User talk:Graeme Bartlett/archive 27

This is a Wikipedia user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user in whose space this page is located may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Graeme_Bartlett/archive_27.

	Older talk is in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 archives. Please add your talk at the bottom of the page:

Regarding Deletion of Article Africa at Miss International

Please undelete article Africa at Miss International as I am also looking for reliable source for the aticles needed. If you need can edit with reference as there are some reference in the official site also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by T4mb4y 22 (talk • contribs) 13:35, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Deletion of Article Adya Prasad Pandey

Please undelete article Adya Prasad Pandey as he is Vice Chancellor also if you need can edit with reference as there are some reference in government sites also117.199.177.5 (talk) 04:43, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Challenges for innovation in Malaysia

Hi Graeme, am not sure how to post answers to your messages but, if you can see this, please note this observation: I've taken a look at the article above and the content is from an openly licensed document. The copyright statement is on page 4 of this PDF (5mb). I notice that  This article incorporates text from a free content work. Text taken from . was used to declare that the content is openly licensed, but it still got picked up by the copyvio report. With high quality content being released by UNESCO it would be beneficial to integrate it into the encyclopedia, especially as this addresses an under-represented area. But this may produce false positives where openly licensed text is being flagged as a copyright violation. Any ideas how to deal with this? Nev1 (talk) 10:41, 2 February 2017 (UTC) and Susan Schneegans, 2 February 2017Susan Schneegans (talk) 13:33, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Revised Article & Reference of Notability

Hi Graeme, I have prepared a new version of an article previously deleted by yourself (on 11 March 2016 ) and would very much welcome your thoughts and feedback if possible? Please see my sandbox for the revised article and updated references of notability. If you are happy to do so, could you please reinstate the original OnTheMarket page, incorporating my revised sandbox article? Many thanks for your support and I look forward to hearing back from you. HarkenMotet (talk) 21:23, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:HarkenMotet I have moved your sandbox to OnTheMarket and history merged. At the moment coverage is a bit unbalanced, not including the protests about anti-competitive behaviour, or those agents excluded. Can you write about that too? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:55, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Graeme Bartlett Many thanks for your swift response and feedback, all very much appreciated. Let me do some additional research and I'll see what I can do to balance the page. --HarkenMotet (talk) 23:40, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I made some additions to the OnTheMarket article following your previous feedback, although there have been significant changes made thereafter. I was initially happy to see the article grow and develop so quickly, although its seems to have been mostly negative contributions, rendering an imbalanced article that I have been told not to edit further(?). Are you able to review and advise your thoughts? I'm unsure how best to proceed from here. Thanks in advance. HarkenMotet (talk) 11:49, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@HarkenMotet: It is probably time for you do something else on Wikipedia. I do not consider you are banned from the article. However it does look to be the only thing you have worked on, so you need to broaden your horizons. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:19, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Graeme Bartlett, I've added a few brief updates on some of the pages I was looking into, although I hope to expand further when I find the time! There are a selection of other articles I'm reviewing and keen to contribute more in due course. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HarkenMotet (talk • contribs) 00:51, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Asian 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^Che dicono a Signa?_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 02:06, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:ACT Policing

Graeme.

Can you please have a look at the last IP edit on Talk:ACT Policing which I have undone. It was ostensibly naming names and while it looks like a fake name or a typo, it might need a complete deletion rather than just the undo I have done.

Thanks in advance. Aoziwe (talk) 12:35, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the request. I have actioned it. Next time just email me! As leaving a message here may just draw attention to the problem from others. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:11, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and noted. Aoziwe (talk) 12:08, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 22 October

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Argon compounds page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Argon compounds

On 24 October 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Argon compounds, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that argon oxide, an argon compound, interferes with the detection of iron-56 in inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Argon compounds. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Argon compounds), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:37, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• 3049 page views

Nomination of David Parry (poet) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article David Parry (poet) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Parry (poet) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:02, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Victor Despeignes

Hello! Your submission of Victor Despeignes at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! — Yellow Dingo (talk) 05:00, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Domenck Lazzara

The concept of importance is subjective, also I was unable to even fix it, which seems to the be the standard according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Deletion_of_BLPs_of_relatively_unknown_subjects.

I still feel that this deletion is in violation of the above standard, and the subject will just get salted and thus not available any longer. I guess a major class action lawsuit against disney is not important enough. I would love to hear from you, but I know you admins never respond to these things.BrianRFSU 22:24, 26 October 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrianRFSU (talk • contribs)

• @BrianRFSU: Admins usually respond, as they should explain their actions and decisions. I don't think the topic is close to being salted yet. If you like I can restore this page to a draft, so that you can find the references. Another suggestion is not to start with the person's life story, but to have a WP:LEAD sentence that tells straight away what the most important thing about the person is. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:31, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If there was a beginners guide I could reference, that would be great.. LOL BrianRFSU 22:32, 26 October 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrianRFSU (talk • contribs)

and yes, a draft would be greatBrianRFSU 22:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrianRFSU (talk • contribs)

• @BrianRFSU: A beginners guide is at Wikipedia:Your first article. I will restore the useful part of the article history to a draft at Draft:Domenck Lazzara. (when it's blue it is there). Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:42, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• See Draft:Domenick Lazzara We will need independent substantial references too. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:57, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Independent as in outside wikipedia? BrianRFSU 23:15, 26 October 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrianRFSU (talk • contribs)

@BrianRFSU: Independent is outside anything to do with the topic. see Wikipedia:Independent sources. So not written by the subject, not written by the subject's company, not written by their clients. Newspapers, and magazines, television news can be OK. Wikipedia is not a Reliable source, but may have references to other reliable sources that you could use. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:19, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you BrianRFSU 23:29, 26 October 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrianRFSU (talk • contribs)

@BrianRFSU: Also note that copying text from websites is not permitted as it is a copyright infringement. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:30, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's not CI when you own the site, K. But once again, no chance to fix it/contest it before it was deleated. BrianRFSU 23:36, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

For services to DYK!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Just wanted to thank you for all the work you have been doing recently on reviewing nominations at DYK. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:18, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Argonium

On 28 October 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Argonium, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that argonium, an ion composed of an argon atom and a proton, was the first noble gas molecular ion to be found in interstellar space? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Argonium. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Argonium), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:08, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• 4385 views

Restore request

ComputerSupport.com + talk page, Talk:Autocunnilingus, and Talk:Cacti (software). Valoem ^talk ^contrib 21:20, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

•  Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:27, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review

Deletion review for Draft:Dominick Lazzara

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Draft:Dominick Lazzara. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. BrianRFSU 00:20, 29 October 2016 (UTC) BrianRFSU 00:20, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Help with 5pm article

Hello, back in 2014 you helped the 5pm article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5pm) by removing speedy delete tag, stating that the article is not spammy. I contributed to 5pm article lately, but it was again marked as not having notoriety and deleted, before I was able to make updates. I seek your help and opinion in this matter. Could you please voice it on the deletion discussion page? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/5pm#5pm. Thank you. NancyJeanGF (talk) 14:31, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@NancyJeanGF: The debate will be final in the decision. You can still update 5pm until it is deleted, but unless you can pull up more substantial references it won't sway voters. So I would suggest working on something different to avoid getting too depressed about the deletion of an article. When you say "notoriety", it would have been notability. I will take a look at the current sources. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:36, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking your time to look into it... I thought the sources are good. Let me know when you check them. NancyJeanGF (talk) 17:38, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Salary.com

Salary.com has a history, and should have been redirected to Kenexa as it was prior to being its latest form of an article. Can you please restore this page in an article or redirect form, or let me know why you choose not to do so? --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:53, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It already seems to have been recreated. Anyway I have restored the non-overlapping history part. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:55, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Victor Despeignes

On 5 November 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Victor Despeignes, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that French physician Victor Despeignes thought that cancer was a parasite which could be killed with radiation? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Victor Despeignes. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Victor Despeignes), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2658 views

Europe 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^Che dicono a Signa?_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 08:56, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Accessibility Barnstar
		To Graeme Bartlett, thank you for fixing my view settings and enabling me to return to editing. Axl ¤ [Talk] 12:27, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that @Axl:. I look forward to seeing some Wikipedia contributions. Let me know if there is anything else that needs to change. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:35, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The links at the top-right are orange too now. Thank you. Axl ¤ [Talk] 10:30, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NPP user right

I noticed that you granted Adotchar the new reviewer right as a grandfathered user. That user was asked three times not to patrol new pages due to CIR [1]. Even now they have continuing problems at RCP with improper warnings [2]. I firmly believe they do not meet the 'uncontested patrols' requirement for grandfathering. Jbh^Talk 22:34, 9 November 2016 (UTC) Last edited: 22:40, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK removed. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:44, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Jbh^Talk 22:53, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anyone else? I am just going through the lists of qualifiers. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:55, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you just restored the right to User:Ktr101, who has been banned; I believe the account was stripped of all rights at the time. Do check first, but perhaps this right should be withdrawn? BlueMoonset (talk) 23:38, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted that change within a couple of minutes, firstly I considered that new page patrol would have been outside the scope of the restriction, (because it was not "advanced" at the time, but when I saw he was globally locked then I realised that Ktr101 should not have been on the eligible list. It would be because he was not blocked in en.wikipedia that the eligible list appearance was made. I am more concerned about Faizhaider, Clubjustin, Catmando999, Adem20 and Adog104. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:44, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can I know what exactly makes you concerned about me?--Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider^tc_s 07:12, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The reason was that your user was on Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers/List3 accorded tagged tmi. This would be because of the number of complaints on your talk page. This was my problem that I looked at list4 before list3. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:59, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I'm not permitted to review pages due to a few horrible mistakes of mine in the first few months of me being here. Thing is though, of the few hundred edits I'm starting to make weekly only one admin has complained, for a total of 4 of my edits over the past month. And since then, I've been perfectly fine. _{Adotchar| reply here} 14:11, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There will be some other requests for permission process as well. Though unless you do it, how can you prove your are fine? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:59, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Whisperback

Hello. You have a new message at Kudpung's talk page. 01:36, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Anita Tomar, India Wrestler

Hi - As a part of Wikipedia Asian Month, I am looking to create a page on Anita Tomar but I see that you flagged it for deletion. Anita Tomar is an Indian wrestler and should not be confused with Alka Tomar or Anita Sheoran . Please let me know what are the challenges you see in creating a legitimate page. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ParulThakur (talk • contribs) 06:56, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@ParulThakur: The text on the page stated "Anita Tomar is a female wrestler from India who won gold medal in 67 kg freestyle wrestling event in 2010 Commonwealth games." see https://speedydeletion.wikia.com/wiki/Anita_Tomar When I look up the Wrestling at the 2010 Commonwealth Games article we can see that it was Anita Sheoran that did that. Alka Tomar was in the 59kg class in the same games. Perhaps there is a confusion between the two that they get blended together. The only reference [3] does not include Anita's family name. And in the early version of the article there was no surname. But if you can prove that Anita Tomar is a notable wrestler with reliable references then go ahead and start an article. Just be very sure she is a different person to Anita Sheoran! Doing a search I can see that there is a botanist, and a mathematician with that name. Possibly there is a misconception about wrestlers. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:00, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Graeme Bartlett:Thanks for clarifying. As I look closely, it seems they are one person. It could be maiden name and name after marriage but I don't have references to support. Appreciate your time. Thanks!--Parul Thakur (talk) 09:10, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Start Class

I see you assessed Turvo State Park as "start class": "An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete. It might or might not cite adequate reliable sources. Provides some meaningful content, but most readers will need more. Providing references to reliable sources should come first; the article also needs substantial improvement in content and organisation. Also improve the grammar, spelling, writing style and improve the jargon use." Everything is sourced. What types of information do you feel are missing? How would you re-organize the content? Where do you see problems with grammar etc.? Aymatth2 (talk) 00:28, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed it to C. Mostly for new articles I would either give a stub or start rating, just based on the amount or variety of content. Being "start" does not mean it has all those problems. For example organisation looks OK. There is a locator map, but we could do with a zoomed in map showing the park, river, waterfall, road etc. What the the planned Garabí Dam will do will be worth mentioning. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:10, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have started an article on the Garabí Dam, still just a beginning, and then expect to go back and add to the Turvo State Park article. I suggest it would be better to give a new article a few days before assessing it. It is disheartening to see a "This is Crap" notice slapped on an article within hours of saving the first cut. Perhaps you could help with the map – I am sure there is one online you could use as a basis. Aymatth2 (talk) 02:21, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Start does not mean it is crap at all! It is the most common assessment. The main point is to tag it for a project, so that the people in the project will know about it. If I tag with importance=none that suggests that I don't think the article is worth having, but even that is not saying anything about quality. There are a number of other tags to put on an article to say more specifically what the problems are. Note that none of these were applied to Turvo State Park. We would not have such a vague tag as "this article is crap". Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:45, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The definition of "start class" sounds like "crap" to me. If you do not have time to review the article, or if the article is very new, the obvious approach is to tag it

{{WikiProject xxx |class= |importance= }}

That puts it in a list of articles for review. Someone from the project can later rate the article, maybe improve it, and decide on the importance of the subject. An article rated "Start" is unlikely to get any further attention. Aymatth2 (talk) 03:13, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Right

Hello Graeme Bartlett, how was your day? want to know how can a wikipedian be one of a group membership just like rights? --Music Boy ^(talk to me) 20:28, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Music Boy50: Good day to you! The different groups on Wikipedia let you do extra things. I can see your groups at Special:UserRights/Music_Boy50. You are a member of Autoconfirmed users. This gives you the permission to upload images or move pages. These permissions can be called "rights" but they are not really rights. You can read more at Wikipedia:User access levels. Your actual rights here are completely different. You have the Right to fork and some right to privacy. For permissions, a person who counteracts vandalism a lot will find rollback useful. Or someone that does a lot of work with files, eg pictures may need file mover. If you have some kind of need and can prove you qualify, you can ask here: Wikipedia:Requests for permissions. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:55, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation it helps a lot --Music Boy ^(talk to me) 21:18, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article draft

Hi Graeme Bartlett, actually i wanted to create an article about a Nigeria music producer Indomix but it was previously created and deleted by a blocked or banned user as it was stated on the page. So i decided to create a draft Draft:Indomix so that i can develop the article to meet its criteria. I am done with the article but i can"t move it due to the main page Indomix is protected for only admin to perform the action. Still working on another draft article which i created Draft:Maryland Mall. Looking forward to your response, have a nice day --Music Boy ^(talk to me) 21:55, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

First we will check if you are the same banned user. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:42, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Roman Tmetuchl

Graeme Bartlett, I was wondering whether you could return to your review here, see whether the QPQ was okay, and post accordingly. This is now the oldest extant DYK nomination, and it would be nice to get it settled. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:30, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Kevin Hays (speedsolver) AFC

I found this AFC a few days ago and noticed the username was the same as the article name, and the only other edits are on pages related to cubing (i.e. speedsolving/solving). This makes it quite reasonable to assume the person making the article is the same as the subject of it. I don't really care much about Wikipedia rules (I am a cuber who occasionally visits Wikipedia, not the other way around), so I just left him a message on his talk page notifying him of the rule against creating articles about oneself in case he was not aware. He then deleted my message which was quite annoying and why I am bringing it up here. I'm not really bothered if anything is or isn't done, I just wanted to inform you of it. |Randomno| WP 08:55, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the alert. What I will do is add the COI tag to the article. You are allowed to write about yourself, it's not banned, just discouraged. WP:Autobiography. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:57, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NIST image copyright

Hi! I am working on my Regional Geology Wiki assignments (User:Jjyyu8/sandbox) and would like to insert an image I found from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) (Image: http://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/special/spray-combust/ftir.html). I am not so sure what I should do to obtain the Licensing from NIST. It seems to be in the public domain of the US but how can I can the Permission label if I want to upload it to Wikimedia commons?

Thanks and looking forward to your response. Jennifer Yu —Preceding undated comment added 11:32, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you use the commons wizard, it will ask if this is your work, You click others, then you will see an option to say public domain work of the US government. Pick that option. Give the link back to to the page and image. However the web site says this: "© 2016 by the U.S. Secretary of Commerce on behalf of the United States of America. All rights reserved." Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:37, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Graeme I am 11lawpt1 and one of my images of the sandbox was just deleted. The reason for deletion was due to possible copyright violation. However I was given the permission to edit and utilize the image on my page by the author of the paper, is it still forbidden on wikipedia under such circumstances? —Preceding undated comment added 10:30, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello Graeme This is 11lawpt1. So if the author sends an email to [e-mail] along with the original image, clearly giving out the consent for the CC-BY-SA-4.0 license, then I'll be able to use the said image? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 11lawpt1 (talk • contribs) 11:04, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Hey offering you a pre congrats on your soon to be 10,000th block. It is a huge milestone for admins to reach the 10,000 block marker. Though you have a long way to get to 100,000. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.0.77.134 (talk) 17:11, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Graeme this is 11lawpt1, can you please convert my sandbox to a live page? The following is a link to my sandbox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:11lawpt1/Project16Sandbox

@11lawpt1:  Done I have moved it to Pre-collisional Himalaya. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:28, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Trouble with Saving changes

Hi Graeme, it's Beth from HKU (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:EHitchcock/sandbox). I hope I am posting in the correct place to contact you! I am having troubles saving my page. I have made some updates to it and it says there is an unknown error when I try to select 'save chnages'. Previously it said 'docserver-http:HTTP 404'. I don't know if there is a way of correcting this or if I just have to press x and redo the changes I have just made. I want to be sure this doesn't happen again because it is very time-consuming having to redo the work. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EHitchcock (talk • contribs) 04:35, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi Graeme Bartlett.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Review needs your help

Hi Graeme Bartlett,

As an AfC reviewer you're probably aware that a new user right has been created for patrolling new pages (you might even have been granted the right already, and admins have it automatically).

Since July there has been a very serious backlog at Special:NewPagesFeed of over 14,000 pages, by far the worst since 2011, and we need an all out drive to get this back down to just a few hundred that can be easily maintained in the future. Unlike AfC, these pages are already in mainspace, and the thought of what might be there is quite scary. There are also many good faith article creators who need a simple, gentle push to the Tea House or their pages converted to Draft rather than being deleted.

Although New Page Reviewing can occasionally be somewhat more challenging than AfC, the criteria for obtaining the right are roughly the same. The Page Curation tool is even easier to use than the Helper Script, so it's likely that most AfC reviewers already have more than enough knowledge for the task of New Page Review.

It is hoped that AfC reviewers will apply for this right at WP:PERM and lend a hand. You'll need to have read the page at WP:NPR and the new tutorial.

(Sent to all active AfC reviewers) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:33, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Grandfathered list

Hi Graeme. I was rather disjointed several days ago by the comments of one user who inferred/implied (or so I understood it) that my work on this NPP user right roll out was no longer required. I therefore abandoned the work of according rights to the grandfather list and you kindly took the relay. I've noticed more by coincidence than design that those who were grandfathered don't appear to been notified yet. In which case, it would be understadable as it was my original intention to complete the grandfathering in one session then notify them all by a mass message - the same template that is sent as a notification to all newly created rights holders. Could you let me know to the best of your knowledge if all the grandfathering is now complete, and if so, which is the master list? (pinging xaosflux to keep him in the loop). Many thanks, --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:02, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I added all the remaining people on Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers/List4, and then removed the entries that I had granted the right to. Cenarium had done similar deletion of those grannted. But Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers/List3 accorded is not fully done. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:47, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List 3 is ok.I can get a mailing list made from that. List 4 is more complicated - because the entries were simply deleted after being processed, there's no knowing what the list was (except for it status at creation) and who was actually accorded the right and who wasn't. I could do it manually by opening all their user pages, then opening their rights changes log, and checking. But I don't have two hours to spare. Maybe you know of some regex or something that can piece it all together again. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:42, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You will find that everyone apart from KTR on list4 was given access. I only deleted entries that I provided the bit to. I have now been through list3 fully. All the remaining entries were grandfathered from list4. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:50, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Live

Hello Graeme, I am trying to make my page go live but I can't seem to work out how to do it. Could you help please. Thank you for your help on saving. I did not manage to resolve the problem but copied what I had done with my corrections and it seems to be working fine now. Thanks. Beth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EHitchcock (talk • contribs) 08:25, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@EHitchcock: moved. It is complaining about one reference still. See Geological history of Borneo. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:07, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New page

Hi Grame, I am Christy (User:Christyyc) Could you help on making my page live? This is the link of my sandbox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Christyyc/sandbox Thanks a lot for your help. Christyyc (talk) 16:54, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• @Christy: Your page is now moved to Okavango Dyke Swarm. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:36, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki page on Live

Hi Grame, I am Jupiter (User:jupmira104) in the regional class, doing the wiki assignment. Could you help on making my page live? This is the link of my sandbox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jupmira104/inclasssandbox Thank you so much!:). jupmira104 (talk) 18:42, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• @Jupmira104: I have moved your page to Geological mapping of Venus. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:35, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox go live

Hello Graeme, may I ask for your help to make my sandbox live? It is the assignment of the Regional Geology class. The link is:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Manngaa_Jenny/paleostresssandbox

Thanks a lot!Manngaa Jenny (talk) 01:32, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• @Manngaa Jenny: Your page is live at Paleostress inversion.

Wiki Page Go Live

Dear Graeme,

Could you help check if my wiki page has gone live or not? Thanks!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Geological_framework_of_Iceland

Regards, Ron — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronlau817 (talk • contribs) 01:44, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• @Ronlau817: the page is live at Geological framework of Iceland. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:25, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Graeme,

Could you help change my page topic from Geological framework of iceland to Geological Deformation of Iceland?

Thanks!

Regards, Ron — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronlau817 (talk • contribs) 04:23, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ronlau817: no problems, I have moved this to Geological deformation of Iceland. Note that this page has far more on it than Geology of Iceland, so perhaps your page can replace that. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:29, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Page Go Live

Dear Graeme,

We are stduents from Regional Geology Class. Could you please help us check whether these two wiki pages have gone live or not? Thanks!

Belows are the links:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palaeozoic-Mesozoic_Lesser_Himalayan_Strata

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

@yuen919

Best regards, Tanya and Roberta

@Yuen919: Tanya and Roberta, These are both live articles. I am going through now and moving those others requested. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:34, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki go live

Hi Graeme! I am also a student from regional geologyy class. Could you please check if my wiki page has gone live or not? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application_of_Fourier_Transform_Infrared_Spectroscopy_in_Geology

Regards & Thanks, Jennifer Jjyyu8 —Preceding undated comment added 02:39, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) HiJiyyu8. Yes, the article is "live" so to speak. However, please try and understand that it is not really "your page" in the sense that you own it. I have done some minor clean up per WP:REFPUNCT, but the article still needs some categories. I also noticed while looking at the article that different citation markups were being used; in some places citation templates were used, while in others it was an older, more basic style. There is nothing technically wrong with this as long as the over formatting is consistent per WP:CITEVAR, but it is a little unusual for the same editor to use multiple styles since most people typically have one style they prefer. Did you, by chance, copy and paste some content from other articles into your draft? This would explain the different methods. Anyway, you can settle on one preferred style/method for all the citations if you like. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:14, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jiyyu8: Why did you blank Application of Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy in Geology? We don't typically blank articles like you did unless there's a really good policy-based reason for doing so. Instead, we try to improve on what is there and fix any problems that we can fix. Wikipedia is a collaborative editing project where articles are improved slowly over time by various editors. Once you add something to the article namespace, it's there for anyone anywhere in the world to edit at anytime. So, if you cannot fix something, it's possible that someone else can. Articles tend to only be deleted when it's absolutely certain that they cannot be fixed. Since you were pretty much the only editor to contribute to the article, you can tag it for speedy deletion if you wish by following the instructions in WP:G7; otherwise, you need to be pretty careful when doing what you did and instead should ask for assistance at the Wikipedia Teahouse or Wikipedia:Help desk first. It also looks like you've moved the content back to User:Jjyyu8/sandbox by a copy-and-paste move. This is not really how this thing is done because it can create problems related to the article's edit history. It might be a good idea for you to refrain from any future page moves and ask for assistance first, so that you don't unintentionally create problems which an administrator will have to fix. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:33, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Please ignore the previous link. Could you help me to make the sandbox below go live? Thanks:) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jjyyu8/sandbox

Jennifer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjyyu8 (talk • contribs) 04:20, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jjyyu8: I think it might be a good idea to wait until Graeme or another administrator gets a chance to look at this a sort out whatever needs to be sorted out. Trying to add the same content to the mainspace is only likely going to further exacerbate the situation and create more things to clean up. In the meantime, you can take the Wikipedia adventure if you haven't already done so, or simply go try and improve some other articles which need fixing. Wikipedia has over 5,000,000 articles and there's pretty much a way that each and every one of them can be improved in some way. One way to contribute to Wikipedia is to go around from article and article and make little improvements. Finally, please try to always remember to properly sign your talk page posts, so that a WP:BOT does not have to come around and do it for you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:42, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marchjuly! Thank you very much for your time in giving helpful feedback. It's my first time using Wikipedia editing. I am truly sorry for causing these problems. Jjyyu8 (talk) 05:34, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It looks OK now. I have moved the talk, redirected the draft, and added some categories. The idea was not to use AFC process! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:41, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Graeme Bartlett: Thanks for taking a look and sorting things out. @Jjyuu8: Don't worry about it. Mistakes are what makes Wikipedia go because there would be nothing to do if articles were perfect from the start. You should consider joining WP:GEOLOGY. They probably would be happy to have an editor such as yourself helping out with things over there. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:13, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for all the troubles! Thank you so much! Jjyyu8 (talk) 07:01, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki go live

Hi Graeme,

I am Skylar form the regional geology class. Might I ask for your help in making my page go live? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SkylYip/inclass16sand

Great thanks, SkylYip (talk) 02:42, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• @SkylYip: The page is live at Monazite geochronology. We have lost the talk page with the reviews though! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:23, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki go live

Hi Graeme, I am Wayne and would need your help to let the wiki draft goes live.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Consequencewayne/sandbox

thank you!!! Consequencewayne (talk) 05:35, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• @Consequencewayne: I have moved your page to Geological history of the Precordillera Terrane as you are talking about more than just drifting. Perhaps it should completely take over the Precordillera Terrane page, as it is much better. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:06, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme,

This is 11lawpt1, and for the gif 'Tectonic Evolution of the Accreted Terrane Model, Grey= Oceanic Plate, Blue= Lesser Himalaya, Pink= Greater Himalaya, Green= Tethyan Himalaya' on my Pre-collisional Himalaya page, I have uploaded a new version of it with an additional frame, but it seems like it is not displaying correctly. Can you help me check?

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 11lawpt1 (talk • contribs) 18:16, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@11lawpt1: It looks OK to me, I assume that the new frame has the green bit added and the sutures labelled. Perhaps you had a caching issue. Though I would make the timing slower particularly on the final frame as it is the most complex, and then it gives the viewer time to read the labels. Also it is a good idea to add your talk message to the bottom of the page, then I can find it quicker! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:57, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki go live Jeffrey

Hi Graeme, This is Jeffreyfung from regional geology class and I'm writing to see if you can check if my page has gone live or not. Title of my wiki article: 3D Fold Evolution. Thank you for the help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffreyfung (talk • contribs) 06:32, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• @Jeffreyfung: yes your page is live. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:04, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! -Jeffrey — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffreyfung (talk • contribs) 16:13, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WIki go live Lydia

Hi Graeme, I am Lydia Yip from Alex Webb's Regional Geology course. I am waiting for review of my page. Can you help my page to go live please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lydia yip (talk • contribs) 07:02, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• @Lydia yip: Hi Lydia, you are the last to ask, and I was wondering if you were absent today or some other situation. We were not planning for any more AFC review, as it would slow you down too much. But I have moved your page to Huangling Complex. It is live. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:10, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free images

Hi Graeme Bartlett. It seems I stumbled in upon some kind of school project you are a part off. I apologize it I was clumsily stepping on toes or may have discouraged some of these students. I think File:X-ray map of U in monazite.png was uploaded by one of your students. It's licensed as non-free which means per WP:NFCC#9 that it should only be used in the article namespace and not in a sandbox. Normally, I remove such images, but figure you might want to do it this time. The file has has a couple of non-free revisions which need to be removed per WP:F5. Since you are an admin, perhaps you can delete them. You might also want to mention that essentially separate image files should be uploaded separately whenever possible and not as updated versions. A source url is provided for the file, but I cannot find the image(s) at all on that webpage; it would make copyright verification a little easier if there was a direct link to the image file.

Finally, and I just feel I should ask, but have your students checked Commons or other places for freely licensed images. There's c:Category:Monazite and if any of these files can be used instead of non-free content, then they should per WP:NFCC#1. There are currently about 8 or 9 non-free images being used in Monazite geochronology. Whether that is OK per WP:NFCC#3 may be open to interpretation, but the I think some might feel too many non-free images tends to indicate decorative use. File:Monazite dating age histogram.png, for example, looks like it fails NFCC#1. Adding a non-free use rationale means the file is OK per WP:F6, but does not necessarily mean it satisfies WP:NFCCP. So, if might help if you're students can beef of the rationales a bit so that the connection between image and content is better established. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:42, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for spotting this one. I had already found some other images lifted out of journals, perhaps with permission for Wikipedia only. I will give it the chop. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:44, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Marchjuly: Hi Marchjuly. Thanks for the detailed explanation for your concern. I think in this case, WP:NFCC#9 and WP:F5 both serve a rationale that non-free images that are not used in any articles should be removed. I have been aware of this rule as I was trying to upload this images a couple of weeks before. The article I am working on will go live these few days. I re-uploaded this image yesterday to get ready for this upcoming article. It provides a reasonable exception of the non-free use of this image per WP:F5. I don't understand the reason of uploading this image separately as there are just some extra components added on the previous version. Grateful if you can explain a bit further. I am providing the source of the online version of the journal where I directly extracted those images, yet I don't have a direct URL linking to the image.

I have searched Commons for any useful freely licensed images, yet most of them are photos of big crystals that are not very useful for my topic. I agree with you the misuse of File:Monazite dating age histogram.png. However, as mentioned in the article, the uses of File:X-ray map of U in monazite.png and File:X-ray map of Th in monazite.png are coupled together, and I think there is no free equivalence of any one of them. I am new to Wikipedia editing. Happy to learn if you can help pointing out the mistakes. Thanks.SkylYip (talk) 10:35, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@SkylYip: This is not just Wikipedia, but will apply to any publication. Replaceable does not only mean that you can find an image already there, but whether you could make a new image. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:02, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Reviewer request overlooked

| Hi there, @Graeme Bartlett: I've added my request for New Page Reviewer and after some time, I believe it was overlooked by Kudpung. Could you take a look at it if you have the time? CyanoTex (talk) 08:39, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I looked but you have little recent experience, so you need to build this up. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:20, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User en-0

Hi there,

I see you restored this category about a year ago, citing "Requested at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals) by Nyttend" as the restoration reasoning. After some searching in the archives, I believe I found the related discussion: link.

While reading over that, I didn't see anything talking about this category. Could you point me to what from that discussion drew you to restore this? As the deletion log indicates, there was a unanimous CfD resulting in deleting this category, and none of the rationale has changed since that discussion. Furthermore, there is extensive, sound precedent for deleting all 0-level categories - we don't categorize people by something they don't do (or in this case, don't speak). I would ask that you reverse your restoration of this category and honor the still sound past CfD decision. Thanks, VegaDark (talk) 09:56, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This conversation that you found was a long time before the restoral, so I do not think it had anything to do with it. It may represent Nyttend's views, but was not a request to have this back. That debate in CFD was so long ago, 9 years, that it is certainly not going to reflect the users around today or consensus. The category has a fair number of pages in it, so several people may think it is worthwhile. It is not an article category, but instead a way to identify users. So therefore I will not be unilaterally deleting it. Instead you may start a new CFD. There could be a serious problem for the users in it as they claim not to know English. So you may be getting a very biased input if they cannot participate. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:47, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're right about the discussion, after further searching apparently it was again discussed here. I think it was a mistake for that discussion to occur there and not deletion review - far less pairs of eyes reached that discussion than would have on deletion review, and also brings up whether process was properly followed to restore this category. It's disheartening to see a small side conversation overturn a well-participated CfD where absolutely none of the rationale behind deletion has changed, and the reasons for deletion have been reinforced in multiple CfD decisions since - it's irrelevant whether the deletion occurred 10 days ago or 10 years ago if no new information or rationale has come to light. Of course consensus can change, but the user requesting restoration had no new arguments or evidence that it had other than their own personal opinion on the category (which I would submit was based on flawed reasoning, but that's another conversation). I'll be bringing the category to CfD shortly, although I believe that this sets a bad precedent that it's okay to allow re-creation of previously deleted content and force a new discussion even when no new arguments have been presented (and the discussion for allowing it back occurred at an inappropriate venue). VegaDark (talk) 21:06, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Graeme Bartlett. You have new messages at Kudpung's talk page.
Message added 01:35, 21 November 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Talk:Application of Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy in Geology

Hi again Graeme Bartlett. I've been reading some of the comments on Talk:Application of Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy in Geology and am wondering if some of the students you are helping are aware of WP:OWN. The article has already been added to the mainspace, so it's not really one individual's page per se. So, if another student feels that there are improvements to be made, then they should just be bold and make them. They understand that anyone, not just the people in their class, can edit the page, right? Maybe they should directing their comments more to the community as a whole than the article's creator. I was going to post something along these lines on that talk page, but I'm not sure how much the students understand about Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:30, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They may not be aware. Perhaps I should post a note. However the reviews would be happening as that would be a course requirement. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:34, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK Graeme. As long as they realize that some of the suggestions they are making can be made by any editor and not just the article's creator, there should be no problems. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:03, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use policy

Hi Graema, I am a student from the regional geology class. I noticed that you have removed a few images appeared in the article monazite geochronology according to non-free policy. Might I know in detail which part of the policy do those images violate? I have asked for the permission of using those images in Wikipedia from the publisher. I read the non-free policy but still I am not very clear about that. Could you help explaining this case a bit further? Or do you have any suggestions to illustrate the content in the article if those images cannot be used? Thank you so much. SkylYip (talk) 17:01, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Graeme Bartlett. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Graeme Bartlett. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

John Hassard

Thanks for kicking in on the editing. I'm going to start looking for better sources for the content and figuring out where to put the inline citations... and let you do your thing in the meantime.--CaroleHenson (talk) 01:03, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@CaroleHenson: I am moving on to other articles now, but you can itallicise the books too if you want. Hopefully no more edit conflict Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:05, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/PSLV-C5

Graeme Bartlett, I was wondering whether you'd be willing to return to this nomination to continue your review now that a new hook has finally been proposed. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:15, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 27 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the List of rallies for the Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016 page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

LinkNow Media deletion

Hi there. You deleted the LinkNow Media page a few months ago. I'd like to recreate the page with a few more sources that I think better demonstrate the company's notability. Should I just recreate the page and let people evaluate the notability then, or would you like to see the new sources first? Lauchlin MacDonald (talk) 17:31, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Lauchlin MacDonald: Since you have a disclosed COI, I suggest that you start it off in a draft at Draft:LinkNow Media and then use the WP:AFC process to get it into article space. If you want I can restore your earlier work to this draft. Do you want to do that? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:10, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Graeme Bartlett: Yes, please! As you can probably tell, I'm not the most experienced Wikipedia editor, and I want to make sure I'm doing everything according to the rules. Thanks for your suggestion! Lauchlin MacDonald (talk) 21:17, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Lauchlin MacDonald: the page is now at Draft:LinkNow Media Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:52, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bodhtree

Because you participated in the previous deletion discussion for Bodhtree, I wanted to make sure you were aware of the renewed one. agtx 17:53, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I had created a new sandbox for the UV filters article to edit it and adjust the errors that need to be fixed .Then , after editing it i moved it to replace the old one with the errors . However, my new fixed one was removed with all my edits and i am left with the old one . i am the same person who was working on the article since september. i meant to replace he old one with the new one without all citation , no grammatical errors or copyright. So please let me know why my edited page was deleted and if i can recover it as i was editing it and working on a project and now i lost all my edits and left with the old one with errors.--Gabdal1 (talk) 16:56, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Thank you .[reply]

Hi Graeme Bartlett -- I was a Talk page stalker here and I butted in trying to respond to this, at User talk:Gabdal1#Your contributed article, UV filters and their photodegradates, metabolites and disinfection by-products in the aquatic environment. However I was mistaken about dates and about who deleted the version that Gabdal1 inquires about. Perhaps you could follow up there, if you can fix this? I do think the editor Gabdal1 should have access to the deleted version (and perhaps so should others) so that whatever problems are in the version can be explained. TIA, and sorry if I confused matters. --doncram 17:36, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Gabdal1: It looks like you found the page at UV filters in the history and undid my conversion to a redirect. A permalink to your last edit is at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=UV_filters&oldid=752504386 . I did not delete the page. However as it stands it is very similar to the UV filter page. What should have happened is that you edit UV filter page to add your new text. You can still do that. It will be confusing to have two articles on the same topic with similar names. Are you from the LSU environmental chemistry class? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:22, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, i would like to clarify that what i intended to do is to fix the errors in the sandbox and then replace the old one with the new corrected one. It seems that i did something wrong. yes, i am LSU environmental chemistry course student.--Gabdal1 (talk) 01:12, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Gabdal1: I have added you to a list where we are keeping track of what your class does, so that we can get the best outcome from the work that was performed for Wikipedia. Anyway your page is no longer a sandbox, but appears as an article called UV filters. You can still edit that, but I am recommending that if you want to change the UV filter article you copy your new version, edit the old UV filter page, replace the content by you new draft and then save. That will merge the content and retain copyright attribution for your changes. The Wikipedia community do not want to have two different pages on the same topic, so either you merge it together, or someone else does it for you, or we can move the page that you wrote back to a sandbox. When does your work all need to be completed by? We want to give you enough time, but don't want to leave problems for too much later. The something wrong is the "title" of the page. We use the singular for the name of the topic, for example "UV filter". Duplication is the other issue that is sorted out by merging the content. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:24, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your patience and understanding.My work should be completed by the next week, so as soon as i finish my finals i will do the merging to save the edits and avoid duplication. Thank you again for your help. Gabdal1 (talk) 18:44, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gabdal1. Can you explain why Wikipedia needs two articles such as UV filter and UV filters which appear to be about the same subject. As Graeme mentioned above, if you want to improve the "UV filter", you should do so by directing editing that article. I understand you are probably doing this as part of a school project, but your edits are creating a big mess that others are going to have to clean up. It's nice to see young people such as yourself interested in Wikipedia, and Wikipedia really wants you to be here to help improve the encyclopedia. You need to try and edit in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines; otherwise, what you're doing is going to eventually seen as disruptive. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:21, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that this wrong. The issue is that it was a mistake from me while moving my edits to the old existing article.I would be happy to fix my error and delete it if i can.Thank you --Gabdal1 (talk) 01:33, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Making mistakes in good faith is part of editing on Wikipedia so no experienced editor is likely to jump all over you for doing so. Repeating mistakes after you've been informed about them is a little bit different and makes it seem as if you're not listening to what others are saying. Graeme changed UV filters to a redirect with this edit and posted an explanation as to why he did so in his edit sum and above, but you undid that edit for some reason. I then changed it back to a redirect with this edit and also posted an explanation in my edit sum and above, but once again you undid the redirect. I understand you are doing this as part of a school project, but you need to try and understand all of us are expected to edit in accordance with Wikipedia's relevant policies and guidelines for the benefit of Wikipedia as a whole, and not for own on particular self interests. So, if you continue to edit this way, you're going to start having problems with other editors who might not realize you are working on something for school. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:53, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Graeme Bartlett: I know you're trying to help these students out, but perhaps you might (if possible) ask their teacher(s) to better explain Wikipedia to them. Duplicates of existing articles run the risk of getting turned into redirects at the very least, but may also get tagged for speedy per WP:A10. Also, copying and pasting content from other Wikipedia articles can be problematic per WP:CWW and might even be considered a form of plagiarism, especially if these students are being graded for their work. If these students are editing as part of a class project, then it might be best for them to keep their work as a userspace draft (not something in the main draftspace) at least until it is reviewed/graded by their teacher(s) because then others will tend to leave it alone. I'm not sure if they fully realize that anything added to the mainspace can be edited by others at any time and they have no editorial control per se over the article other than what is given to all editors by relevant policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:39, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Marchjuly: User:Helaine (Wiki Ed) is the person trying to sort this out with the instructor. At this place: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry#Louisiana State University the Chemistry project is tracking the pages, and will clean up any problems, and save useful work once the activity dies down. But that project is interested mostly in the content rather than the people. You may wish to make comments about what to do in the comments column. Some pages had already gone to AFD, on the case discussed here redirected. AFAIK Gabdal1 is the only person from the class who is talking. If you look what they are doing, they have also added text to the UV filter page like we requested. I think Wikipedia is being improved. I have actually been helping out another class in Hong Kong, where the main problem was copying pictures, but the articles are pretty well written and useful. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:08, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I posted a comment at the WikiProject Chemistry page. FWIW, I'm not trying to bite any of these students and glad that they are trying to contribute positively; however, it seems from looking at a page like Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/FSW State College/ENC 1102 (Fall 2016) that some of these instructors should themselves probably take the WP:ADVENTURE and read WP:YFA so they can better explain what Wikipedia is about to their students. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:01, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I stumbled across UV filters while disambiguating links to DAB pages and set it back to being a redirect before seeing the context here. Sorry if my edit causes any additional chaos, although honestly I think it's better to let the student try to merge changes from a historical revision of the page rather than maintain a duplicate until their work is finished. Just my two cents, and I won't further edit the page if my change is reverted. For what it's worth I was once involved in a similar project helping students who weren't native English speakers edit the wiki and I understand how trying it can be for students and helpers alike. Good luck! -- Fyrael (talk) 18:50, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Ed Rush

Graeme Bartlett, I was wondering whether you'd be willing to take another look at this nomination now that a new hook has been proposed. Since you reviewed it earlier, you'll know whether your issues with it have been satisfactorily addressed. Many thanks either way. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:56, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

suggestion to avoid trolls ?

hi Graeme, I was working on page review backlog, and in that process I flagged two list articles National Register of Historic Places listings in Union County, New Mexico , and National Register of Historic Places listings in Curry County, New Mexico . The editor seemed grossly annoyed and started writing all kind of nuisance on my talk page as well as in the reverts he did on the article. I found the person politically inclined by his last message as well. I would like to keep my promise of reducing backlog and avoid such deterrents. Can you please suggest best way to handle it when you get time. Devopam (talk) 09:23, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Devopam: none of the people are trolls. See meta:What is a troll? for what is a troll. Instead you came across someone upset by the appearance of tags. You must admit that tags do not looks good, so you hope that the problem that the tag notes is addressed soon, and then they can be removed. In the case you listed, it looks like the citation style is acceptable for this kind of article. So I suggest that you find out if it is, perhaps by talking to user talk:TheCatalyst31. The normal advice to follow is WP:BRD. In this case you boldly add a tag, someone reverts, and the next step is to discuss, either on user's talk page or the article talk page. Just ignore the suggestion made on your talk page and move on. The suggestion is taking things to extreme, and they don't seriously want you to do that! Before mass tagging or mass changing articles, discussion should take place as it is sure to be controversial. Have a cup of tea, take a deep breath, and when you are relaxed start some different Wikipedia work. Perhaps you can check the articles with prod on them to see if they should be deleted or not. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:49, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Graeme Bartlett:, thanks for the suggestion to keep away for some time. I don't like edit wars at all, hence didn't revert their change. Asked him to assess and revert , instead got an elaborate writeup. I have marked the pages un-reviewed as well so that someone else can take them up. I was rattled by the Trump remark very much. Devopam (talk) 11:11, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Donald Trump remark is just to tease you. Another remark not to take seriously. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:27, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The curator toolbar

Hi Graeme - since being granted Reviewer rights I have been busy making use of the awesome Curator's toolbar, and have done a lot of good with it. When I dismiss it from a page though, I can't find how to get it back. Please let me know how. Thanks - Mark^Dask 18:08, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Markdask: Sometimes I see a "Curate this article" link over on the right. When I click that it reappears. Old articles don't get this link. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:54, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Graeme - all sorted. Mark^Dask 04:53, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

?

this is very hard to understand. Jytdog (talk) 22:22, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like a notable topic even if there are problems. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:24, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying!

Autism is a topic with important public health consequences where, due to the desperation some parents feel, there is tons of woo on the internet and tons of people trying to take advantage of that desperation. There was only one MEDRS source in the draft and there were problems even with it. Almost all the sources came from two guys (always a bad sign) who also happened to have filed a patent application on methods to diagnose autism and other stuff based on detecting those folate receptor autoantibodies. In my view that article was not even close to ready to move into main space - it didn't summarize accepted knowledge, which is what articles do per the policy, WP:NOTEVERYTHING.

Sometimes folks reviewing drafts about health bring them to WT:MED and ask for input; would you please consider doing that in the future? Jytdog (talk) 00:02, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected

AfC Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Geological deformation of Iceland

Hello! Your submission of Geological deformation of Iceland at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 01:30, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Prod of 'Top 50 Influential Women in Engineering'

About your prod of Top 50 Influential Women in Engineering, the creator of the list declared a potential COI here. That is presumably the same "Dawn Bonfield MBE, Chief Executive of the Women's Engineering Society", so she could be asked about the copyright issues. Would you be willing to do that? See also the discussion here. If you know more about this, you may want to comment there as well. Carcharoth (talk) 15:56, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme, I am new to wikipedia and really struggling to know how to even write a reply on your talk page - is this the way, I wonder, let alone know how to respond to your question about copyright violation. I have been away for the weekend and have not been able to research this in more detail, but would be sad if the page got deleted before I had chance to fix the issues. I am part of the team working to get more women listed on wikipedia and this page is my contribution to encouraging all 50 of these influential women to be included. Any help you can give me with the actual editing of the page so that it become compliant would be appreciated. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dawnbonfield (talk • contribs) 15:33, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Commonwealth Freedom of Movement Organisation logo.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:35, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

hmm

having worked in seismic crews I cannot believe how pathetic our info on wp is re oil and gas in oz. oh well thems the breaks JarrahTree 23:57, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What other oil fields are there in Australia? Halibut Oil Field was written by a student as a class exercise. They were writing about oil fields all over the world. We could suggest topics to that class for next year! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:01, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

hahaha i can tell youre a hard rock man - problem - each sedimentary basin in Australia as oil and gas shows or fields - when i re-processed old shell data for the officer basin in a previous lifetime tell tale formations showed but other contributory factors were missing for adequate traps - why there was/is even a weirdo millionaire funding a very odd research project into oil gas under tasmania proper  :) - to answer your question every basin has 'shows' - the actual fields see http://www.ga.gov.au/scientific-topics/energy/resources/petroleum-resources/oil - the map with grey shading - and the tell tale text Most of Australia’s known remaining oil resources are condensate and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) associated with giant offshore gas fields in the Browse, Carnarvon and Bonaparte basins. In addition oil resources are identified in the Perth, Canning, Amadeus, Cooper/Eromanga, Bowen/Surat, Otway, Bass and Gippsland basins. - wp has hardly anything on all of that... JarrahTree 00:12, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah WP coverage of geology is pretty patchy and mostly lacking any detail. We could do with articles on more basins. But I have now found Category:Oil fields of Australia Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:53, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NPP tagging Russell Cecchini with BLPPROD

Hi there. You tagged Russell Cecchini with BLPPROD. However, in the time that it would have took me to tag it, I popped the name into Google, and the first result was the official Canadian Paralympics Committee page on the athlete, which confirmed his awards. I have added the source. Next time, before tagging, I ask that you pop the name into Google to check. Thanks, Ramaksoud2000 ^(Talk to me) 09:09, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the page was so poorly written, that it may as well start from scratch. I have tagged a couple like that recently. Thanks for improving it! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:36, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Revdel of copyvio

Do you mind revdeling Special:Diff/754406042 as it is a copyvio of http://www.buzzen.com/user/QuzealanGlobal/id/3246/blog.html? Zupotachyon Ping me (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:02, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Zupotachyon: hidden. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:58, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a bunch. Zupotachyon Ping me (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:59, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mintlinux listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mintlinux. Since you had some involvement with the Mintlinux redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ^(talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:24, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Hello! Your submission of Subduction polarity reversal at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! North America^1000 20:58, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Graeme Bartlett. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Boron monofluoride monoxide.
Message added 02:11, 21 December 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

North America^1000 02:11, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas, my friend. May this find you in good health, good spirits, good company, and good finances. If any of these be missing, may God see fit to restore you in good time. EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits)

regarding the page Priya Singh Paul

This page does not violate any copyrights. the website www.priyasinghpaul.com belongs to the person Priya Singh Paul who has full rights over the contents posted in her wiki page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thinking.guru (talk • contribs) 12:00, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That user User:Priya Singh Paul may be the same person as the subject of the article and have the rights to reproduce the page, but the content was inserted by you User:Thinking.guru who has no rights proven to that content. In any case the material was unsuitably promotional. AND IT IS NOW DELETED. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:18, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Hello! Your submission of Okavango Dyke Swarm at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! North America^1000 16:45, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Hello! Your submission of Huangling Complex at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! North America^1000 16:50, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Hello! Your submission of Monazite geochronology at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! North America^1000 16:56, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Ed Rush redux

Graeme Bartlett, it looks like yorkshiresky won't be able to make all the changes you requested, and is prepared to withdraw the nomination if no one else can take care of them. If you aren't able to or don't wish to, I can't imagine that anyone else would come around, so I'll let you reply and/or close it. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:27, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

I share your concern about the notability of National Concrete Masonry Association. I reluctantly created the article, after I kept seeing "NCMA" in numerous technical discussions, but could not find a definition in Wikipedia. After much Google searching, I finally tied NCMA to the National Concrete Masonry Association.

I found many references to "National Concrete Masonry Association," mainly in the form of citations to their many publications. I have found the organization mentioned in passing, but never covered in depth as required by the MOS. Also the organization is mentioned in at least two Wikipedia biographies, which I have since linked to my article. After seeing your tag, I cited "Concrete construction engineering handbook," published by CRC, because it references National Concrete Masonry Association publications, even though it does not discuss the organization in depth. "Landscape Architectural Graphic Standards" published by Wiley is another example.

I feel frustrated, because the organization is widely mentioned, yet does not have in depth coverage. I would appreciate any suggestions that you might have. Thanks for being an administrator and for maintaining the quality of Wikipedia. I will watch this spot, in case you respond. Comfr (talk) 04:17, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Lesser Himalayan Strata

Hello! Your submission of Lesser Himalayan Strata at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! SpinningSpark 19:19, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Tectonic evolution of the Aravalli Mountains

On 26 December 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tectonic evolution of the Aravalli Mountains, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the Aravalli Mountains contain intensely deformed rocks? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tectonic evolution of the Aravalli Mountains. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:01, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

4944 page views

Merry, merry!

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:13, 26 December 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Reference errors on 26 December

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Lesser Himalayan Strata page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Vice News Tonight

Graeme Bartlett, have your concerns been adequately addressed here? Please stop by when you can. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:33, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Okavango Dyke Swarm

Hello! Your submission of Okavango Dyke Swarm at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:22, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake?

diff He died in 1976. Adam9007 (talk) 01:32, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

True! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:51, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Victorian Railways E type carriages

Happy to rewrite the last bit of the Sleeping cars section if you think it's necessary. Guessing it's too close to the Newsrail article, which I can't check because I don't have that edition anymore.

The old version of the page, E type carriage, seems to have had that text in place for at least three or four years without being flagged.

Anothersignalman (talk) 23:09, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Anothersignalman: It seems to have copied material from http://www.comrails.com/sar_carriages/a0202_se.html which has a non-commecial creative commons license. (perhaps this copied E type carriage but I cannot tell which came first).

The tool I use is at https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Victorian+Railways+E+type+carriage&oldid=&action=search&use_engine=1&use_links=1&turnitin=0 it will highlight in pink. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:16, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wayback machine has the text dated 2011 at comrails[1], E type carriage history shows 2012. I'll fix it sometime in the next 24hrs. Anothersignalman (talk) 04:49, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Great!

Done. Next project is to fix up the Infoboxes, because if they're all the length of the Sleeping car entry it won't work.

1. http://web.archive.org/web/20110726072252/http://www.comrails.com/sar_carriages/a0202_se.html

New page reviewer

Hi. I'm just letting you know that I have removed User:1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR from the New Page Reviewer group. Reason: indeff blocked. If you have any questions or if you would like me to revert this action, don't hesitate to let me know. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:03, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the Priya Singh Paul page

Priya Singh Paul is a famous personality in India, the page created on her is deleted again and again. Please verify the links before deleting the page. I will make sure article will not be copied from her linkedin page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Happysoul22 (talk • contribs) 00:21, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Happysoul22: There have been several problems, and twice pages connected to the subject have been copied to make this. Also there was use of promotional language (very likely if you copy a page her publicity people wrote). Are you being paid to write this, or working for a publicity company tasked to write about this person? If so you must disclose this. Your user page is a good place. I suggest that you use WP:AFC and write your page at Draft:Priya Singh Paul, and then get it reviewed before inclusion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:46, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Graeme Bartlett: please review the Draft:Priya Singh Paul and see if everything is written following wikipedia rules or not.

• @Happysoul22: The good aspect of this draft is that there is no longer a detectable copyright infringement. However the style is unsuitable, in that it is informal and promotional sounding. This is an encyclopedia with a serious tone. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:58, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The copyright infringement still exists, since the text is the same (or almost the same) that was found in the deleted articles. The text is removed from the web (except through the Wayback Machine) but that doesn't remove the original author's copyright. Sjö (talk) 12:39, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We will see if Happysoul22 can really prove the copyright. It appears they have control of the copied web site. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:47, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) Graeme, I think there is a procedure for when somebody wants to use his or her own work on wikipedia, but I can't find it. Since you are an experienced editor, perhaps you could direct the editor(s?) of the Priya Singh Paul article to that WP page? Sjö (talk) 12:50, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Graeme Bartlett: Sir, I have deleted the website www.priyasinghpaul.com and you can see that its no more functional, now the website is in web archives, and I have no control on at, but it does not violate any copy right as the original website doesn't exist and my page and my draft has been deleted. Please restore my page.

And I am not paid to write this article at all, and this is no promotion, I have posted a lot of links to prove that she is a important person.

Happy New Year, Graeme Bartlett!

Happy New Year!

Graeme Bartlett,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Donner60 (talk) 06:21, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Foreigner-I-Want-To-Know-Wh-297484.jpg

The copyright status of this image is discussed; I invite you to comment at FFD. --George Ho (talk) 07:41, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Ecuador 2017

It is preposterous that this has to go back to AFD less than 3 days after the last AFD was closed as a clear delete. The consensus was clear from the three non-nominators- TOO Soon and questionable notability. How have those two issues changed in three days?...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 01:27, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How about converting to a redirect to Miss Ecuador? Because the page is different G4 is not appropriate. I will support keeping this as a redirect and not expanding to an article untill there are good references. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:29, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete it plus SALT it. A redirect will just be turned right back into an article. The changes bloody don't matter, another AFD is going to end in a delete and the changes didn't alter or impact the views of the three non-nominators. TOO Soon and Notability....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 01:32, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How about evident sockpuppetry at work? A first time editor who creates a new article like this is a Sonic boom case of WP:DUCK....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 01:33, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Since the first was not English, I suspect different people, but MEATPUPPETS are possible. I have made this a redirect protected for 2 months. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:52, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of documentation and sandbox subpages from deleted templates

Hey Graeme, about 30 minutes ago, you deleted the templates Vgrtbl-bl, Vgrtbl-tx, and Vgrtbl/text as a conclusion to the respective TfD entries opened by me. However, it seems like you forgot to delete the respective subpages, Template:Vgrtbl-bl/sandbox, Template:Vgrtbl-bl/doc, Template:Vgrtbl-tx/doc, and Template:Vgrtbl/text/doc. I have listed them at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 January 3 already, but figured to contact you directly on the case. If you'd be so kind, please delete those abandoned subpages and remove (or close) my respective entries at TfD. Thanks! Lordtobi (✉) 12:47, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have deleted the pages in question. Thank you! I have closed the respective TfD entries. Lordtobi (✉) 12:55, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Sukuma calendar - Deletion/Blanking

Dear Graeme Bartlett,

@Graeme Bartlett:, I am taking for granted that you deleted/blanked the said draft with a purpose. Let me know why. Are you suggesting I have got to seek a deletion review?

Please reconsider the deletion.

Thank you(Nghwaya (talk) 18:49, 4 January 2017 (UTC)).[reply]

@Nghwaya: the reason the draft was deleted was because of the MFD linked in the deletion reason Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Sukuma Calendar. Normally if an article was deleted after a debate, a draft could be allowed to address the problems. But in this case there was a debate to delete the article, and one to delete the draft. When it comes to hoaxes it is possible to have an article about the hoax, but it should not give the impression that it is true. Perhaps you are a believer, which will make it tough for writing about a point of view matching the idea of fabrication. A deletion review will be needed to progress towards having a page here. (I have had nothing to do with Draft:Sukuma calendar (2) so far, as it appears that you blanked it. This page is eligible for G7 deletion unless you put something there such as "please do not delete"). Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:26, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Graeme Bartlett:, ==Deletion review for Draft:Sukuma Calendar==

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Draft:Sukuma Calendar. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Nghwaya (talk) 17:54, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:MassMutual logo.gif

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:09, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

X2 declined

Hi Graeme, just in response to this -- yes, it was understandable. All X2s will be. If the content wasn't understandable to an English speaker we would use G1 or A2. Would you mind looking at that again? Cheers—S Marshall T/C 21:25, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The point is it better for Wikipedia to have this or not? You may also note that I also copyedited. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:28, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Boron monofluoride monoxide

On 5 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Boron monofluoride monoxide, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when the condensate of boron monofluoride monoxide is reheated, it forms a glassy, popcorn-like froth? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Boron monofluoride monoxide. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Boron monofluoride monoxide), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:01, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

6688 page views. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:32, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for

The "under construction" tag at the Turkana Basin template! -Darouet (talk) 01:19, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That was not me that put it there, I only tagged for the project. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:36, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Contested BLP PROD

I see that you restored Kiran G. Nath as a "contested PROD". However, it was deleted as PRODBLP, which, despite the confusingly similar names, is a very different process. There is no provision for "contesting" a PRODBLP except by adding reliable sources: the policy is that a BLP without sources is deleted after the time is up, without any exemptions. I will leave the article for your re-dated PRODBLP to expire, rather than deleting it on the grounds that the original PRODBLP has expired, but I thought I would let you know that, as far as I can see, what you did is not in line with policy. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 22:09, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Normally I will restore a prod BLPPROD on request and reset the timer to allow countdown to deletion again so that the requestor will add references. Looks like I missed the timer reset. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:01, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, you didn't miss the timer reset. My whole point is that restoring the article and resetting the timer is, as far as I can see, against policy. Policy is that a BLP that has been tagged with a PRODBLP tag and still has no reliable sources after a week is deleted, not that it may be deleted but it can be kept for another week if anyone doesn't like the deletion. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 09:49, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The policy is at Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Undeletion "pages deleted as a result of summary decisions and not following community discussions, undeletion may be requested at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion". These BLPPROD's fall into the "not following community discussions" group. Perhaps BLPPROD should be explicitly mentioned in this paragraph. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:00, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for pointing that out to me. I hadn't noticed those specific words, or had forgotten them. I do wonder, though, whether that really makes sense for PRODBLP. The reasons why PRODBLP was introduced were complex, with a huge amount of argument involved, so it's hard to tie everything down precisely, but the essential point was that policy was that an unsourced BLP should not be allowed to continue, but there was disagreement as to whether that should mean that they could be summarily deleted without warning or not. Letting such an unsourced BLP remain for a specific amount of time for sources to be provided was the compromise that was eventually reached, and extending that to make it indefinite (which it is if anyone can have the clock reset on request) seems to me to be contrary both to the intention of the agreement that led to that policy and to the wording of the policy itself. This seems to me to be one of the many cases when two different policies, developed independently of one another, come to be inconsistent with one another. I'll think about that. However, I do now see that there is a policy justification for your action, which previously I thought there wasn't. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 21:52, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We could add a requirement for WP:REFUND, that the requester mentions a reference. But many times the requester does not even know why it was deleted, and may not be the original author. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:59, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Lesser Himalayan Strata

On 6 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lesser Himalayan Strata, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that rocks from the Lesser Himalayan Strata show that the northern part of the Indian plate submerged in the late Cretaceous period? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lesser Himalayan Strata. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:01, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2609 page views

Hi Graeme

I saw you have moved two articles from Draft to the Mainspace; Las Pavas and La Pita, two emerald mines/mining areas in the Western Emerald Zone of the Eastern Ranges of the Andes here in Colombia. Reading the article texts, however, they didn't seem ready for publication; proof-reading was missing as many sentences were either badly translated from Spanish, not even complete, the refs were wrongly assigned, etc. I have done considerable work on Las Pavas to improve the article. I will contact the author of the articles to ask him to perform similar work on La Pita. But for you as reviewer, in the future can you proof-read and edit the article and ask the author to do the same and for other Colombian geological drafts contact me for a review/work? Thanks a lot, I see we have quite some things in common; geology and the Netherlands as obvious ones. Tisquesusa (talk) 02:01, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Molecular Hydrogen Therapy

Hello Graeme, recently, the article I was working on (Molecular Hydrogen Therapy) was moved from Template to Draft; thankyou for that. I was still learning how to use the formatting and saving features in Sandbox. I have finished the article and was wondering if you could help with publishing it. I have already moved it from draft to article but was wondering if anything additional needs to be done to make it an official Wiki entry? Thankyou in Advance. Kmharpalani (talk) 05:54, 6 January (UTC)

Texas Technology Students Association

Good morning. I saw that you deleted my article for an unambiguous copyright violation, however the material in the claim in not copyrighted and our organization makes no claim to the copyrighted nature of it. I sit on the Board of Directors for the organization and have full authority to create the wiki article for the organization. Please consider restoring it, or let me know if you have further questions. Thank you! Ethridgem (talk) 17:24, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Geology applications of Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy

On 7 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Geology applications of Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy can be used to find how much water and carbon dioxide are in melt inclusions in mineral grains? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Schwede66 00:02, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Huangling Complex

On 8 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Huangling Complex, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that dikes in the Huangling Complex show that Australia was adjacent to the South China Craton prior to 825 million years ago? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Huangling Complex. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Schwede66 00:02, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:Whincup12345

G'day Graeme, I have a problem with User:Whincup12345. This edit was to tell the user that the previous red image of the car was perfectly fine. However, he replaced back his low quality image on the next edit. To prevent an edit war from taking place, I placed a message on his talk page reminding him that Wikipedia is not his as per WP:OWN. Could you have a look at the user's contributions as I have asked him to cool down his tantrum outbursts. Loads appreciated --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 06:06, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mate.. I've changed the picture to 4 different photos! you said non of them are good enough.. Plus what's said on my talk page cannot be used against me on the FG wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whincup12345 (talk • contribs) 06:08, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Whincup12345 – the image of the white car was perfectly fine. Why did you need to change it? --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 06:12, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I thought users would like to see a very rare FG proven by Fords itself.. As seen here https://gyazo.com/07a744defca56bd44538b5019100360c What's the big deal? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whincup12345 (talk • contribs) 06:16, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The best place to talk about this is at talk:Ford Falcon (FG). Then others can join in with the discussion. Thanks for talking to each other about the issue, it is better than reverting. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:42, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thankyou so much for all your help in setting up my first Wiki Entry, "Molecular Hydrogen Therapy". Kmharpalani (talk) 15:49, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well I don't think I deserve that as I only did very minor stuff, and it may yet be savaged by WP:Medicine. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:40, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Pre-collisional Himalaya

Hello! Your submission of Pre-collisional Himalaya at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 19:13, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Caribbean

Hi, Graeme. I confess I'm mystified by your decision to keep the Miss_Caribbean_UK_2016 article as a stub, rather than merging it into Miss_Caribbean_UK. Let me quickly say that of course I won't contend the matter or take further action, since the articles are not important to me (I found them when scanning New Pages). But I'm genuinely curious about your reasoning, and almost wonder if I'm missing some important concept. My view is that article will probably remain little better than a stub for a long time to come; it will be a little bit of Wikipedia detritus, like so many others. Especially given that Wikipedia has procedures like AFC and YFA to help improve the quality of new articles, it truly seems odd to abandon essentially an orphan, when it could usefully contribute to the larger article. I even speculate that maybe the idea is not to hurt the feelings of the article creator, but I'm just grasping for an explanation with that theory. Why do you think narrowing the scope and saving an article fragment that could otherwise integrate painlessly into the larger nearly identical topic is the best course of action? DonFB (talk) 22:58, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@DonFB: The page has the potential to be a valid article with more content, even if there is nothing there yet to justify a stand alone page yet. The reason not to speedy delete is that the writer may need time to flesh it out. What I would suggest instead is to turn the page into a redirect to the section in the Miss Caribbean UK page, and the same applies to Miss Caribbean UK 2015, and Miss Caribbean UK 2014 which do not have any more than the parent article either. Many A10 candidates can be usefully changed to redirects. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:04, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. If the article is turned into a redirect, doesn't that mean all content is removed and only the redirect title remains? Not clear how one would "turn the page into a redirect" without losing the content. DonFB (talk) 23:17, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, but since all the information is at the target anyway, nothing is "lost". If the writer wants to expand on it they can do so later based on the earlier revision. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:52, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand correctly, the redirect option that you recommended would be an alternative to your first recommendation of preserving the stub and hoping people will improve it. Making a redirect from a stub needs no administrator deletion action, but would need agreement from the stub-maker (and possibly other editors), I should think. DonFB (talk) 01:04, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Mitten wir im Leben sind

Graeme Bartlett, Gerda Arendt has replied to your review, though I expect you haven't seen it (and you weren't pinged at the time). Can you please stop by and see whether she has addressed your concerns? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:58, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FoodSaver

Can I get that userfied? Valoem ^talk ^contrib 00:50, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done see User:Valoem/FoodSaver. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:14, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Kiko Insa

Hello Graeme Bartlett. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Kiko Insa, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Salvio ^Let's talk about it! 15:14, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2600:1017:B419:A570:C9C3:402D:4E8A:9554

Please block user:2600:1017:B419:A570:C9C3:402D:4E8A:9554for block evasion2600:1:9245:F7CD:A18E:4A24:618E:18DA (talk) 23:44, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:55, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	For Tireless Efforts on the Encyclopedia Jimiwriter 10:12, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of page Lukasz Plawecki

Hello Sir, You are right that I've made a copy o deleted page. But this fighter is now notable enough (gain WKN World Title in December) according to Wikipedia policy. Please give me tip how can I undelete this page. Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Łukasz Czarnowski (talk • contribs) 10:48, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Łukasz Czarnowski: I have moved this to Draft:Lukasz Plawecki to give you a chance to show this topic is notable. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:43, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Sir. I hope that I've made enought to prove that. Łukasz Czarnowski (talk) 17:25, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Okavango Dyke Swarm

On 13 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Okavango Dyke Swarm, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the Okavango Dyke Swarm formed 180 million years ago during the opening of the Indian Ocean? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Okavango Dyke Swarm. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Revdel request

I think this edit's edit summary could stand to be removed. If you agree, please remove it. Thanks. Air.light (talk) 01:08, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK it is gone. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:00, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Hello! Your submission of Geological history of Borneo at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! North America^1000 09:43, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Hello! Your submission of Paleostress inversion at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! North America^1000 09:50, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Graeme Bartlett. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Long Military Service Cross (Spain).
Message added 09:53, 14 January 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

North America^1000 09:53, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Graeme Bartlett. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Kjell Eriksson (radioman).
Message added 10:01, 14 January 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

North America^1000 10:01, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Subduction polarity reversal

On 14 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Subduction polarity reversal, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that subduction polarity reversal on either side of Taiwan causes differences in topography? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Subduction polarity reversal. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Vanamonde (talk) 12:01, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Kevin Pho

Restore please, 100% confident this will survive AfD, I believe the nomination was a mistake. Valoem ^talk ^contrib 16:41, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done by DGG and Orangemike. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:57, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Hey, Graeme Bartlett. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Lepricavark (talk) 01:14, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have been on Wikipedia 13 years, that is a long time! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:29, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Geological history of Borneo

On 17 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Geological history of Borneo, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the Crocker Fan in Borneo has the largest volume of any Paleogene deep marine sediment in a single basin in southeast Asia? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Geological history of Borneo. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

About undeleting AtHomeEditor sandbox

Hi Graeme,

I received your note about undeleting my sandbox page. I am intending to work on revising it soon.

I didn't realize you had undeleted it months ago, so I thought it was hopeless to try again--until I received a note recently about it. I am out of work so I have more time to work on it this month. Thanks, hopefully!

Athomeeditor (talk) 20:09, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

-->Dear Graeme, Thank you so much for Restoring it! I plan to work on it soon. Athomeeditor (talk) 23:19, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Revdel of copyvio

Do you mind revdel'ing Special:Diff/760548458 as it appears to be a c/p of a Seinfield episode script? Zupotachyon _{Ping me} (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:34, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

•  Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:12, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RfC Notice

There is a Request for Comment posted at Talk:New York Daily News#Request for Comment. You are being notified as a registered editor who has commented on that article's talk page or in a related move review. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:51, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Detrital zircon geochronology

On 19 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Detrital zircon geochronology, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that detrital zircon geochronology uses zirconium silicate to determine the age of sedimentary rock? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Detrital zircon geochronology. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Schwede66 00:02, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Monazite geochronology

Hello! Your submission of Monazite geochronology at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 10:42, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Pre-collisional Himalaya

Hello! Your submission of Pre-collisional Himalaya at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 14:21, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Electronic cigarette manufacturers

It is possible they may not all be manufacturing all their own products. Some may be importing products they did not make. I propose changing the cat to Category:Electronic cigarette companies or Category:Electronic cigarette brands. QuackGuru (talk) 18:44, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@QuackGuru: My original idea was for it to be manufacturers and not "brands". But I am happy with Category:Electronic cigarette companies. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:05, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Changing it to Category:Electronic cigarette companies will work for me. QuackGuru (talk) 20:09, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Geological deformation of Iceland

On 20 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Geological deformation of Iceland, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the geological deformation of Iceland is resulting in cracks opening up in the surface (example pictured)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Geological deformation of Iceland. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lake Atna assessment

I'm curious about your assessment of the Lake Atna article. What is it you feel is lacking, insufficient, broken, etc. that makes it a "start" class article? --Hammersoft (talk) 03:11, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It would almost be close to a C class. But the assessment I gave is mostly based on the size of the article. From a quarter of a screen of text it is beyond a stub, but this is about 1 screen full of text. It could easily go for DYK. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:44, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry, but I'm just not getting it. Not C class because of size? The article can't be any bigger than it already is with available information about the lake. I look at C class here and read "Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and solve cleanup problems." Ok, what cleanup problems? What gaps in content? Can you specify? Personally what I see is that, given the amount of material that is available on this subject, I see this article as being extremely complete. It's very well referenced, every bit of knowledge that is known to be fact about the lake is included in the article and referenced to appropriate sources, any gaps in the content are only because the relevant research has never been done regarding this lake. I've added appropriate images to the subject. I have a free license source map showing one of the extents of the lake, I even made a map showing relevant geographical features to give better understanding in the megafloods sections as to where geographical features exist that affected the lake. There is no getting it more complete. If there's a problem with any of the style, believe me I'm all ears. If there's something wrong about the referencing, I'm all ears. But, finding more references isn't going to happen. They don't exist. Believe me, I've looked. I've even talked with two of the researchers directly involved in the information that is available on the lake, and even they say there is a lack of research. Please, show me the way to improve this article because frankly, I'm not seeing anyway that it could be improved. At all. But, as I say, I'm all ears. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:44, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for reviewing the article I created : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Into_The_Cannibal%E2%80%99s_Pot:_Lessons_for_America_From_Post-Apartheid_South_Africa Would you do me a small favor and add the book cover to the infobox template, or at least tell me how to do it. For the life of me I can't figure it. Kc2290 (talk) 09:20, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Kc2290: First find a good image somewhere of about 300 pixels across size. Save it to your computer, then click "upload file" Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard give it the file name, and the name you want witch might be the book name followed by "cover". say it is not your own work and then find the fair use option (for book covers?). Then using the name you put it in the info box. If you point me to an online image I can do it for you. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:42, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank again. I guess this image, although not as big, would be as good as any. https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/517XC4r617L._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg Kc2290 (talk) 10:07, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The (un)deletion of User:TyEvSkyo/Particle Sphere Theory

The undeletion of my page seems to have been neglected. (It's thread is here). Since you responded to me I felt you were the best person to contact about this matter. TyEvSkyo (talk) 22:06, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@TyEvSkyo: Since this was your idea WP:Synthesis and WP:Original research, Wikipedia is not the place for this. You can try at WP:Deletion review but don't expect it back. The best you can expect is an emailed copy so that you can work on it for another publication elsewhere. You can check out Wikiversity which does accept original research writing. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:11, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How can I get a copy of the page, is there a specified process for this? Thank you.TyEvSkyo (talk) 23:17, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you enable email on your Wikipedia account, I can email you a copy. The usual mirrors do not seem to have snagged a copy of your page. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:01, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Graeme Bartlett:I have now enabled e-mail. Please e-mail me a copy. Thank you in advanced. TyEvSkyo (talk) 22:22, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Review of my page

Thank you for reviewing my new page Hari Bhimaraju and adding the biography template, much appreciated. Is there a tag I can add to a page I create to ask for a review as I created Jeff Forshaw back in December? Otherwise can I add the biography template to the talk page myself? Thanks Mramoeba (talk) 08:51, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are cetainly welcome to add the WP Biography tag yourself. @Mramoeba: You can also add tags for relevant projects too. Each project usually has a way to ask for a formal review for the project. For Jeff Forshaw you asked on the talk page there, but perhaps no one will notice. You can directly ask the Physics project for a rating at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics/Quality Control. You can add {{WP Physics|class=C|importance=}} on the talk page -- I don't know how to rate the importance, but I would assign a "C" class. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:11, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great thanks, appreciate that Mramoeba (talk) 13:54, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Do not perpetuate the edit warring at Abundance of elements in Earth's crust. Someone else was just warned for breaking the 3RR and ignoring the talk page. Your edit goes against the manual of style. 128.40.9.164 (talk) 13:49, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are close to being blocked yourself. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:24, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Starting at the top this time :)

Hello, Graeme -

First, thank you for providing a non-promotional, non-advertising-esque article for me to reference. And then another "thank you" for your comments to SwisterTwister. I greatly appreciate your help.

I will rework my content and resubmit (complete with the two new citations I was able to gather).

Hoping for the best....thanks again for your help!

MaeDarla (talk) 17:46, 3 February 2017 (UTC)MaeDarlaMaeDarla (talk) 17:46, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My recently submitted draft article, Draft:ID Wholesaler

Good afternoon, Graeme Bartlett ~

Thank you for your time in reviewing my latest submission (Draft:ID Wholesaler). Back in late August 2015, the reviewing Editor (One15969) indicated my original submission read like an advertisement. I re-wrote the content and re-submitted, and the Editor (One15969) commented as follows:

---

Comment: Definitely better on the advertising angle, but still doesn't meet notability guidelines. Coverage must be "substantial". In other words, it must be from several independent sources (more than 2), and must be in-depth. While the Internet Retailer article is substantial, the Ad Age is not. Onel5969 TT me 13:42, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

---

I would find it extremely helpful if you could elaborate on the comments you made on my submission ("This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia."). I have added two additional citations and have read the Wikipedia guidelines thoroughly. I would greatly appreciate any insight you would have how best I am to rectify this status.

Thank you, in advance, for your help.

MaeDarla (talk) 21:15, 26 January 2017 (UTC)MaeDarlaMaeDarla (talk) 21:15, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

---

1-31-2017 Good morning, Graeme Bartlett -

Just checking in with you on any insight or advice you could give to help me with my article about Draft:ID Wholesaler, based on my message to you above (from last week).

Thank you!

MaeDarla (talk) 16:05, 31 January 2017 (UTC)MaeDarlaMaeDarla (talk) 16:05, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject templates

Re this edit: I suspect another editor will be along shortly to change back from "WP" to "WikiProject" as that's the full name of the template (at least for Chile, didn't check the other). It doesn't seem a great idea to change it as you did - is there some good reason to do so? PamD 14:10, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was just doing a whole set of similar changes so I just changed the whole template. There is no difference between WP and WikiProject in this context, so other editors will be just wasting their time if they change it again, but they can change it as it is harmless. It is just a cosmetic wikitext change that has no visible effect. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:07, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NB NDP Leadership Election

Hi, re New Brunswick New Democratic Party leadership election, 2017 the NDP executive hasn't announced when the leadership election will be - at least I haven't seen anything in published news articles and you haven't added a source for the date to the article - so adding "2017" to the article name is premature as we don't know yet if the leadership election will be in 2017 or, say, in the spring of 2018. You may be right but we shouldn't add a year to the article name until it's been confirmed. I've requested that the original name of the article be restored for now. McArthur Parkette (talk) 21:31, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was worried about the "next" part of the name as there will ahve been many of these in the past. Perhaps New Brunswick New Democratic Party leadership election is appropriate. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:35, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bible chapter articles

Thank you for your advice. I will try to include more contents. Please help to improve the articles together. JohnThorne (talk) 04:11, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Student project/course assignment that requires some assistance

Graeme, I saw your name in the Online Ambassadors category, so I'm bringing this to you. If you aren't the/a right person to bring this to, could you point me to someone can help?

Utcursch and I uncovered this course assignment that's going on (I'm guessing the college is in India), coordinated by a Prof Srinivas Reddy. We had a variety of problems including copyvios, plagiarism, OR, POV etc from this and most of the students were unresponsive --WP:ANI#College project that's introducing copyvios, plagiarism, OR and Non-NPOV content to wide variety of Indian history articles. One student has been responsive and their latest note to me indicates that they may need some handholding as far as the education program goes. Someone else had posted this on the Education noticeboard, but there hasn't been any response there from any of the regulars. It'd be great if you or someone else can help with this. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 05:00, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Undeletion of the article Solomon Nwaka

I've created a profile article about Dr.Solomon Nwaka and I have now learnt that the page is moved and later deleted. I'm sincerely requesting for undeletion of the article and would like to learn the rationale for deletion and guidance so that I can improve the article to meet your standard protocols . Many thanks for your support on this!HabtamuG2017 (talk) 07:45, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@HabtamuG2017: the U5 reason was inappropriate, but the real reason for deleting was that the page read very much like a promotional CV. It looked like the material that might be put up on a web site or when applying for a job. We do not need a big list of all presentations, publications, memberships, awards and career history in an article. I suggest you start again at Draft:Solomon Nwaka. Also leave out peacock terms like "loving", "fondly", "hails from", "leadership", "excelled". Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:56, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67

Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

• A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
• Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
• Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news

• When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
• Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
• The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries

• JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

---

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 3D Fold Evolution

Hello! Your submission of 3D Fold Evolution at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 07:26, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Geological history of the Precordillera terrane

On 6 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Geological history of the Precordillera terrane, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the Precordillera Platform in Argentina may have originally broken off from rocks that are now in the southeastern United States? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:07, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:INCUBATOR

I invite you to comment on my idea of article incubator. The idea is not new and details of the previous version can be found at WP:INCUBATOR. I would be glad if you enhance it with your experience. Feel free to improve upon the proposal that I have placed. Anasuya.D (talk) 09:32, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Smyser-Bair House. NeilN ^talk to me 01:35, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

United States–Cuban Thaw

Can you please move United States–Cuban Thaw back to Cuban Thaw per commonname? Valoem ^talk ^contrib 01:59, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

•  Done @Valoem: Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:17, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seasons' Greetings

...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 02:38, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]