentic information. We have to make the world better. Wikipedia has given us an opportunity to be true and unbiased Reporters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvsaraswathi (talk • contribs) 12:18, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

@C.Fred: I hope you don't mind me continuing the discussion here -- the user has posted pretty much the same on my talk page, and I'd rather not fragment the discussion.

@Pvsaraswathi:: Let me comment on the issues you raised one by one:

1. To reiterate what C.Fred already said and I mentioned, comments and warnings directed at you were solely about your conduct, and independent of the conduct of any other user. It is expected that you maintain civil and polite discussion irrespective of what anyone else says.
2. Wikipedia functions on reliable sources, and as such, Youtube videos are not reliable sources, with or without translation.
3. This particular article on P.V. Ramana is about that person and should be centered on him and not his family or ancestors. The article's claim to notability is based on his achievements as a sportsperson. What would belong to this article is information like his sporting career, his achievements or his trainers (for example). Information about his family is a nice add-on, but is most certainly not the central point of the article. I find it ridiculous to argue about the place of his and his wife's ancestors when the primary topic of the article should be his achievements.
4. To add to the previous point, just because a certain piece of information exists (in this case, information about his ancestry), it does not mean that it belongs to the article. In the present state the article is in, it does not belong there. MikeLynch (talk) 13:30, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

First, @MikeLynch: I prefer non-fragmented discussions, so I have no objections to you continuing the discussion here.

@Pvsaraswathi: Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate facts. As Mike mentioned above, the article should focus on the person and what makes him notable. For most people, that includes some brief background information. That typically includes date of birth, hometown, and name of his parents. That typically does not include trivia or details about ancestry, unless it is relevant to the article. For example, in most cases, it would not be important to the article to say that John Doe's great-grandmother is Jewish. However, it would be relevant in the context of "John Doe is an American handball player who competes on the Israeli national team. He is eligible for that team because his great-grandmother is Jewish." In that case, the information has direct bearing on something in the article.

The other thing to remember is that information needs to be verifiable. There need to be reliable sources cited to support assertions made in the article. This is important for all articles, but it is critical for biographies of living people. Frankly, sources are even more critical in articles about Indian people because statements about a person's caste, family origin, or even region of origin can be contentious and controversial. WP:BLP is clear that any statement in a biography of a living person that is not supported by a source may be removed from the article.

Finally, because the article is now protected, the way to proceed with any changes is to suggest them on the talk page, provide sources to support the change, and (civilly!) discuss the matter until consensus is reached. If consensus is to add, then the material will be added to he page. —C.Fred (talk) 15:24, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Very "wonderful points" you both have. I wish you put the same points for all articles such as William Shakespeare etc. Who cares about his family history or who his grandpa was or what percentage of some blood he has in him, or who they married or where they lived etc. All that is important about him is that he is a great writer. I have had a lot of fun time with this article. Friends hope you both live to these points in your practices. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvsaraswathi (talk • contribs) 01:01, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Honorifics not required around Islamic names

Why you changed the page I edited just now? Rashkehoor (talk) 03:23, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

@Rashkehoor: Because your edits do not comply with the Wikipedia Manual of Style. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Islam-related articles has more information on that, including the sections on Allah and Muhammad. —C.Fred (talk) 16:55, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the intervention

Thank you for this revert. The user is clearly a vandal-only account, as all they have done is vandalise 4 times on two articles. I have warned them, and pointed out each of their previous 3 vandalism edits, and that if they did it again they would likely to be indef'd. But they must not listen seeing as a 4th has been done. You wouldn't happen to have a long-handled mop that you could surgically place onto that Pavle 123 user? Wes Mouse ✒ 19:48, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

@Wesley Mouse: The timing was just close enough that I'm willing to give benefit of the doubt that they hadn't seen the warning. If there's another instance of vandalism now that they've had the chance to see the warning, that'd be different. —C.Fred (talk) 21:04, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

I had given the user the first warning directly after their first edit, which despite treating in good faith, I felt a soft warning would nudge them away from vandalism. After the next 2 vandal edits were made on List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest, which I gave a more stern warning for. The 4th edit which you reverted was made 2 hours after my stern warning was issued and on the same article. So I think they had seen the warning, but chose to ignore it. Wes Mouse ✒ 21:08, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

@Wesley Mouse: You're right about the two-hour interval. Still, it was their first edit back and their only one. Or, I'm just giving them a little more WP:ROPE for them to get strung up by if they do it again. :) —C.Fred (talk) 21:13, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Ahh I like the way of thinking with the old rope trick. I'm angelic at heart, but giving someone rope to hang themselves brings out the devilish side within me. (Give out ghoulishly cackling laugh). I'll get the gallows clean-up ready for their execution lol. Wes Mouse ✒ 21:23, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

• And here is the rope. Same edit summary style, but this time dodging scrutiny by IP editing. They really are not the brightest lightbulb on the Christmas tree. Wes Mouse ✒ 21:46, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Johan Karlberg

Hello,

You put a speedy deletion notification on @Neo Asian 2010s: talk page, for the page Johan Karlberg but I do not see the speedy deletion tag, or any evidence that it ever existed on the page or in its history. Did you forget to tag it, or am I just missing something? Cheers, Tazerdadog (talk) 01:02, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

the speedy deletion on Johan Karlberg was false alarm and has been fixed and removed. It was false alarm. Thank you for notice. It's all taking care now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neo Asian 2010s (talk • contribs) 01:12, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

@Tazerdadog: Check the log; the page was previously deleted. —C.Fred (talk) 01:17, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

And there's enough of an assertion of significance this time that I'll go AfD to see if the community agrees that he's not notable. —C.Fred (talk) 01:19, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

I did not request for a deletion on that article. That was an old article with the same name that was removed before. This is a new article and was not requested of a deletion — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neo Asian 2010s (talk • contribs) 01:40, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

@Neo Asian 2010s: Yes it has been "requested of a deletion". I just nominated it at WP:Articles for deletion/Johan Karlberg. —C.Fred (talk) 01:45, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

I see no reason to nominate Johan Karlberg or Romantic Blue for a deletion. If it's needs to be fixed or edit, then ok let's edit as Wikipedia feels more suitable. But delete it is going too far. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neo Asian 2010s (talk • contribs) 01:52, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

The concern with both articles is their notability. No amount of editing or fixing can save an article on a non-notable subject from deletion. Wikipedia articles should be sourced to reliable third party sources with non-trivial coverage of the subject. Neither C.Fred nor I could find such sources for these articles. If you can find such sources, that is a powerful argument to make at the AFD discussions, and would effectively refute us. Even 2 or three sources that discuss the subjects sufficiently well is enough. See the reliable sources guideline for more detail on the type of sources we are looking for. Cheers, Tazerdadog (talk) 02:21, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Jeremy Strong

I am not the agent of Jeremy Strong, his agent simply asked me to see if I was able to take out the photo on the site on behalf of Jeremy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philipdeluca96 (talk • contribs) 23:46, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

@Philipdeluca96: When you said "We represent Jeremy Strong",[5] that implied that you were representing him in a professional capacity. —C.Fred (talk) 23:48, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

I work at the management company where the agent works. I was instructed to try and see if I can take down the photo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philipdeluca96 (talk • contribs) 23:51, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

@Philipdeluca96: I think you need to make a very clear declaration of your relationship with the subject and whether you are doing any of this editing in your job capacity per WP:PAID. —C.Fred (talk) 23:53, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

I am a current intern for Mosaic Media Group, a management company that represents Jeremy. His manager, Prince Varughese, was asked by Jeremy's agents if it would be possible to change his Wikipedia photo since they wanted a different photo up. Since there have been issues, they have asked me to request that no picture be up on the profile for Jeremy. That is my relation with the client and the situation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philipdeluca96 (talk • contribs) 00:00, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

World Economic Association

Hi Fred,

I did not edit the page; I merely argued that it should not be deleted.

ProfSteveKeen (talk) 15:07, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

@ProfSteveKeen: Yeah, the welcome template is stock. The purpose of it is to make sure you know the COI guidelines. —C.Fred (talk) 15:08, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Yep, I'm aware of it, which is one reason that I haven't attempted to edit any Wikipedia pages before--since I turn up in a fair few of them. But this was different.

ProfSteveKeen (talk) 16:01, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Islamic studies (theology)

I want to split this article in two, so I create first the two, then I make a disambiguation page out of the original article. --IbnTufail (talk) 23:10, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

@C.Fred: Thank you. The split is now done. Looks good: Islamic studies. I had a comment in the creation edit. --IbnTufail (talk) 23:21, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

ashley massaro

hi fred someone with the ip 69.113.250.67 deleted ashley massaro's stats can you undo that for her pls and then allow me to change the picture if its not on the one she wants

ty OdellaRobbia — Preceding unsigned comment added by OdellaRobbia (talk • contribs) 17:40, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

@OdellaRobbia: I'll check about the stats. As for the pictures of Ashley Massaro, we go with the best free picture we have. We can't steal a picture by scraping it off another website. If there's a picture she'd like, she can clearly put it on her website with a Creative Commons or other free license, and then we can see about updating. —C.Fred (talk) 17:42, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

ok the one that ive put up every time she likes if you have that one for free please put it up for her cos thats the one she wants

ta OdellaRobbia — Preceding unsigned comment added by OdellaRobbia (talk • contribs) 17:46, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

@OdellaRobbia: First, it doesn't really matter what picture she wants. The picture in the article is the one that the community of Wikipedia editors decides is the best for the article's purposes. For most articles, the picture doesn't get changed without discussion over the new picture.

That said, the picture you last placed in the article is the one that's currently up. —C.Fred (talk) 17:47, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

thank you ashley will be more than happy with that shes got a nicer pick and her stats back she'll be happy

thank you fred from me and i know ashley would like to as well OdellaRobbia — Preceding unsigned comment added by OdellaRobbia (talk • contribs) 17:50, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

My first article

I just published an article and it was deleted because there was another ongoing article that was relatively close to my article, i know my article was short but it was not finished yet, i was going to make it proper in some time as i was already working on it, The article to which my article was found linked is Dota 2 and i am thinking to write article about the heroes of dota 2 and their roles and guide on how to play them, that is totally different from that page, i hope you get my point. And yes it was my mistake to publish it when it was not finished yet, i was actually checking stuff as i am new to Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saad Jillani (talk • contribs) 01:38, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Reply at your talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 01:38, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

FYI

Incorrigible Troll socks need to be blocked without email or talk page access. Thanks, BethNaught (talk) 21:00, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

@BethNaught: Thank you for the heads-up. I hadn't personally seen talk page abuse from this one before, so I didn't revoke talk page access. However, I'll try to remember if (when) the next one shows up. —C.Fred (talk) 21:02, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Silencer (band)

The article itself contains reliable material and this translated into other wikis and all contain the same information, so I do not see the need to be eliminated. Greetings! Adriel ricardo morales (talk) 19:57, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

@Adriel ricardo morales: I saw a lot of self-published sources and no assertion of significance or importance. —C.Fred (talk) 19:59, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Sure , I understand. But this article is translated from the wikipedia in Spanish, Portuguese and Polish. And its content is true. Adriel ricardo morales (talk) 20:06, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

@Adriel ricardo morales: The guidelines for notability are not uniform. Each language has its own threshold for inclusion. And the article was not deleted because the content was untrue; the article was deleted because there was no coverage of the band in independent sources and no assertion of its significance or importance. —C.Fred (talk) 20:15, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Of course, now I understand , well I 'll be more careful next time. Thanks again! Adriel ricardo morales (talk) 23:37, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

brake repair huntington beach

I was in the process of adding more informative content to the page when it was deleted, please review teh more recent edits and reconsider. Emanuelusa63 (talk) 00:07, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

@Emanuelusa63: Brake repair in Huntington Beach would be way too local a topic to be notable if it covered the topic fully. When written about just one company, it's pure spam. —C.Fred (talk) 00:08, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

ahhh very good then would these type so article be appropriate if I left out the single company reference. I have lots of content about Huntington Beach with specifics on Auto care. Being so close to the ocean its different than auto care say in Iowa. Thanks Emanuelusa63 (talk) 00:38, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

@Emanuelusa63: Please read through WP:Your first article. Again, I have reservations on whether an article on car care in Huntington Beach could ever be notable. —C.Fred (talk) 00:40, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Phil Ochs suggested correction made by me

Thank you for the input on how to properly cite a source and the proper way to present a correction. I will take your advice and follow the guidelines, as you have pointed out. Thank you for your help. I look forward to becoming a useful and credible member of your editing crew.

Moonlightgraham (talk) 21:16, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Richard L. Levine

   BA, MS Ed JD
   Syracuse UniversityMoonlightgraham (talk) 21:16, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

LonelyHartsClub

Not sure if you were watching (I know you were involved with Mary Katherine Duhon, but did I do anything wrong? Adam9007 (talk) 00:20, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

@Adam9007: I don't think so. The page had been up several hours, so it isn't a really hasty AfD. See also the comment I left at User talk:LonelyHartsClub. —C.Fred (talk) 00:39, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Do you think it's a case of WP:PRAM? Adam9007 (talk) 00:41, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

@Adam9007: Given how they responded to my explanation of the deletion, that's a valid read of the situation. —C.Fred (talk) 00:44, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

I forgot to say, there's another page I nominated for deletion: Lili Sepe. It was tagged BLPPROD, and I considered restoring it, but opted to go for normal PROD instead. Did I do anything wrong there? I'm not sure the G7 tagging is in good faith. Adam9007 (talk) 00:49, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

@Adam9007: Nope, it looks fine. I've intentionally not acted on that page, to let other eyes have a look. However, when they put "pls delete my page omg I wanna go home" on their user page, I did delete that under CSD U1. —C.Fred (talk) 00:51, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I considered tagging it U1 then, but decided to just leave it. It's ironic that it's this sort of behaviour that makes me want to jump ship. I was considering removing the {{considering retirement}} tag from my talk page, but, sadly, it looks like it's gonna be on there for a while yet :(. Adam9007 (talk) 00:57, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

@Adam9007: I just go for areas that are more drama-free if it gets too bad in one area. I've backed way off from WP:AIV after a few experiences there left a bad taste in my mouth. —C.Fred (talk) 00:59, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I suppose I'd better learn to deal with dramas better if I'm to have any hope of being an admin someday. Adam9007 (talk) 01:04, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

User:Ted Thompson is a real homeboy

Can you please take care of this... :-) MeowMoon (talk) 01:35, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

@MeowMoon: Dang, I missed the second one. I got the latter but not the former. Both gone now. —C.Fred (talk) 01:36, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

how to remove the page from which it was redirected

Hi there, thanks for abridging the page title: I'm aware I didn't use the right naming convention.

I would like to know how I could delete the "John Shaw (Painter/Printmaker)". There is no use to preserving this page: it only appears upon google-searching "john shaw painter" or "john shaw painter" along with the real page (the one you baptised) titled "John Shaw (painter)". Basically, I think there should only be 1 search result for this person, not two.

Please let me know if you have suggestions for how to delete this misnamed page.

Treebrainiac (talk) 19:12, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Treebrainiac: I'm failing to see why it was declined before, there is no history at that page title that needs to be retained, all of it has been moved over to the new title. Technically G7 might apply because you were the one who originally created it at that title, but {{db-error}} should apply either way. nyuszika7h (talk) 19:16, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

@Treebrainiac: I had left the link as a courtesy to make sure you found the new page title. Since you found John Shaw (painter), I've deleted John Shaw (Painter/Printmaker). —C.Fred (talk) 19:57, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

thanks guys Treebrainiac (talk) 20:11, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Dear C. Fred can you look at the page that I may have a conflict of interest in. I made a page for a distant relative who is an author and has been mentioned on a few pages already. I do not want to be biased while writing it and if you have any suggestions I'd be happy to fix the page. The page is Moshe Wisnefsky. ---Matthew Wisnefsky — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthew Wisnefsky (talk • contribs) 23:01, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Reply at your talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 23:05, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Edit warning Zootopia

I actually have spoken about this in the talk page of Zootopia and given PLENTLY of sources to prove my claim. This was actually a very recent edit done by another user changing "critically acclaimed" to "postive reviews". This isn't based in fact! And for months pior it has stated "critically acclaimed"! Now how ever there seems to be an effort to make the film seem lesser than what it is. This isn't just! As other films maked the same are not to my knowlage being abused like this.

Thank you for your attention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lennonthefox (talk • contribs) 18:37, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Thread kept together at your talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 18:47, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Mića Jovanović

Either socks or something organised. Doug Weller talk 20:12, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

maybe not, see my talk page which I'll move to the article talk page. needs more input. 05:22, 8 September 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doug Weller (talk • contribs)

Danny Boy Styles Page

Why are you deleting this page over and over? There is absolutely NO NEED TO DELETE A PAGE THAT FOLLOWS ALL GUIDELINES!? There is only 1 reference and that is to the discography. What else is missing? This unethical and completely disrespectful to the artist! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanzadeh1 (talk • contribs) 21:25, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

@Alanzadeh1: As I've noted before, the page was not improved at all over the version that the community decided to delete. Criterion for speedy deletion G4 clearly applies. If you disagree, you're welcome to contest the matter at WP:DRV. —C.Fred (talk) 21:28, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Please explain to me why the page was in worst shape than before? this is extremely vague and not constructive. I am merely trying to support Wikipedia by adding useful information but users such as yourself do not help by deleting pages without clearly explaining why. There was only 1 sourced information and that was for his discography. Are you even looking at the page?! The guy who decided to delete the page in the first place has a personal issue with Danny Boy Styles, and he had a level 3 vandalism scoring on his page. Are you ignoring all this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanzadeh1 (talk • contribs) 21:31, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

@Alanzadeh1: Which guy? The nominator or the admin who closed the AfD? —C.Fred (talk) 21:33, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

The nominator. Once again, we cannot just delete this page. It is a real person. It is a real discography. Those were real facts about him. A simple google search would end all this. Please help me restore this page. Even if its his info box and discography to begin with. This only hurts the community, not help it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanzadeh1 (talk • contribs) 21:35, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

@Alanzadeh1: As for how it's worse, let's see:

1. The intro does not mention that he charted on Billboard.
2. The intro does not cite any sources at all.
3. The intro doesn't mention his production work for The Weeknd.
4. The only item sourced is discogs.com: no Forbes, no Billboard.

As Jo-Jo Eumerus said in closing the deletion discussion, "Based on the discussion here, the coverage of this bio is limited to brief mentions with no detail on the individual and his biography. Thus WP:SIGCOV does not appear to be met." The most recent version of the article provides even fewer sources, so WP:SIGCOV is clearly not met.

In my opinion, the only way to fix the article is to provide independent, reliable sources that have given significant coverage to Styles. Discographies are not significant coverage.

As for the nominator, two other editors also agreed that the article should be deleted, and the closing admin felt the deletion had merit. That's four editors from the AfD alone. I'm endorsing the deletion when I speedy delete, so that's five editors who say this article is sufficiently flawed that it should be deleted. This is not just a rogue nomination.

"A simple google search"? A week's worth of searching didn't help during the AfD. At this point, the burden is on you to do the searching and find the reliable sources giving in-depth coverage if you want the article restored. No sources, no article. That's what the AfD determined, and that's pretty non-negotiable now. —C.Fred (talk) 21:41, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

1. The intro DID mentioned he charted on Billboard: The Song hit No.1 on the Billboard Hot 100.

2. The intro ORIGINALLY cited Universal Music Publishing Group's site and it got taken down. Take a look here: http://www.umusicpub.com/#contentRequest=artistdetail&contentLocation=sub&contentOptions=%26artistid%3D6514. This will cite everything stated in the Wiki page.

3. The intro DID mention his work for The Weeknd. What are you talking about? In 2013 Danny Boy Styles worked on Kiss Land, the critically acclaimed debut album The Weeknd, producing all 10 tracks. In 2015 Danny Boy Styles followed up by working on The Weeknd’s record-breaking album Beauty Behind The Madness, including platinum single “Often”. Beauty Behind the Madness charted at the #1 spot on the U.S. Billboard Top 200 Album list for 3 consecutive weeks.

4. I DID SOURCE FORBES and BILLBOARD and the moderator had a problem with that, hence why it was taken off.

5. His discography can be found literally with A SIMPLE GOOGLE SEARCH, and discogs.com is a source that verifies his discography. I can source any other page that has his discography on there as well, how is this not a reliable source.

I honestly think you guys just don't want this page up. This is insane. The person exists. The credentials are there. The information I just supplied are all on UNIVERSAL MUSIC's website....does none of this make any sense? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanzadeh1 (talk • contribs)

References

The intro did mention that, yet the community felt there was not significant coverage.

I didn't look at the intro before the AfD was opened; I only looked at how it existed during discussion.

The intro did mention the Weeknd; the recreated version did not.

The community felt that the coverage in Forbes and Billboard was not significant in length; that's why those cites weren't deemed to be enough to be significant coverage.

A discography is not in-depth coverage about the performer.

Again, I deleted the article because it had not improved on the article as it existed at the time of the AfD. If you think the article was not in as bad state, take it to WP:DRV and see if there's consensus otherwise. —C.Fred (talk) 23:18, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Brutal. Even when I show you the obvious reasons why it shouldn't have been deleted in the first place, you're giving me the run around. Sorry we all don't have 24 hours a day to spend on Wikipedia arguing common sense. This is hurting the community more than helping. Based on what you just said above, the original WAS ok, but the recreation wasn't....it wouldn't have to be recreated if the original was just EDITED with the correct information. Absolutely brutal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanzadeh1 (talk • contribs) 15:17, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Again, the community has decided it should be deleted. I am merely enforcing the decision. If you want to make a new, improved article, Draft:Danny Boy Styles is that way. If you think the AfD was misinterpreted or that the speedy delete was inappropriate, WP:Deletion review is that way. —C.Fred (talk) 16:17, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

I have created a new and improved page. There is no other information to add to this page and everything is sourced. New sources as requested. If there is any issue regarding the page, please let me know without deleting it. I honestly have no idea how else I can recreate this page any different than what it is, considering the fact that it is identical to every other music producer / artist's page I've seen. Please advise. Thx Here's the draft, please let me know if its good to publish: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Danny_Boy_Styles — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanzadeh1 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

@Alanzadeh1: It does not look improved. I've asked the closing admin from the AfD to see if they agree. —C.Fred (talk) 17:04, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

@User:C.Fred: What is there to improve besides adding direct references and citations to what is being written. You're wrong on this one. I'm glad I can get a second opinion. Read the page. Tell me where its wrong. You're borderline trolling now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanzadeh1 (talk • contribs) 17:08, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

@Alanzadeh1: What do you mean by "wrong"? I never questioned the article's factuality or deleted it as a hoax. I deleted it for failing to fix the problems identified at an AfD and recreation with the same material. —C.Fred (talk) 00:43, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

I agree with :@Alanzadeh1: The page is cited and sourced. I've viewed the original and the new page, and although its similar, it is factual with the necessary citation and sources providing accurate information on Danny Boy Styles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jiggamafu (talk • contribs) 17:22, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

@Jiggamafu: Which new sources? —C.Fred (talk) 00:44, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Take a minute and read the article: http://www.musicweek.com/publishing/read/living-for-the-weeknd-we-re-the-guys-behind-him-who-make-the-machine-work/064982 which is the first source that establishes notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanzadeh1 (talk • contribs) 00:47, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

about the living person biography.

Hi this is Vamsi I would like to add an shortfilm hero biography so please help me for that thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vamsimallavamsi (talk • contribs) 02:55, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

@Vamsimallavamsi: Who is the person, and what reliable sources have written about him/her already? —C.Fred (talk) 02:58, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Chinese Army listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Chinese Army. Since you had some involvement with the Chinese Army redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 10:02, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Block/protection request

There has been appalling abuse at the page of music historian Martin C. Strong, some of which you recently reverted. Accounts The Music Manic and Scotsmanic, along with IP 2A02:C7D:2FCD:9700:ADD0:DF51:54EB:E184, have served only to abuse Strong on Wikipedia, with all three accusing him of plagiarism while providing no supporting documentation for their claims. On top of that, The Music Manic added bogus information about Strong being a "closet homosexual" who "moved to mainland Europe"[6] and negated a positive review of Strong's work[7], while Scotsmanic and the IP have falsely accused him of being a "violent alcoholic" who has had legal action successfully taken against him (the IP deceitfully gives its edit summary as "facts")[8][9]. It seems that these edits indicate sockpuppetry by someone with a vile agenda against Strong; The Music Manic and Scotsmanic are similarly named, while the IP and Scotsmanic yesterday edited within three minutes of each other with almost identical edits. Could the accounts and IP involved be blocked? Perhaps page protection is also relevant, as the abuse has been going on since June. Thanks. Reed77 (talk) 09:02, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

@Reed77: Page protection is not justified, since there have only been two incidents over the last three months. Likewise, with only one edit (plus a self-revert, if we assume he's the IP), it's hard to justify blocking Scotsmanic. Looking further back in the article's history, there have been edits by an IP who held himself out as if he were Strong. So, the article definitely needs an eye kept on it. I've got in on my watchlist, so I'll see what future edits go on. (I've also got Scotsmanic's user talk on my watch list; I'll see any future messages left for him.) So, page protection is not justified at this time, but I'll be watching to see if that changes in the future. —C.Fred (talk) 12:20, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Halsey (Singer) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Halsey (Singer). Since you had some involvement with the Halsey (Singer) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. SSTflyer 14:10, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

@SSTflyer: Thanks for the heads up. I've chimed in at the discussion. —C.Fred (talk) 15:53, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Al-Obaidi

Hi, Ive got the sources but unsure how to add them. This family is very well known and aristocratic in the middle east and Iraq and what I wrote is common knowledge for the most part. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johntratingham (talk • contribs) 18:57, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Added info on adding refs to User talk:Johntratingham Jim1138 (talk) 18:59, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Rahilljoshi5 (talk) 21:44, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, for your support. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahilljoshi5 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Rahilljoshi5 (talk) 21:57, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

I have found a link of the subject, but it's not on Wikipedia, is it okay. but I don't know how to place that link, that link is http://www.hungama.com/#/artists/Crazy-King/5835151/play Rahilljoshi5 (talk) 21:57, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Revdel may be needed

Howdy! Since it looks like you're on the beat right now: User:Honest Truth, No Lies has made four contributions since signing up and all of them have been BLP violations. Could you kindly take a look? Thanks much! - Julietdeltalima (talk) 23:39, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Sir

Sir, I will be thankful for your support and hope for more guidance. Rahilljoshi5 00:27, 13 September 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahilljoshi5 (talk • contribs)

RevDel

Hey C.Fed, just a quick thanks for RevDeleting those spam articles. I was getting annoyed looking at those titles in my contributions. Thanks again! -- LuK3 (Talk) 00:50, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

How did you know?

I am coming to you as an IP user to prevent my 'stalker' from knowing that I was talking to you.

Recently, you sent someone a warning about reverting edits on my talk page (edit warring). But, I didn't report him. So, the question then becomes, how did you know I was getting annoyed by him?

2601:983:8101:865A:15B4:84FF:466C:1D9E (talk) 23:13, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

One of two possibilities: either the text of the message (blatant harassment) or a pattern where you blanked the message and then they restored the message. —C.Fred (talk) 01:37, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

I understand if it was an article where people might have it on their watch list, or they come by to read/edit and see what's going on. But this was my talk page. There would be no reason for anyone to see my page history. That's why I was surprised to see someone intervening.

2601:983:8101:865A:15B4:84FF:466C:1D9E (talk) 10:43, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

I do have some users' talk pages on my watch list, if either I've been in a conversation with them or there's been a history of vandalism at their talk page. It's possible that the user had vandalized an article on my watch list, and after I left them a warning, I checked their edit history and saw the other edits. Finally, I looked at contributions by new users often, so I may have seen it there. —C.Fred (talk) 15:00, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

File:University-of-Sussex-logo.png has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content

• University of Sussex (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hi Fred

I'm a member of the branding team at the University of Sussex. Sussex has recently had a rebrand - discontinuing its crest and changing its logo. I have made a couple of attempts to replace the logo files but the edits have been declined and the page reverted.

Can you help me to make the change? My attempts to upload a screen res version of the logo file have been blocked, and wikimedia commons retains an imperfect version (for some reason it's cropped at the bottom) named University-of-Sussex-logo.png. I would like to delete this file, plus the old University of Sussex logo, plus the crest, and add a new version.

For confirmation of the rebrand, please see the University of Sussex website.

Hope you can help,

Carrie Prew — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carrie Prew (talk • contribs) 09:25, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

@Carrie Prew: What content is missing from the bottom of the logo, or is it just an issue of the padding/white space around the image? I looked at the source the image was taken from, and I don't see any content missing. —C.Fred (talk) 18:36, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Re University ofSussex logo.png - the logo is slightly clipped at the bottom so that the letters aren't completely rounded. This was my error from last time I tried to upload it but I couldn't see how to take it down. Just to note - I had a Conflict of interest notice through just now. I do not wish to edit the text - just to provide the correct logo. I hope therefore that this isn't a conflict of interest? Carrie Prew (talk) 08:31, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

@Carrie Prew: Looking at File:University of Sussex Logo.svg, I'm not seeing the clipping: all the letters that should have round bottoms (especially the descending y, but also U, e, s, t, o, S, and u) have round bottoms. Yes, i and x, have square bottoms, but that's to be expected with letters with serifs. So, I'm not sure what changes you would want or need to make to that logo. —C.Fred (talk) 15:07, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Looking at File:University of Sussex Logo.svg, That is the old logo - the svg file. That's the one that is obsolete and should be taken down. The new logo (failed attempt) was the png file. However, I would like to send you a version that is not clipped at the bottom. Would this be possible? In addition, please can you help me take down the crest? It is not part of the identity of the university so it's wrong to have it on the page. Carrie Prew (talk) 16.16 14 September 2016 (UTC)

@Carrie Prew: What's changed in the logo then? If you had uploaded it to Commons, I can't see the deleted file, so I can't compare. As for the crest, it's part of the historic identify of the school, so you should discuss its removal at the university's talk page. Be prepared to provide links to press releases, news stories, or something similar to show that the crest is being discontinued. —C.Fred (talk) 15:29, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

@Carrie Prew: The logo has been redesigned by the brand agency Pentagram. If you go to www.sussex.ac.uk you will see the new one at the top. We did not press release on removing the crest (as we felt that no one would particularly care enough to publish news about it...) However, if you see the official published ID guidelines (in PDF) at http://www.sussex.ac.uk/brand/ there is no mention of the university crest. Pentagram's contact details are on the end page if further confirmation is needed? Thanks for taking this care - it's reassuring that the page is looked after this carefully. [User:Carrie Prew|Carrie Prew]] (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.184.148.224 (talk) 16:18, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

@Carrie Prew: Ah, different typeface for the text and putting it on two rows. I see it now. Looks like there will be no change in the copyright status (letters and simple geometric shapes), and it's probably better to upload it to a new file rather than overwrite the old.

As for the crest, I will concede that http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/faq?faqid=12 makes it implicit that the crest is not being used to identify the university. It could still have value as an historic identifier of the university, but that would mean moving it out of the infobox.

One other thought: what appears on the university diplomas now? Is there a seal, probably unchanged through the branding updates, or does the logo appear? —C.Fred (talk) 17:06, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Concerns with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Str1977 talk page

Hello C.Fred, I have been notified by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Str1977 that my name is gone but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:KOMania16 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:TheTexasRattlesnake17 are still listed so would someone be able to notify them their names are on his talk page?

Many thanks, KO PopUpPowerbomb — Preceding unsigned comment added by KO PopUpPowerbomb (talk • contribs) 21:36, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

@KO PopUpPowerbomb: I'm not aware of any requirement that a user must be notified if their name appears on a user's talk page—although it probably is a good thing to have happen in most cases. —C.Fred (talk) 21:38, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Whilst I appreciate that you are not aware and you are only trying to prevent an edit war, could Str1997 be asked to justify the section or remove the section altogether?

Once again,

Many thanks, KO PopUpPowerbomb — Preceding unsigned comment added by KO PopUpPowerbomb (talk • contribs) 21:43, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Discussion

Hello C.Fred sir, how are you? At first I sincerely reveal myself as a new sock account of Sarojupreti. I (as instructed by you and other editors) stopped creating new accounts and tried to spend 6 months in Nepali Wikipedia but my previous account was globally blocked. I even don't know why it was globally blocked and now I even cannot log in to that account. So I am creating this account just to inform you about my bad fortune. Now what I should do be be safe from being blocked? Please help me.........I am here to help wiki not to destroy it. Thanks--Bibek bro (talk) 11:13, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@Bibek bro: Your last activity on the English Wikipedia was in July, barely two months ago. That's far from the six months away that we usually look for before granting the standard offer.

At least you have been up front that this is a new account for an old user, but that does not change the basic fact: you are blocked from editing the English Wikipedia from any account. The global lock means you are restricted from editing all Wikipedia sites.

Since your talk page privileges (User talk:Sarojupreti) were revoked for earlier issues, I can't do anything to help you. Your only recourse is to contact the WP:Unblock Ticket Request System via email and see if they are willing to work with you. I can't guarantee anything there, though.

Also, your honesty notwithstanding, I must block your new account to enforce the action previously taken to block you as a person from editing Wikipedia. —C.Fred (talk) 17:13, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Iistal

Hi C.Fred, would you be happy with me unblocking if/once they agree to the condition (ban from living people)? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:07, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@Callanecc: If Iistall accepts a topic ban from BLPs, broadly construed, I am on board with the unblock. How long is the ban going to be? —C.Fred (talk) 17:17, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks~ Creeperparty568 ~ Cool Guy (talk) 00:46, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Kenny Davenport

I have had the edit i did to Kenny Davenport footballer removed. I wanted to correct the impression in the work that the goal he scored at 3.47pm on 8 September 1888 was a chance discovery as a colleague and myself spent hundreds of hours finding out that information and that point is in fact made in the link to the Telegraph article that is linked to the Davenport page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarkMetcalf (talk • contribs) 16:37, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

@MarkMetcalf: And what source, published by a party other than you, says that such extensive research was undertaken? —C.Fred (talk) 16:43, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

eg

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/12040/8846387/bolton-player-credited-with-first-ever-goal-in-football-league — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarkMetcalf (talk • contribs) 16:58, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

eg http://www.wsc.co.uk/wsc-daily/1165-august-2013/10175-mystery-of-football-league-s-first-goalscorer-solved — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarkMetcalf (talk • contribs) 17:00, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/10577670.Bolton_Wanderers_scored_world_s_first_league_goal___Marc_Iles__view/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarkMetcalf (talk • contribs) 17:01, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

@MarkMetcalf: The issue then becomes, does it warrant being mentioned in the article? The article is about the player, not the researchers finding out about the goal. —C.Fred (talk) 17:06, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

I have removed "chance discovery" as Mark is correct that the sources do indeed not seem to support that. MPS1992 (talk) 17:07, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

that's good by me. Not bothered it doesn't mention me or Robert Boyling but I didn't want anyone thinking it was a piece of luck, We spent ages finding that information. Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarkMetcalf (talk • contribs) 17:15, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome!

I just made my account for the minor edit on Morse code however after seeing your message and looking around it seems the community aspect of Wikipedia that I was blind to could be just as great a resource to me as the rest of the site. This does all seem a bit daunting but hopefully the learning curve isn't too bad. I think I'll have to try and get involved, as a university student not only will it aid in my learning but also potentially put me in contact with people in the industry I wouldn't have had the chance to discuss with previously. Thanks again! ToeBee (talk) 20:45, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi C.Fred! Editing a page :)

Hello there. Its my first time editing on Wikipedia and it seems I started with the left foot, sorry about that! I am Tavo, a Colombian Dj/Producer based in Vegas and wanted to edit info about my career. I have added the basic links to my knowledge. Could you please tell me how can I make it... Thank you! Best to you!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tavomixx (talk • contribs) 00:31, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

@Tavomixx: You need to make sure to show that you've gotten substantial coverage in independent reliable sources. Make sure also that you meet the notability criteria laid out at WP:MUSIC. If that's the case, then you would need to create a new page at a title like Tavo (musician) or Tavo (DJ).

That said, it's probably a bad idea for you to create an article about yourself. See the message I left on your page about conflicts of interest and autobiographies. —C.Fred (talk) 00:35, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hello C.Fred the vandalism is ongoing. Please help Ear-phone (talk) 15:10, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

@Ear-phone: One registered user since I've been watching plus the IP; the user has been blocked. —C.Fred (talk) 15:15, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

@C.Fred: Thanks. Please may you edit protect my user page. Ear-phone (talk) 15:21, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

@Ear-phone: Why? Has it been vandalized? As a general rule, pages aren't protected pre-emptively. They're only protected to prevent further vandalism from taking pace. —C.Fred (talk) 15:24, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

@C.Fred: I assumed since it's my space this could be done. Ear-phone (talk) 15:35, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

william

C Fred,

Thank you I feel I walked into a den of lions thinking I am making a draft and all .... broke lose, thank you for your kindness, William — Preceding unsigned comment added by William Hardy Hill Steiner (talk • contribs) 23:21, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

One more thing, so you understand why i was attempting to help not to hram, it appeared simple words to me are not here meaning this what i was writing, then you will understand , what i was doing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:William_Hardy_Hill_Steiner/sandbox I pray this is not live but in a draft location.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by William Hardy Hill Steiner (talk • contribs) 23:24, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

talk: Hello C. Fred

Can you please help me get Philmont's new venture "Lynx" updated as an official wikipedia article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billys2288 (talk • contribs) 00:42, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

@Billys2288: You'll have to do the legwork: find the coverage of them in reliable sources or otherwise show how they meet the notability criteria at WP:MUSIC. If you do that, though, then I can help you with formatting. —C.Fred (talk) 00:45, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

talk: Hello, please help C. Fred

Hello, I was given some information from Brooke Hogan correcting some of the facts that she said were untrue. My intent wasn't to be disruptive. What is the best way to do it make those edits? Shurebusiness (talk) 14:05, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

See reply on your talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 15:38, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

talk: Will do.

C. Fred, I hate to bother you with another question, but I wrote the band in hopes to get some more source material, and they requested that I let their management handle the Wikipedia creation.

Thing is, I want the credit for the creation of it. Is that legal? Do you possibly have a link to some information regarding "legality of creation of articles for other persons/bands" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billys2288 (talk • contribs) 20:00, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

@Billys2288: The management will probably have even more difficulty starting an article because of their conflict of interest with the band. They will also run up against the restrictions on paid editing.

As far as "legality", Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and we generally encourage articles to be created by independent parties rather than parties affiliated with the subjects. When a user adds text to an article, they release the contribution under a free license, so Wikipedia may do what it will with it from that point on. There is an edit history of the article to track who contributed what to the article. So, your contribution will be credited, but it's not like there's something where we track who makes the first edit to various articles. —C.Fred (talk) 20:04, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

C.Fred thanks for your feedback. Responses forthcoming. MarkWinslowPotter19291995 (talk) 20:24, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Gen Cone

http://www.kcentv.com/news/local/gen-robert-w-cone-passes-away/321721884

The link above is a reference for Gen Cone's death, but not very detailed. I added the link to the page references, but the format isn't correct or consistent with the other references. I'm sure that there will be better references in the next few days.

Also, I changed the Second Lieutenant date of rank to June 6, 1979 from May 1979 which is the date of USMA graduation. He wasn't commissioned before graduation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.114.52.206 (talk) 02:24, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

I've added that as a citation. The source doesn't support the date of death, so I've got that noted as questioned. —C.Fred (talk) 02:32, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

https://www.westpointaog.org/memorials?srctid=1&erid=18752986&trid=fa7eaf9c-e9c1-4574-8b88-a4f298886317

Association of Graduates, USMA indicates date and location of death as September 18, 2016, in Shawano, WI. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.114.52.206 (talk) 12:07, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

https://externalapps.westpointaog.org/Memorials/Article/36399/ The link above is the AOG, USMA memorial page for Gen Cone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.114.52.206 (talk) 12:32, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Letter sent to Wikipedia regarding Assange copyright of The World Tomorrow

Sir, Please know your long history with disruptive edits at The World Tomorrow church page, and the infringing Assange page of the same title, has not gone unnoticed.

Know also Assange and his NYC attorney and production company changed the name of his ill-advised conflicting planned programme title from "The World Tomorrow", to "The Julian Assange Show", just prior to airdate. No programmes ever aired with the copyright infringing title.

Wilipedia admin will correct the Assange infringing page title, shortly. So, no matter your continued desire to hold fast to maintaining the infringing Wikipedia Assange page World Tomorrow title, the page will cease to exist as such very soon now, and it will be corrected by Wikipedia admin to reflect the correct title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FastNLoud (talk • contribs) 03:27, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

@FastNLoud: Umm, where are your reliable sources for the title change? Actually, the information in the article points to the title being The World Tomorrow, rather than World Tomorrow. So, no, the article will not be changed without reliable sources. —C.Fred (talk) 03:28, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

The reliable source is we are the copyright owners. Our reliable source is our trademark AND copyright. And yes, Wikipedia admin has advised us the change to the Assange page will be made upon receipt of those certified documents and the letter of agreement we forwarded to them which we received from Assange himself and his attorney. God Bless! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.123.128.179 (talk) 03:36, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

So, you are admitting a conflict of interest? You shouldn't be editing any related article at all, then, and you should know that sources for claims like this must be independent sources, not sources from involved parties. —C.Fred (talk) 03:38, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

So sorry to disappoint, but I am not an "involved party". Frankly, I am not a Wikipedia user. And as far as rules go, Assange wipes his ass all over every rule of law and regulation. That is why he is in so much legal trouble from so many sources. Evidently he is still holed up hiding in the embassy for over 5 years with no shower bathtub or kitchen facility.

This page infringment will be righted regardless of your personal strong desire to keep the infriging content and disrupt the original church sponsored programme Wiki page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.123.128.179 (talk) 03:47, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm confused. Are you the copyright owners, are are you an uninvolved party? It's one or the other; it can't be both. —C.Fred (talk) 04:01, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Our typist is our temp "spokesman", the one doing the typing or speaking; the uninvolved party. We, on the other hand are the copyright holders.

What is your personal interest in our programme? Are you a current or former member, or supporter of the telecast or subscriber to The Plain Truth magazine or any Ambassador press publications by Herbert and Garner Ted Armstrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.123.128.179 (talk) 04:19, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

If the typist is typing on your behalf, they are involved. If you prefer, I can refer this matter over to the conflict of interest noticeboard or, given your prior track record, the incidents noticeboard for administrators.

I have no personal interest in the programs whatsoever. That is why I have no qualms acting in an administrative capacity as necessary on this article, including reverting the deletion of material that is done in a manner inconsistent with Wikipedia policy. —C.Fred (talk) 14:50, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

You've deleted material on this page and claimed a .gov website reference is not an acceptable source. Be our guest as we would love to have anyone other that you and your good pap Barek take at look at your long personal disruptive editing to this article. Your long history combined smacks of vandalism.

Please refer the matter for review. A sourced White House State dinner given by President Carter for Sadat should never have been vandalized and removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FastNLoud (talk • contribs) 19:32, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

And since you claim to have no qualms about acting in an admin capacity on this, enforce Wikipedia rules on blatant copyright and trademark violations. Edit the infringing Assange article YOURSELF. Remove all mentions of the World Tomorrow from the Assange article, including the article heading, title card, and IMDb link, (which your pal Barek claims to be an invalid source). Prove you're not personally biased, C.Fred by making these proper true and accurate edits.

@FastNLoud: What copyvio? The title card is properly listed as non-free content, noting the source where we obtained the information. The IMDB link is in order. I do not see any violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. —C.Fred (talk) 19:49, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

As intelligent as you portend to be, now you claim ignorance. The Assange show never aired in any market as the world tomorrow. It aired as the Julian Assange show. So, the wiki article title is wrong AND infringing on our copyright and trademark. Assange changed his planned name prior to airing any episodes because he was not aware of our program with the same title. It called trademark and copyright violation. Are there two wiki article for Coke, Walmart or Seinfield, 60 minutes, American Idol.

To create an article and pretend it aired under a name that it did not air under, smacks of ignorance. Others would say it's being a stupid fucking retard. Now, escalate this bullshit — Preceding unsigned comment added by FastNLoud (talk • contribs) 20:25, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Well, that certainly clarified my next step. FastNLoud blocked for persistent personal attacks and for apparent abuse of multiple accounts. —C.Fred (talk) 20:36, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

your block of 24.142.195.227

User:74.218.182.50 is yet another sock restoring this material. Meters (talk) 04:21, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

@Meters: Alas, I'm not surprised. There's been a pattern of IP hopping by this user. —C.Fred (talk) 11:42, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Agree. East to spot socks IP hopping by users who feign consensus of support of disruptive edits and then carry on one sided conversations between their main user ID, and their socks. ou81 —Preceding undated comment added 13:45, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, C.Fred. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

• Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
• A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Christina Aguilera photo

I wanted to change Christina Aguilera's photo but why do you keep changing it? I clearly cited the author and the source so I don't get why. I'm new to this. Charmaine Who (talk) 06:12, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

@Charmaine Who: hello, just in case C.Fred is busy, here is an answer of sorts. Mostly the only way you can add a photo of a living singer to Wikipedia is if you took the photo yourself with your own camera and you want to license it the way Wikipedia likes. There are some other ways, but just crediting the author is not usually enough. This is different to other websites, so it can be confusing. MPS1992 (talk) 18:17, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Marisela Marrero

To Whom It May Concern:

Why did you delete my page on Dr. Marisela Marrero?

This is being completed as part of an ongoing project at the Harvard Kennedy School. Please undo your most recent action.

Thank you, MTR2017 — Preceding unsigned comment added by MTR2017 (talk • contribs) 23:52, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

@MTR2017: The page had sat unimproved for a day. A doctor who has a segment on a local talk show does not make a clear assertion of significance or importance.

If you need the history of your work, I'll be glad to restore it to either Draft: space or your user space. Let me know which you prefer. —C.Fred (talk) 23:53, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

I have steadily improved the page over the last two days and was continuing to do so today. I need both the user history and a copy of the page.

Thank you for your consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MTR2017 (talk • contribs) 23:55, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

@MTR2017: It's restored at Draft:Marisela Marrero. —C.Fred (talk) 23:58, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MTR2017 (talk • contribs) 00:05, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

@MTR2017: You're welcome. Also, don't be surprised if you're asked to clarify your relationship with Marrero and whether you have a conflict of interest, since you apparently were on set with her when you took the picture you uploaded today. —C.Fred (talk) 00:06, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Understood. I was not on set with her (and have never been on set...I don't work in tv). I requested a photo from her through NECN and that is what she sent me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MTR2017 (talk • contribs) 00:18, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

@MTR2017: So File:Dr. Marisela NECN.jpg is mistagged? You're claiming that you have the copyright to it—i.e., that you are the photographer and have the rights on how the image can be used. —C.Fred (talk) 00:20, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Dr. Marrero has the copyright and has given me permission to use the photo. If I have mischaracterized the photo, please guide me toward the right path. Additionally, I have not actually been able to upload the photo so it does not appear on the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MTR2017 (talk • contribs) 00:23, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

@MTR2017: Two things. First, the image page would need to show that it's somebody else's work and that they have released it. Ideally, we'd want a link to a page on her website where she states the image is released under a Creative Commons license that allows for reuse, including commercial reuse. As an alternative, she could email to donate the image; WP:Donating copyrighted materials has directions.

Second, if you've been trying to create a page about Marrero on her behalf or at her direction, then you have a conflict of interest. —C.Fred (talk) 00:32, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

I have been creating at my own behest and not under direction from Dr. Marrero. I only asked her for a professional photo. As for the photo, it comes from Dr. Marrero's cellphone; to my knowledge it doesn't exist anywhere else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MTR2017 (talk • contribs) 00:40, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

@MTR2017: Her cell phone or somebody else's? There's another name on the file upload page. That's who'll need to contact Wikipedia directly. —C.Fred (talk) 01:00, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

official logo

Sir Fred I just have posted our official logo of my article Beta Sigma Omega Phi in my last edition. It was a legitimate logo of our organization and I am an alumnus member of that organization and one of the Board of Directors — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brian Caintic (talk • contribs) 05:42, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Responding on your talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 14:46, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Deleted

Hi I think that my page was deleted incorrectly and that josh moir is of significance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Friendlylad (talk • contribs) 17:32, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

@Friendlylad: The article didn't make an assertion to that end. Being written about in local papers isn't enough, whether the subject is 12 or 42. —C.Fred (talk) 17:35, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, he was also on an interview by cnn and bbc news. He is more famous than you think... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Friendlylad (talk • contribs) 18:02, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

@Friendlylad: In a sense, that might be the problem: there was nothing in the article to indicate that he had been interviewed by a national news service. —C.Fred (talk) 19:34, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

No I do not work for Mr. Melvin E. Brown,

No i do not work for Mr. Melvin E. Brown, nor am I in his circle. I do own a studio in Manhattan. Driver6577 (talk) 22:42, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Melvin E. Brown, Trackformaz, and members of G-Unit came by studio after Global Spin Awards. Address to Studio is 1728 Eastchester Rd, Bronx, NY 10461 I took the photo as well as othersDriver6577 (talk) 22:49, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

My Deleted Article is listed when searching for it in Google

The bio article I created and you deleted, which is understandable and fine, is showing up when people search for me, in at least Google. It shows "(my name)- Widipedia, the free encyclopedia". Then if they click on it just shows "02:09, 2 October 2016 C.Fred (talk | contribs) deleted page (my name)". Can you make that go away? I'm trying to get ride of garbage links associated to me. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dsybelnik (talk • contribs)

@Dsybelnik: No, I can't. That's a Google issue, and you'll need to address it with them. We have little if any control over how they index and present articles, including deleted ones. —C.Fred (talk) 21:24, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

But as a courtesy, this link might help: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/6332384 —C.Fred (talk) 21:26, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Ahmad ibn Ibrahim al-Ghazi

Regarding the page Ahmad ibn Ibrahim al-Ghazi you advised to debate the user BySomalilander about the subject which I did. First he denied that the Gadabursi had a clan called the Habar Makadur to spread propaganda. I showed him the evidence that they do. Then he started to argue around the name.

Here you can obviously see that the clan Gadabursi is divided in 2 branches, the Habar Affan and Habar Makadur, the latter making roughly 90% of the clan.

There are two main fractions, the Habr Afan and Habr Makadur, formerly united under a common hereditary chief (ogaz)[10]

Here the English translation of the Futuh Al Habasha: Conquest of Abyssinia one can see than Western scholars have agreed that the clan mentioned is written as Habr Maqdi or Makadi

[11] [12]

On page 27 as a footnote Richard Pankhurst clarifies that it's the Habr Makadur.

[13]

So the individual based on WP:MAINSTREAM can't keep on undoing the edit. WP:MAINSTREAM on wiki means high quality within a particular field of science or scholarship. The expert in the case of the -Shihāb al-Dīn Aḥmad ibn ʻAbd al-Qādir ʻArabfaqīh Tsehai Publishers & Distributors, 2003 - are Stenhouse and Richard Pankhurst, a British academic with expertise in the study of Ethiopia.

Also the genealogy of the Habr Makadur of the Gadabuursi is mentioned in the book and the location of the Habr Makadi mentioned in the book corresponds with that of the Habr Makadur of the Gadabuursi.

If he's so desperate to add his clan. Why not add it next to the other. - comment added by AbwaanRooble (talk • 23:29, 3 October 2016

@AbwaanRooble: I think that's a good discussion for the article's talk page, where some subject experts will see it. —C.Fred (talk) 01:07, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes but so far he is just wasting my time. The book even mentions Habr Maqdi as a footnote Habr Makadur. Well we can't keep undoing our edits. What is the solution? - comment added by AbwaanRooble (talk • 1:14, 4 October 2016

@AbwaanRooble: If nobody else chimes in at article talk, request a third opinion. —C.Fred (talk) 01:20, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, I will look into it when I have time. Have a good day! - comment added by AbwaanRooble (talk • 1:27, 4 October 2016

New Page

Hi there! I'm trying to set up a new article about a public figure. Piper Madison is a credited actress, musician, singer and songwriter. Can you assist me with setting up her Wikipedia profile?

Thank you. Rhonda KeeseeRkeesee (talk) 17:46, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

@Rkeesee: First, the initial article had no credits listed. With no assertion of significance or importance, the article was speedy deleted.

Second, just having credits isn't always enough, especially if they're just "Student #2" or "Girl at counter". WP:ENTERTAINER has more specific definitions of what an actor or entertainer needs to have done to be considered notable.

Finally, the general notability guidelines apply to all articles. That means that Madison would need to have been written about in independent reliable sources. It also means that she's gotten significant coverage (not just one-sentence mentions) and coverage in newspapers that are more broadly circulated than just locally in one city. If there aren't sources in the article, that could also get it deleted. —C.Fred (talk) 18:24, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, that's helpful. I'll work on getting these specific items before I proceed. I appreciate your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rkeesee (talk • contribs) 19:27, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Your question about the photo of me used on Wiki's Jeffrey Robinson page

Dear C Fred, I appreciate your continued help with the vandalism on the page about me, but I don't understand your concerns about the photo of me on that page. It was taken by photographer Daniella Zalcman specifically for public use and distribution. You are more than welcome to check with her via the contact link on her website which you'll find by Googling her name. (I don't want to list it here for obvious reasons.) There is absolutely no copyright violation in the public use of this photo. It was taken for expressly this purpose. What's more, and for what it's worth, she happens to be my daughter-in-law. Again, you have been very kind in defending the entry against sustained vandalism, but I would object very strongly to any questions about a copyright violation in the use of this photo. Many thanks and best regards/ JR SJR524 (talk) 11:54, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

@SJR524: I don't think she wants to answer email from every user who looks at the picture and wonders about the license status. Either she can email the Commons directly to confirm her donation of the picture, or she can post the picture somewhere that it's clearly stated to be under a free license. By the way, free for Wikipedia purposes means free for any reuse, including commercial reuse. —C.Fred (talk) 11:56, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, and thank you for that. Trust me, if you ask via her contact/webpage, she assures me that she will answer you. The photo has been widely used on websites, with press releases and on book jackets. It is freely available on Google, because it was taken for that purpose. She has just emailed this: "You are welcome to use any photos I have taken of you in any way you choose, digitally or in print, in perpetuity. Daniella Zalcman" Again, if you check with her she will confirm this. Thank you for your help./ JRSJR524 (talk) 12:15, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

@SJR524: For record-keeping purposes, she needs to email that directly to Wikimedia Commons. Could you have her email that to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and note that it relates specifically to File:Jeffrey Robinson.jpg? Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 15:00, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

C. Fred - I fail to understand why this is suddenly an issue. The photo has been widely circulated for free public use for several years. It definitely and obviously meets Wiki's criteria. That said, she will do it. Thank you for your help, especially where the more serious issue of vandalism has occurred/ JRSJR524 (talk) 15:11, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

@SJR524: It would have been an issue; it just now got detected. Also, NFCC and licensing rules have gotten more stringent over time. —C.Fred (talk) 15:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi again, It's not a problem. I simply didn't understand, and appreciate both your explanation and help. Dani will send that email sooner rather than later. Please let me know, if you don't mind, that you've seen her email and the issue is now cleared up. Again, thank you. I wish you well/ JR SJR524 (talk) 15:57, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

@SJR524: I won't see the email directly; access to that is limited to a select group of administrators, to protect personal information. They'll then note that they've verified the release. I have left a message for the Commons administrators that I've spoken with you and you're having her send the email, so they should be on the lookout for it.

(Wikimedia Commons has its own separate administrators and policies, but it hosts free images used on all Wikipedia sites, including English Wikipedia. I'm an admin here but not Commons, so there are tools that I have available to me here that I don't there.) —C.Fred (talk) 16:47, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

I understand. And thanks again/ JRSJR524 (talk) 17:17, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I thought you'd like to know this. I saw Dani the other night, she's exhibiting at Photoville (huge show under the Brooklyn Bridge) and mentioned your concerns about the photo. She will send the letter as soon as she's got a free moment (it's hectic there) but said she was happy to do it because photographers' work gets ripped off all the time and Wikipedia is one of the very few sites that does what it can to protect their copyright. Kudos to Wiki. Cheers/ JRSJR524 (talk) 10:41, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Dear C. Fred, May I please ask a favor. I saw Dani yesterday and she assured me the email was sent saying the photo is her copyright and free for use. Would you please be kind enough to check with the powers that be to confirm that they've received it and that the photo now conforms. Thank you/ JRSJR524 (talk) 11:13, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

@SJR524: It looks like the email was received but insufficient. From the message currently on the image: "This may, among other reasons, be because there was no explicit release under a free license, or the email address that the permission came from is not associated with the location where the content was originally published." I'd suggest contacting the person on Commons who made that decision; there's a link to their user page in the message there. —C.Fred (talk) 13:00, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi again, I really don't understand. The copyright is hers and she sent an email as a release, from her email address, to say the photo is free to use. How much more complicated does Wiki want to make this? The photo has been widely published, because it is free to use. For a bunch of hip people, you're starting to sound like the government. Also, I don't know what you mean when you say contact that person on Commons. I'd be grateful if you'd be kind enough to pass this along to whomever, or at least send me a direct link so I can get someone to understand that this is taking up too much of your time, taking up too much of my time, and that the photo is absolutely and unequivocally free to use. Thank you/ JRSJR524 (talk) 13:14, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

@SJR524: As a point of clarity: So I could print that photo on a t-shirt, sell the t-shirt, and not have to worry about copyright issues? —C.Fred (talk) 13:16, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, you'd be very welcome to and I'll order a dozen. SJR524 (talk) 13:24, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

The file in question is File:Jeffrey Robinson.jpg. —C.Fred (talk) 14:45, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

I have asked about it at commons:User talk:Storkk. —C.Fred (talk) 14:53, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

@SJR524: Hi. I'm the OTRS agent dealing with the ticket. Unfortunately, because OTRS contains confidential information we have stringent rules regarding what we can divulge--so my reply will probably be unsatisfactory. The only thing I can say specifically for this ticket is that we have not yet received a clear and unambiguous license. Now speaking more generally, we cannot accept statements such as "XYZ can post my photo to Wikipedia" or even "XYZ can do whatever he wants with my photo" (unless it is also made clear that the copyright itself has been transferred to XYZ) because we only accept media that anyone can do anything they want with (not just XYZ). For this reason, we need an unambiguous record of a license like the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 license. The appropriate wording can be found at C:COM:CONSENT or be generated at https://tools.wmflabs.org/relgen . The ticket submitter was emailed to this effect on September 28th, and if and when a response is received and processed, the ticket will be updated. Storkk (talk) 15:33, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

@Storkk: Thank you for the reply. I know you're limited in what you can say, but that is the direction my hunch was going.

@SJR524: As Storkk indicated, Wikimedia is very picky about what is considered a sufficient license. The common trap that people fall into is saying "You can use my picture on Wikipedia" or something similar. That's not enough. The license needs to state that anybody may use the picture for any purpose, even commercial reuse. The Creative Commons license that Storkk mentions allows for the uploader to still be credited for the image when it's reused but otherwise makes the image free to reuse.

Yes, image licensing is confusing and sometimes time-consuming. However, the trade-off is that by taking some time now, we make sure the images are used right from the get-go and don't have to clean up a problematic image that's discovered after the fact. —C.Fred (talk) 15:40, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

To my mind, needlessly confusing and time consuming. That said, if you will let me have the proper wording, word for word, plus an email address, I will ask Dani to send it to you, word for word. That would be the easiest thing, and I appreciate your help in solving this. Thank you/ JRSJR524 (talk) 15:48, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

@SJR524: the exact wording can be generated on https://tools.wmflabs.org/relgen or can be found on C:COM:CONSENT. Please also ask her to use an email at her domain - we cannot verify the identity of free email accounts. Storkk (talk) 15:52, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for that. I have written her with the link. Please let me know when you get her satisfactory permission/ JRSJR524 (talk) 16:25, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, Sorry to bother you with this, yet again, but I can't find anyone else to ask. I assume the matter of the photo of me has now been settled to Wiki's satisfaction. It looks like copyright permission has been granted, although the page where that entry appears (which I cannot find now) is slightly confusing to me. I'd be grateful for assurances that it is finally settled. Again, many thanks/ JR SJR524 (talk) 11:43, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

PS - Just found the page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jeffrey_Robinson.jpg The first section spells out Wiki's concerns. But the second entry is titled: This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license. Accordingly, may I assume the issue is settled? Thank you/ JRSJR524 (talk) 11:47, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

@SJR524: No, as evidenced by the presence of the first box. We're presuming it to be under the Creative Commons license, but the OTRS hasn't received an email verification with the necessary information. —C.Fred (talk) 15:40, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I just asked her and she sent me this copy: I hereby affirm that I, Daniella Zalcman, am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the media workhttps://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Robinson#/media/Jeffrey_Robinson.jpg. I agree to publish the above-mentioned work under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International. I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work, even in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws. I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites. I am aware that the copyright holder always retains ownership of the copyright as well as the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by the copyright holder. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

Daniella Zalcman 2016-10-05 [generated using relgen]

Is this now finally over? I seriously hope so. Thank you/JR SJR524 (talk) 15:44, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

@SJR524: That message should work. However, the other piece of the puzzle is that they need to know it's her. That generally means she needs to send the email from an address associated with her business. By way of fictional example, if Clark Kent emailed us from clark.kent@dailyplanet.com, and if dailyplanet.com were the newspaper's website address, we could be confident that the email came from Clark Kent, reporter at the Daily Planet. If it came from clark.kent@gmail.com, we would not have the same confidence. If it came from imtotallynotsuperman@gmail.com, we'd have even less confidence.

So, the message is right, if she sent it from her work/business email address. —C.Fred (talk) 18:18, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Seriously? She's already sent you two emails. Her contact, her email and phone numbers and her own domain and her website, and all the information you need, is already there. She said she filled out the form that you asked her to fill out. This, after sending those emails granting permission. You're a great guy and I appreciate your help, but please this is starting to get surreal./ JR SJR524 (talk) 19:11, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

@SJR524: I am not an OTRS Agent. I have not seen the email, I don't know where she sent it from, and I have no first-hand knowledge of the "ticket" that was opened about the image. Because of the sensitivity of the information, OTRS agents cannot give specific details on a talk page about the request. So, my comment was based on my general understanding of how OTRS does things; it does not represent an accurate assessment of her specific situation.

I would assume that the OTRS Agent who handled her email had contacted her directly via email about any specific things they needed. However, that would have been a direct contact via email; the agent cannot reveal anything on an open talk page about the ticket. Again, I have no knowledge of what information has been exchanged in email. —C.Fred (talk) 19:49, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Neil Ormandy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Morrison. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 6 October 2016 (UTC)