User talk:Funplussmart/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You may also want to see User:Funplussmart/Awards for Barnstars and the like.

Speedy deletion contested: John Marenbon

Hello Funplussmart. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of John Marenbon, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: being elected a Fellow of the British Academy is sufficient to pass WP:GNG. Thank you. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 03:14, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Draft:Joel Lenehan

Hello Funplussmart. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Joel Lenehan, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: appears to be a real person and a real person can not be made up. Thank you. ~ GB fan 21:39, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Yeah I noticed that only after I tagged the article. It should probably still be deleted because it appears to be an autobiography with no claim of significance. Funplussmart (talk) 22:02, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Funplussmart, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! PamD 14:34, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Draft:Andrew Norman

Hello Funplussmart, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Andrew Norman, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not a test page. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. ~ GB fan 01:23, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

GB fan, how is Draft:Andrew Norman not a test page? It appears to be the only purpose of the page, as it obviously will not make onto the namespace no matter what edit is done to it, and has no practical chance of surviving a deletion discussion. Funplussmart (talk) 02:23, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Draft:CHILD USA

Hello Funplussmart. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Draft:CHILD USA, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 03:49, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Draft:Inogen

Hello Funplussmart. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Draft:Inogen, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional, but references are weak. . Thank you. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 00:16, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Eastmain, look at who created the draft. Funplussmart (talk) 00:18, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
Noted, but I still think it might be possible to salvage a useful article out of the draft. I added a few references, but I am not going to move the draft to article space until it becomes good enough. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 00:34, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
Okay, sounds good! Funplussmart (talk) 17:24, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:21, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Blocked user template

The blocked user template probably isn't needed on every blocked account. The editor typically gets a talkpage notification, as well as a notification when they attempt to edit. Also - why are you adding protection templates to tons of articles? SQLQuery me! 17:21, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

SQL, I add the blocked user template to point out that the user had been blocked. If you don't like it then I'll stop. I add the protection template to articles because whoever protected them forgot to put the template in themselves. Funplussmart (talk) 17:24, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
Okay so I will not add {{blocked user}} to accounts blocked for simple vandalism, spam, or a username violation. I will only add it if the user was brought up on the Administrator incidents noticeboard or if the user is a troll. Funplussmart (talk) 18:13, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
No, don't add them ever.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:26, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
+1. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:37, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
(talk page gnome) I think that there's a bot to update the protection icons (or there used to be one at least). —PaleoNeonate – 20:45, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
Some admins put in the protection template themselves, and then there are the lazy ones who let the bot do it...like me.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:29, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Rollback granted

Hi Funplussmart. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

  • Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
  • Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
  • Rollback should never be used to edit war.
  • If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
  • Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Vanamonde (talk) 12:08, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

So we can finally bite.[Humor]PaleoNeonate – 02:09, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
LOL no, there's a policy against that. funplussmart (talk) 02:11, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Note to CheckUsers

Some of the time, especially in the mornings, I may be editing from my school. The school's computers are IP-blocked so anons can't edit, but obviously I can since I'm logged in. I just want to point this out to any CheckUsers. I'm not even sure if it will even be a problem anyway. funplussmart (talk) 11:59, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Unblock requests

Regarding your recent edit at User talk:Assmuncha. Normally it is expected that the blocked user will get their request looked at by an admin. It is not necessary for you to remove impolite requests, some admin will deal with it. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 21:36, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

EdJohnston, I did consider just leaving the requests there and only request the removal of talk page access (which obviously did happen in the end). However, not only did the requests have no chance of succeeding, but the requests were in themselves disruptive, which is why I removed them. funplussmart (talk) 22:25, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
If an admin had seen the rude request, that could have factored into their talk page locking decision. In my opinion non-admin clerking of unblock requests is undesirable just like non-admin removal of AIV reports. You are depriving the person of their admin review. EdJohnston (talk) 22:35, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Well it no longer matters because the user is gone now, but I see your point. How long does it typically take for an unblock request to be seen by an admin? funplussmart (talk) 22:39, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Alex Shih (talk) 23:09, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Alex Shih. I hope things go well for you too. funplussmart (talk) 23:12, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Arbitration case request closed

The Creationism and NPOV arbitration case request has been closed. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 01:25, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

@L235:, I promise next time I will only file a case if the dispute is long lasting. I'm not very familiar with the Arbitration process, so this is really a learning experience for me. funplussmart (talk) 02:28, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
No big deal – most editors don't know how ArbCom works (including what kinds of cases it usually takes), and I think that's a very good thing! Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 02:46, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
BTW, I'm also not very familiar with it and it was the first time I was invited to participate in a case (except AE). It could also be a question of timing: when the arbitration case was started the ANI thread was still ongoing, but it was quickly closed. My comment was related to its precedent WP:ARBPS, but when reading again, it did seem to be more specific about this particular event (and maybe appropriate). In any case, we'll see, as it's the last step of the DR process, it'll happen if necessary. This is only a personal impression: If it's not necessary, all of the better: arbcom cases can last a long time (weeks to months from what I see), with any possible sanctions harder. An editor reported at ANI is often considered to be wasting community time (less so the first time); since time is considered a precious resource, that could possibly be considered worse after a full ARB case... In any case, I understand that your move was in good faith and not worthy of any reproach. —PaleoNeonate – 08:43, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Kingdamian1

I was about to support your entreaty on Kingdamian1's TP when he deleted it. I think we need editors with different viewpoints. But, some just aren't interested in civil discussion. O3000 (talk) 23:48, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Yep. He clearly has no regard for anyone else on this site. I think he should be indefed for WP:NOTHERE at this point. funplussmart (talk) 23:58, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

i've separated Health in Nigeria from healthcare. I did leave edit summaries, but not on every move. Rathfelder (talk) 12:15, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

@Rathfelder: Yeah, I eventually did realize that. I am a RC Patroller so sorry about that. funplussmart (talk) 12:17, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

No problem. Rathfelder (talk) 12:20, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Funplussmart. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 04:37, 23 September 2018 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

TheSandDoctor Talk 04:37, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Joe DiRosa

When did deleting pages that have been on wikipedia for 10+ years over a creation of a completely unrelated page become a standard practice? Especially with no review or notice. Not to mention the page was just reviewed by another editor a couple days ago with no mention of anything except the type of image that was placed inside. This is essentially harassment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joedirosa (talkcontribs) 20:35, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

@Joedirosa:, WP:AGF. I am really not sure what to do about you. I kinda feel that you attacked me on your talk page, but I also know I did something to provoke that. funplussmart (talk) 13:07, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Template:User wikipedia/SPI clerk, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User wikipedia/SPI clerk and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:User wikipedia/SPI clerk during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Hhkohh (talk) 16:36, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Template:User wikipedia/Arbitration clerk, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User wikipedia/Arbitration clerk and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:User wikipedia/Arbitration clerk during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Hhkohh (talk) 10:20, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Why did you revert to the vandal version?

On the Science reference desk you Reverted to revision 864690719 by 151.252.86.58 (talk): Remove vandalism. That was six edits before my response to the section "Diesel-electric rail emissions", which read as follows:

On Saturday morning I watched the Flying Scotsman leaving King’s Cross. That was an experience, I can tell you. I haven’t really got close up and personal to a steam locomotive since they switched to diesel in the fifties. Meanwhile, the long-promised electric trains on our local line (the wires have been up for a year) have yet to materialise, and no-one has suggested a date when they will.

Please be good enough to restore my comment. 92.23.53.100 (talk) 21:11, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

At the same time you were posting your comment someone else was vandalizing the page. I reverted the edits, and an admin RevDeleted them. Your post as inadvertently removed in the process. I can restore it if you'd like, or you could ask the admin to. funplussmart (talk) 21:15, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

blocks vs bans

Regarding this edit: a block is a tool to enforce a sanction; a ban is a type of sanction. Thus semantically they will always remain distinct. If discretionary sanctions are not authorized for a topic area, admins can enforce policies such as disruptive editing using a block to prevent ongoing issues. Bans can only be issued via a community discussion or the Arbitration Committee, unless discretionary sanctions have been authorized. Because bans do not have to be limited to the types of blocks available, I don't think trying to merge the terminology will work. (In practice, of course, a lot of editors in community discussions will vote for a "block" when in reality the result is a ban. Some people dispute this and think there is a theoretical difference, but since the appeal route is the same, even if there were a difference in theory, there is no difference in practice.) isaacl (talk) 21:12, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

@Isaacl: Obviously I know the difference between a ban (a formal sanction) and a block (a technical restriction). I opened that thread to discuss the impact of partial blocks on enforcing sanctions. If you have something to say then say it on there. funplussmart (talk) 22:46, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

A small note

I support Maxim's desysopping may suggest you support desysopping Maxim ;-) PizzaMan ♨♨♨ 20:16, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

@PizzaMan:, thank you for pointing that out, I have clarified that. funplussmart (talk) 20:30, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fred Bauder. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fred Bauder/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 27, 2018, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fred Bauder/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, --Cameron11598 (Talk) 20:56, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Some things I should tell you

I have Autism as well! Tigerdude9 (talk) 15:30, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

@Tigerdude9: nice to know someone else like me on here. And good job at Avianca Flight 011. funplussmart (talk) 16:48, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. I have also translated from the Spanish version, which has more information and made a community draft which still needs a lot of help. Draft:Avianca Flight 011. Tigerdude9 (talk) 21:19, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Funplussmart. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Hacked accounts

Do you have a list?

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:52, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

You can look at several ANI posts in the last few days for that. funplussmart (talk) 19:53, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
And there's an incomplete list at User talk:zzuuzz#Bad image list. funplussmart (talk) 19:54, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Cheers. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:01, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Funplussmart. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 08:52, 6 December 2018 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Yunshui  08:52, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Boolean algebra

"Mathematical logic" is a bit of a weak stretch with respect to adequately describing Boolean algebra, yet you nonetheless undid in a recent, related edit of mine. Please explain your "logic" in this, as your reversal otherwise makes no sense to me...and my edit was in any case certainly not "unhelpful" or something that should have been sandboxed. 104.15.130.191 (talk) 23:59, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry about that. Feel free to reinsert the edit if you haven't already. funplussmart (talk) 00:03, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you

I can't unsee what was done to boxing day, but I have joined Wikipedia just so that I can say thank you to funplussmart for speedy deletion. Thank you! YarnSnob (talk) 19:11, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:03, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism - warnings

Hiya Funplussmart, I noticed you were reverting some vandalism on Rat (disambiguation), please remember when you revert someone for vandalism to add the warning templates to the user's talkpage. If you use twinkle, you can do this using the warn tab at the top of their talk page. If you don't, you can find the templates at WP:WARN. Cheers. Agent00x (talk) 23:19, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Agent00x, the reason why I only used a 4im is because of WP:DENY. The is socking on the page now. funplussmart (talk) 23:25, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
aha, my apologies. Many thanks Agent00x (talk) 23:26, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

WP:UAA reports on users with no edits

Generally, there is no reason to report usernames with no edits whatsoever. Per WP:UAAI: "Wait until the user edits. Do not report a user that hasn't edited unless they are clearly a vandal. We do not want to welcome productive editors with a report at UAA, nor do we want to waste our time dealing with accounts that may never be used." The exceptions are obvious hate speech or names that attack a living person/Wikipedia editor, those are blockable even without any edits, but other run-of-the-mill violations need not be reported unless and until they at least attempt to edit, and you should be able to clearly explain what the problem is if it is not immediately evident.

For whatever reason, every day dozens, if not hundreds of accounts are created that never make one single edit. It is our responsibility as admins to conscientiously review every report a user makes at UAA, so we have to check for contribs, deleted contribs, and tripping of the edit filter for every one of these reports, only to find out there's nothing there and therefore no problem to be solved. That's time that could be spent doing more productive things, but you basically obligate admins to do it by making such reports. Additionally, UAA is only for blatant violations. I have no idea what was supposedly offensive in this report, let alone so offensive it should be blocked before even trying to edit, and none of the other reviewing admins did either. Please be more careful in the future. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:23, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

@Beeblebrox:, I reported that username because to me it certainty did not look promising. It seemed as if some immature adolesent made an account with that silly name to do silly vandalism. Evidently no edits were actually done with that account, so I guess we're fine then. I promise I'll be more careful in the future on reporting accounts with no edits to UAA. funplussmart (talk) 00:10, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2019

The Signpost: 28 February 2019

Removal of my page

You have to be kidding me for reporting my page to gain some points on your profile. You sir donot have a regular job and have decided to report most of the new pages. This process by you has been noticed several times and you are one trouble maker for new people. Kindly stay away from my page and let others share thier thoughts on wiki. Like the famous statement Mind Your Own Business. Personal suggestion : get a real time job! Snow Flakes Official (talk) 23:31, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

First, I have a job in real life. Second, your user page is blatant promotion, and your username is a blatant violation of the username policy. Third, this message is uncivil and I would've reverted had it not been by an outright troll or vandal. Wikipedia is not for promoting your music, even on your userpage. funplussmart (talk) 23:37, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:00, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 March 2019

Looking for help with fair-use image tag

Hello, I uploaded File:The 35th Annual National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences Suncoast Chapter Emmy Award Winners.pdf to Wikipedia. This is a list of the NATAS Suncoast Chatper Emmy Award Winners in 2011. This list is so important. The Suncoast Chapter does not archive before 2013. They gave me this list via Facebook Messenger. I have reached a stopping point in the process of uploading the file. Would you please consider helping me with this file with a fair-use image tag? I need the help. Thank you,--Wyn.junior (talk) 17:40, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

@Wyn.junior:, I am not very experienced with pdf documents, nor can I say that the file meets WP:NFCC, so I'm not sure if I can help you. You may wish to post your questions on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. There are editors there that I know can help you with this file. Happy editing! funplussmart (talk) 17:49, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank you--Wyn.junior (talk) 17:52, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion? No u!

Ok I know the title of this was mean but seriously, I fixed what you needed me to fix for the speedy deletion nomination of my article for Suicidal Wedding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ADillon1 (talkcontribs) 02:53, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

@ADillon1: While A3 doesn't apply anymore, it appears A7 does. You way wish to look at Wikipedia:Your first article. funplussmart (talk) 03:42, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
For going the extra mile to revert my talk page vandalism I hereby bestow upon you The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar and my sincerest thanks. Its people like you that renew my faith in the Wikipedia community. I pray you never lose that good heart of yours :) Sincerely, TomStar81 (Talk) 00:17, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
@TomStar81:, thank you so much for this. I'm just doing my job as a vandal-fighter around here, keeping the encyclopedia free from all damage. Every member of the community is very valuable. funplussmart (talk) 00:24, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Help with an Image

I noticed that an image I uploaded was deleted due to section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. The image in question was File:MaureenWalsh.jpg. This image came from a government website and the person in question is a public figure. Does this not qualify? I see many politician's photos being used in this capacity. Much appreciated - Stubb05 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stubb05 (talkcontribs) 02:14, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

@Stubb05: Wikipedia requires photos that are freely licensed or in the public domain. In other words, copyrighted pictures that do not allow unrestricted commercial use and derivative works, and are not under a valid claim of fair use are not allowed. The file you uploaded was not freely licensed as it is copyrighted by the State of Washington (Federal gov works are in the public domain, but not necessarily state gov works). Under WP:NFCC#1, we cannot allow that image as a free image of the subject can be reasonably taken, therefore, it does not qualify for fair use either. That's why the image was deleted. If you can find a freely licensed photo of her, you are more than welcome to upload it. funplussmart (talk) 13:10, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello Funplussmart, Thanks for your message regarding the permission for the picture I added. As I haven't been on Wikipedia, doing significant edits, for a while, I may need your help and guidance. In this specific case, it took me a few attempts until I was able to load that picture and have it displayed, publicly. As for the permissions themselves. I took the picture of the document MYSELF, so it is definitely my picture. The document itself, was given to me by Dr. Paula Hill, who I'm afraid passed away last year. It is an old document (1938) which she obtained from a UK archive for research purposes. I believe it is public domain. I actually loaded the document twice, gave it two different names. So one can definitely be deleted. Please let me know what else I need to do to make sure this picture can stay. Thanks a lot, Ophir Baer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ophirbaer (talkcontribs) 08:36, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

@Ophirbaer: If the photo is indeed in the public domain in both the US and UK, the Wikipedia copy of the photo should be deleted and the Commons copy kept so that everyone could use it. Now, on the permission tag I placed, there is an email provided that you can forward permission to to verify everything stated about the document. I am not sure if this is necessary, but I believe that PD status should also if possible be verified by the archive that Hill obtained the photo from. I am not very experienced in this area, so if you need any further help, I recommend posting on either Wikipedia:Media copyright questions or Commons:Commons:Village pump/Copyright. Thank you. funplussmart (talk) 13:33, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

22:27, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 April 2019

16:27, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Reverting my changes

You just reverted my changes leaving me this message https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:81.220.104.117&diff=cur . I deleted content that was both unsourced and ,by my personal experience, completely wrong. It's up to someone that wants to add (or keep) content to get some sources. I find your reverting behaviour aggressive and after a few years since my last edit on wikipedia, it discourages me to come back.

00:48, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

13:03, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

15:33, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 May 2019

15:24, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

17:06, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

20:37, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

17:29, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

The June 2019 Signpost is out!

21:22, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

20:12, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

15:29, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

13:07, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

21:42, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2019

13:24, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

18:19, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

15:20, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2019

09:07, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 September 2019

16:50, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

15:35, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Retirement

Thank you for your work here, including patrolling. Farewell, —PaleoNeonate – 20:30, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your support. It is sad that I must move on. funplussmart (talk) 20:41, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
As requested I have blocked your account. I have not removed your talk page access, ping me here if you do wish this to be the case. Should you ever change your mind - or that your circumstances change - you can request an unblock here or by emailing any active administrator. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Fish+Karate 16:38, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

The same. I'm saddened to see this, but relieved that you said "indefinitely", not "permanently". You are, of course, welcome back here any time. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 18:34, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

I have appreciated your work here, and am sorry to see you go. Jacona (talk) 19:43, 22 June 2019 (UTC)