This is an archive of past discussions with User:Interstellarity. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories.
Technical news
As previously noted, tighter password requirements for Administrators were put in place last year. Wikipedia should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.
It's on the bottom left regardless of where you scroll on the page. It will light up green and say online if online, but it will light up red when offline if offline. Interstellarity (talk) 23:01, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
The U.S. Navy guided missile cruiser USS Josephus Daniels (CG-27) maneuvers around an island as it passes through the Strait of Magellan en route to Punte Arenas, Chile, on 1 July 1990, during exercise "Unitas XXXI", a combined exercise involving the naval forces of the United States and nine South American nations.
This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.
Note that the username contains an equals sign, which the parser sees as dividing a parameter name and a parameter value. Inserting 1= in front ("1" because it's the first parameter) might fix it, but I'm a bit uncertain how the user's name has to be given in order for the ping to work. {{ping|1=7&6=thirteen}} is my best guess. — jmcgnh(talk)(contribs)21:08, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
Indeed. {{u|1=7&6=thirteen}} will give 7&6=thirteen, if you want to go the template route. As an alternative, manually linking to the user page (as in [[User:7&6=thirteen|7&6=thirteen]]) of course also works. Huon (talk) 21:23, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
I stumbled upon your User and talk page. Noted your interest in geography and your membership in Wikipedia's article for improvement. Since I substantailly reworked this article last week (when it was listed in WP:TAFI, I thought you were a likely collaborator. Was I wrong? Or was it kismet? And Serendipity? Only you can answer. Ciao. 7&6=thirteen (☎)21:29, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
It seems that at least one of the pings worked, but even a nowiki tag doesn't prevent basic elements like ampersand from being translated. So there's a remaining distance between what one types and what one sees. — jmcgnh(talk)(contribs)21:43, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
For future reference, I recommend [[User:7&6=thirteen]] I am a Luddite and have been using this User name going on 12 years. So I won't change. I apologize for any inconvenience. 7&6=thirteen (☎)21:49, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
the removal of the "Shooting of Quintanio LeGrier and Bettie Jones"
Hello Interstellarity,
As requested, I supplied the info for the "copyrighted text" under the page that said, "You believe it is not copyrighted material because ..." however, after writing it in detail I cannot find it now, and I am not sure where to look for it and analyse it? The FOIA lists the sharing of public records FOIA from the Cook County State's Attorney's Office, and except for mental health treatments, custody battles, etc., are all public entitlement. I emailed the Cook County State's Attorney's office who corroborated the public access, and affirmed that specific approval was not necessary. The statement in question was from the assistant DA as to why there were no charges pressed against Officer Rialmo. Everyone had seen it: the press, the public. This led to the civil wrongful death by the family:
@Bigeez: Your page was deleted because it appeared that you copied and pasted the content in a Wikipedia article. This is not acceptable. If you wish to bring the article back, please see WP:REFUND. If I could be of any further assistance place let me know. Thank you, Interstellarity (talk) 21:17, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello Interstellarity (talk), could it be that at the same time I was writing the reasons for ..., you were deleting it? This is perplexing, to the say the least. In any event, if you feel I could paraphrase it, ok. Cheers, Eli Bigeez (talk) 21:18, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
You tagged Tagging of Earth (Artists for the World song) for speedy deletion as a copyvio, and it did indeed include an excessive amount to copied content. When you encounter such an article, but there is enough non-copyvio content tom k=make at least a decent stub (and the topic seems notable) it is often better to remove the infringing text, and use {{copyvio-revdel}} to as an admin to do revision deletion to remove the copyvios from the history. I have done such a removal and revdel on this article. Thanks for chefcking for copyright violations. DES(talk)DESiegel Contribs19:22, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
G11 is very much a judgement call. A key question is would the article (or draft) need to be fundamentally rewritten to achieve neutrality; if jerking out puffery, even reducing to a stup, leaves a non-promotional valid page, it isn't a G11, in my view. Note that some admins are more ready to delete on G11 grounds than I am.
As for G12, these were valid G12 tags. But note that wp:CSD#G12 says: This applies to text pages that contain copyrighted material with no credible assertion of public domain, fair use, or a compatible free license, where there is no non-infringing content on the page worth saving. Only if the history is unsalvageably corrupted should it be deleted in its entirety; earlier versions without infringement should be retained. The copyvio content must go, that is not in question. But by looking at the copyvio detection report (or comparing with the source manually), and taking more time and trouble, an editor can in many cases, including the ones above, remove all the copyvio content, and do or request a revision deletion to remove it from the history, and still be left with a valid article or draft. That is going a step beyond finding a copyvio and placing a G12 tag, but in my view gives a batter result.
And in the case of Island Home (anthem), the cited source which had been copied from included a release under a CC-BY license right on the source page, and this was mentioned in the history. Do please check the history when tagging for G12 (or G11). If there is a clean version to revert to, do it, and ask for revdel on the G12.
Gospel of Mark (intertextuality) is another case which you tagged for G12. It includes {{Free-content attribution}} at the end of the sources section. The presence of such an acknowledge of use of open-source content means that a simple G12 tag is not appropriate unless you have checked and find the attribution incorrect or the licensees not applicable or not compatible. Double and triple checking is needed when this sort of license claim is on the article. DES(talk)DESiegel Contribs20:42, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
Very interesting. I like the training exercises. One thing about G12, it can be for anything copied from any protected source, such as a book or newspaper, not just a web site, although we see far more copies from web sources than anything else. Of course if the content is PD or released under a compatible license, it is not a G12. And limited quotes may be used without permission if attributed and cited. DES(talk)DESiegel Contribs22:42, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
I'm surprised that you don't recall it, but if you take a look at the histories of those two articles you will see that you tagged them both in the last few hours as copyright violations of that "Gospel of Mark" text. Please be more careful. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:24, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
_passes_through_the_Strait_of_Magellan,_1_July_1990_(6475056).jpg)
