User talk:Diannaa/Archive 36

Archive 30

←

Archive 34

Archive 35

Archive 36

Archive 37

Archive 38

→

Archive 40

Mass deletion

Thank you to be more WP:CAREFUL with mass deletion. You wrongly deleted File:Post_Office_Logo.svg, even though the file was re-uploaded from a legitimate source, and its description edited accordingly. While I understand you don't want to spend time going through individual images one by one, you just added extra work to other editors (both those who now need to restore deleted images and those who had to edit all pages linking to deleted images). Regards, kashmiri ^TALK 23:31, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Kashmiri. There's a big discussion about this issue at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive266#Massive copyright violations. Regardless of the outcome of the discussion, all articles currently missing their logos will get them replaced. Hopefully this part of the task can begin soon. You should not have re-uploaded this logo, as there's a free-use image at File:Post Office Logo.PNG. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:39, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Diannaa, that has very little to do with you deleting a legitimate logo, and all the work other editors had to put into addressing the issues you caused. Please note that the logo design in question is not even eligible for copyright protection due to threshold of originality issues. Please, please be more careful with your actions, I do not want to spend any more time in correcting your good-faith but still problematic edits. kashmiri ^TALK 19:54, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Sorry. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:55, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Il primo giorno d'estate, Violetta, cover art.jpg

Hello Diannaa, thanks for your notification. The thing is that actually this image *shoud* appear in this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Il_primo_giorno_d%27estate but for some reasons it looks like I cannot manage to upload it. Any suggestion? Thanks a lot! Mattia Mat (talk) 15:21, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

{{infobox single}} doesn't have a field labelled "image"; it's "Cover". Note it must be upper case as well! I have fixed Il primo giorno d'estate and Dimmi Che Non Passa (song) . -- Diannaa (talk) 15:32, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Mass deletion of football logos

Hey! Whats up with the mass deletion of football logos? No warning just mass executions? That's bad form. If I gather it may have something to do with them coming from stuffled.com (who probably sourced them from here to begin with). Or is there some other reason? Any chance of restoring them so that I can work the copyrights as required. And also please be good enough to provide other users with a proper heads up? Thanks. Wiggy! (talk) 16:20, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Wiggy!. There's a big discussion about this issue at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive266#Massive copyright violations. Regardless of the outcome of the discussion, all articles currently missing their logos will get them replaced. Hopefully this part of the task can begin soon. Sorry for the inconvenience. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:39, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. So, if they're coming back shortly, what was the point of deleting them in the first place? Are they coming back with modified rationales? Or are they just collateral damage arising out of the discussion you've referenced? I can see attaching warning tags to them, but just wiping them out without any kind of heads up is not a particularly collaborative approach. Wiggy! (talk) 03:12, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in getting images back in place. It's still not clear from the discussion as to whether or not we have a legal right to display logos from the source website stuffled.com. I have posted again at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive266#Massive copyright violations and if no one objects, I will start restoring the previous png versions of the missing logos, hopefully later today. -- Diannaa (talk) 12:21, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello you deleted also the club Assyriska Föreningen logo will it be replace? --Suryoye85 (talk) 00:37, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Suryoye85. I am working my way through them. I have done this one now. Sorry for all the inconvenience. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:51, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Its no problem but that logo you just replaced is the old logo, the new logo was the latest, cant you put the new logo instead? --Suryoye85 (talk) 02:58, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Happenstance?

Is "happenstance" a word and what does it mean? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 16:54, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Noun; a coincidence. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:46, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations

		100000 Edits
		Congratulations on reaching 100000 edits. You have achieved a milestone that very few editors have been able to accomplish. The Wikipedia Community thanks you for your continuing efforts. Keep up the good work!

If you like you can add this userbox to your collection.

This user has been awarded with the 100000 Edits award.

```Buster Seven Talk 13:53, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! -- Diannaa (talk) 13:55, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Keep on rollin' - Congrats, Kierzek (talk) 13:42, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations, you're an inspiration to all Wikipedians. :) Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 22:57, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Block needed

Hey Dianna, got another sockpuppet of User:Zimmermanh1997, this time it's 2601:A:200:676:E017:69C7:158D:EED1. Of course, that's one of those new IP addresses, so hopefully it will make it easier to block. Range blocks would be appreciated. Thanks...Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:18, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Neutralhomer. I think those IPv6 are pretty dynamic, so there might not be much point in blocking. Regardless I am not inclined to block on the basis of one edit. Please let me know if the problem persists and I will have another look. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:21, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Believe me, there will be more edits from that IP. The sock has an obsession with radio station WICL. Drmies and I have played whack-a-mole with this guy for awhile. You took out a couple of his socks. Just gettin' old at this point. :) I will keep an eye on it though. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:53, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

The IP on WLTF is probably the same guy. He has already jumped IPs, and I have no idea how to do an IPv6 range block. If the disruption worsens, we could add semi-protection on a few of his favorite targets. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:47, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/5.81.198.219

It was MariaJaydHicky’s IP. Can you please block? 183.171.183.4 (talk) 02:01, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

No. This does not geolocate to her known location. Sorry, -- Diannaa (talk) 02:05, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

October 2014 wikification awards.

		The Greater Working Wikifier's Barnstar
		For scoring 5th place on the leaderboard during the October 2014 Wikification Drive, Diannaa, you are hereby awarded the Greater Working Wikifier's Barnstar! Congratulations!!!

Cheers!!! If I had to guess... (talk) 08:35, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Inappropriate use of talk page while blocked

Hello. Alexyflemming (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), who you blocked indefinitely yesterday, continues to post walls of POV material/propaganda on their talk page, instead of proper unblock requests, so would you, or someone else, please consider removing their talk page access? Thomas.W <sup>talk</sup> 15:06, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

New Order vandal

Hello, I just wanted to notify you that the New Order vandal is back and is currently vandalizing album articles by disrupting the track listings. Myxomatosis57 (talk) 15:06, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

I will deal with this when I get back from work if he is still at it. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:21, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

The Bobby Broom Organi-Sation Photo Should Not Be Deleted. Is Fair Use

This group photo should not be scheduled for deletion: It was made available by BobbyBroom.com and granted fair use status: "Bobby Broom’s photographs are rights cleared for use in all print, Internet, and video news, social, and informational media. Fair us shall be for non-commercial purposes: Informational, news, educational, and historic uses, in both high res (print) and med-res (web applications)." http://bobbybroom.com/newsmedia/ Please remove the challenge. Theclevertwit (talk) 15:12, 5 November 2014 (UTC)theclevertwit

Wikipedia doesn't allow fair use images of living people. The permssion in place on the source website is inadequate for our purposes. What you need to do is get an OTRS ticket in place on the file, using the information at WP:consent. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:16, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Important question

Map of the D-Day invasion area showing channels cleared of mines, location of Allied vessels engaged in bombardment, and targets on shore

The German navy did not operate in the English Channel did they? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 22:56, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

They must have; otherwise who laid all those mines? Four German torpedo boats shot at the Eastern Task Force on D-Day, sinking the Norwegian destroyer Svenner (Ford, Zaloga p.233). German ships in the Channel on D-Day included three torpedo boats, twenty-nine fast attack craft, thirty-six R boats, and thirty-six minesweepers and patrol boats (Ford, Zaloga p.205). The Germans also had several U-boats available (Whitmarsh, p.31). -- Diannaa (talk) 23:11, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

I know about the U-boats and Donitz of course, but was thinking more about the overall navy. They didn't play a big part did they? My understanding has always been the Germany Navy was, at the outbreak of war, in the middle of a building process which was not due to finish until 1948, and that the Royal Navy far outnumbered the German home fleet. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 23:55, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Evans covers this in volume 3, starting on page 479. Results of the German navy were not encouraging; German cruiser Admiral Graf Spee was scuttled; Bismarck was famously sunk; the St Nazaire Raid destroyed the port facility on the Atlantic; Raeder was dismisssed in 1943. Hitler changed his focus from battleships & cruisers to submarines. They planned on building them in huge numbers but it never happened. The British were able to break the German codes and thus knew the location of the Wolfpacks and thus were largely able to avoid them. Evans, The Third Reich At War, pp.479-482. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:08, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Interesting little thread. congrats on your 100k eds by the way D :). Oddly actually the German surface fleet was probably the most effective in the Channel. Think the Channel Dash, the major bombings of Portsmouth and Plymouth (obviously a Luftwaffe action though), the sinking of several RN cruisers by E boats and destroyer action, I believe 2 were sunk off the Ch Islands in 43 in one action, and the infamous Fabious - Tiger exercise attack in 44. The Kriegsmarine were certainly not driven from the Channel. Irondome (talk) 23:37, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Irondome. Thanks for the link to Channel Dash, I had not heard of this incident before. Interested persons can find the Tiger incident at Exercise Tiger, where some men practicing to land at Utah were killed. Far more infantrymen were killed at Slapton Sands than died at Utah Beach. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:47, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi D. It was in fact 1 cruiser HMS Charybdis (88) and 1 destroyer, which were sunk with heavy loss of life in Oct 43 during the Battle of Sept-iles. Kind regards Irondome (talk) 23:52, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Email

Check your email. User:Bladesmulti|Bladesmulti (talk) 00:56, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

And here User:MrBill3/sandbox Bladesmulti (talk) 01:18, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

You might be interested in reading these questions.[1] [2] Bladesmulti (talk) 02:48, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

How much quoting of sources on talk is acceptable?

Greetings Diannaa. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. You recently removed a post I made to Talk:Ayurveda due to copyright concerns. I see now that the last quote I posted (Sujatha 2011) was too extensive. In my experience providing quotations of sources on talk is a common practice. I believe it falls under fair use. I note you didn't remove a quote on the same page that was a complete (and lengthy) paragraph. The common practice of quoting a few sentences from a source on talk is not something that is being commonly reverted that I can see. Many of the points in my post contained what could only be considered brief quotations. Some contained no quotation at all, yet you removed the entire post. I am interested in your opinion, pointers to policy and examples of common practice regarding quoting sources on talk. This is of particular interest to me as I have access to a number of databases through the WP Library (and other access with terms of use etc.) I am not the strongest paraphraser/author and provide research assistance on request, often I will post a brief excerpt or quote of the most relevant content from a paywalled source that I have access to. In doing so I would like to ensure I adhere to policy and law so your input would be appreciated. Best wishes and happy editing. - - MrBill3 (talk) 03:16, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

I see you have also got discussions going in three other places so I will not be commenting here. -- Diannaa (talk) 03:22, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

No problem. That is why I pinged you on my talk and provided links to the queries I made. As a note the queries I made were looking for information on the subject of quotes in general. I have posted on Talk:Ayurveda#Copyright material removed regarding the specific removal of content. - - MrBill3 (talk) 03:32, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Yusuke Nakamura June 2012.jpg

Hello, Diannaa,,, I noticed that the photograph of Yusuke_Nakamura_(geneticist) was deleted, just a few days after you first communicated that you had issues with the permissions to use this photo. I communicated back that I would try to get permissions through the multiple channels of persons involved, and yet, now it is deleted. The original copyright holder sent me an email with his permission, but that isn't good enough according to your protocols, which are well-intentioned but incredibly complicated for non-experts. You must give people more than a few days to get things done as we have busy lives outside of this forum. Reading the above history of "Mass deletion", this seems to be part of a larger problem. Can you restore that photo while we get the permission sorted out, please? I do not relish the work of restoring it myself. Thanks much! Anomicworld (talk) 20:50, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Animicworld. Your photo is unrelated to the 1,300 images mentioned in the above discussion. I have restored your image and tagged it as {{OTRS pending}}, which gives about a month for the email to be matched up with the image. The email needs to be sent to the OTRS team using the instructions at WP:consent. Please ensure the email mentions the specific file name, and specifies which license the file is released under. Sorry the image rules are so complex. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:03, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Diannaa. I have contacted the source again and requested a fresh and more complete permission to be sent to the permissions team. Anomicworld (talk) 18:50, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Anomicworld. As is true in many areas of the wiki, the OTRS team is experiencing backlogs, so please be patient. It may take a few weeks. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:53, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

You Have Mail

Hello, Diannaa. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

- Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:48, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

...and again. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:25, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

New IP vandal

This time it's Special:Contributions/198.53.122.29 - Hoops gza (talk) 02:41, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

It's in the same range as 198.53.122.87, which he used back in July-August. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:49, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

He's back on Special:Contributions/206.75.168.247. On another note, am I completely within my rights to translate a German Wikipedia article to the English Wikipedia as long as I attribute the translation? - Hoops gza (talk) 03:42, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it's okay to translate. Please place the template {{Translated page}} on the talk page of the new article. You could mention the translation in your first edit summary, as well. -- Diannaa (talk) 03:48, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

List of German field marshals

A few minutes ago I massively improved and expanded List of German field marshals in order to get to GA-status. Before I nominate it however, I would appreciate if you, as a second pair of eyes, could glance over the source section and tell me if you see any book out of alphabetical order. Cheers in advance. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 16:31, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Done, using ref sorting tool. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:46, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Messages from Thatonebossdude

Dianna, this is Thatonebossdude. Since you are an administrator, and deleted my article within minutes of its publication, i expect a quick response. I am deeply saddened that you deleted my article. I went into the talk section and pleaded with you to let the article stay up for just one day so that my friend could gain a better understanding of the content of the article. But you refused. I am sad to say that I will likely delete my wikipedia account after this, and use Wikipedia only if I have to. Why, you ask? Because my request was reasonable. I wanted the article to stay up for just one day, but you declined. I am saddened, and would appreciate if you would restore the article for just one day. Is that not a reasonable request? You deleted my article.I am upset. I expect a response. Or are you to cowardly to talk about it? Respond to me. Thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Thatonebossdude (talk • contribs)

Hi Thatonebossdude. Wikipedia is not the kind of place where you can post random stuff about private individuals or things that you made up one day. Your article appeared to be an attack page or a joke page, so it was promptly deleted. We don't leave such material up, not even for one day. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:17, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Socking

Hello. Alexyflemming (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), who you blocked indefinitely recently, is per WP:DUCK back as GeorgeLees1975 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Making the exakt same edits on Akrotiri and Dhekelia as Alexyflemming did, editwarring to get the same self-made OR image back in the article as Alexyflemming did. Thomas.W <sup>talk</sup> 16:57, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Already blocked, by HJ Mitchell. Thanks for reporting. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:41, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

The quacking was so loud that I reported it at WP:AIV too, a short while after posting here. Thomas.W <sup>talk</sup> 20:03, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

I was at the gym. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:04, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Oh, "real life". I've heard there is something called that, maybe I should check what it is some day? Who knows, I might like it. :) Thomas.W <sup>talk</sup> 20:09, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

-- Diannaa (talk) 20:13, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Copyvio on Greco-Italian war

Hi Dianna. While adding some references due to periodic tag-bombing of the article by a not to be named user, I noticed some really close paraphrasing due this edit. I tried to fix it and I also ran the Earwig detector, without results, but I am not certain that the section is clean. I have marked the source of the close paraphrasing in some of the edit summaries but in the beginning, before I noticed the extent, I tried to change some of the sentences such as "The decision was taken in a characteristic Mussolini’s personality and of style of rule" which, although copied ungrammatically, was taken almost verbatim from Kershaw. Disclaimer: If or when you have any time, you can check it out. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. <sup>λόγοςπράξις</sup> 04:53, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

It turns out that some of the material may have belonged to an earlier version of the article and the Lulu pubs book may have copied the article. This section on my talk has some more details. Thank you Dianna, and sorry for the trouble. Δρ.Κ. <sup>λόγοςπράξις</sup> 06:01, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Checking some more, the section "Consequences" starts with the sentence "Looking back near the end of the war, as Germany’s defeat loomed closer, Hitler attributed blame to Mussolini’s Greek fiasco as the cause of his own subsequent catastrophe" which is almost verbatim from page 178 of Kershaw. The rest of the paragraph has additional sentences from the same page of Kershaw. Δρ.Κ. <sup>λόγοςπράξις</sup> 06:53, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

The entire section was copied from Kershaw. Please see the article talk page for a report of what I found. Thank you for reporting this problem. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:21, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Dianna for taking the time. I just saw your talkpage report and that the copyvio segments were added by blocked socks. I also saw that some of Kershaw's paragraphs were cited to another reference (ex. Rintelen, p. 101.), perhaps in an attempt to hide the copyvio. I'll try to paraphrase some of the removed material but I don't know how long it will take. In any case I'll let you know. Take care. Δρ.Κ. <sup>λόγοςπράξις</sup> 18:39, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

The citations were Kershaw's citations, added presumably to hide the extent of the copying. I have the book here, as I could not access all of the needed pages on Google. I will have it here till Monday, so let me know if there's anything you need checked from that source. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:58, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Dianna. I'll let you know. There are some paragraphs from Kershaw, for example the one starting "Even so, the Italians still had numerical superiority over the British in the region, though this was to alter..." that are cited to "Rintelen, p. 101." I think this is also an attempt at misdirection. There are also some paragraphs from "James J. Sadkovich, ‘Understanding Defeat. Reappraising Italy’s Role in World War II’". Googling these paragraphs nothing comes up. Are these also part of the copyvio? Δρ.Κ. <sup>λόγοςπράξις</sup> 19:16, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

You must be looking at a cached version of the page, because that part has already been removed. Meanwhile, further checking has revealed more copying from Kershaw, page 170. Note that our copy vio detectors will not find material in books, and a Google search of snippets of prose will not necessarily reveal copying from book sources either. They have to be checked manually. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:48, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I was referring to the parts you removed. They are no longer in the article. I was looking at the diff. I don't have the "Sadkovich" ref, so I have to assume that it is also suspect. Δρ.Κ. <sup>λόγοςπράξις</sup> 22:02, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

• We have the same problem with Battle of Greece. I just removed the same paragraph you just removed from the Greco-Italian war. There may well be other copyvios. Δρ.Κ. <sup>λόγοςπράξις</sup> 22:13, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

"Rintelen, p. 101" is Kershaw's citation #204 on page 179, and Sadkovich is his citation #205. The entire paragraph starting "Even so, the Italians still had numerical superiority over the British..." is copied almost word-for-word from the first paragraph of Kershaw page 179, and uses his footnotes. The same is true for all the prose I removed in the big diff: the editor copied/closely paraphrased the material from Kershaw, and then added Kershaw's citations to disguise what he had done. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:17, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

I see. They were internal citations of Kershaw's book, used for diversion. That's a new level of copyvio. But what can you expect from socks. Thank you Dianna. Δρ.Κ. <sup>λόγοςπράξις</sup> 22:24, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

• Hi Dianna. In the same article, Greco-Italian war, I happened to see the image File:Grecia-AlpinoeMulo.JPG. The source in the image is mentioned as "own work". Since the image is 74 years old, the photographer must be over 90 years old, assuming he was 17 when he took the picture. This user is still active at Commons. Is there any way of verifying the copyright status of this image? Δρ.Κ. <sup>λόγοςπράξις</sup> 04:33, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Hi Dr K. I have nominated this image for deletion on the Commons, along with some others by the same uploader that seem questionable. commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Grecia-AlpinoeMulo.JPG. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:50, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
    • Thank you very much Dianna. I hope I didn't cause a work overload for you. I see from your deletion list that many of the pictures were from 1915 and marked as "own work", so the user must be well over 100. I never knew centenarians could be so technologically savvy, working so hard and uploading so many pictures on the internet. Perhaps 100 is the new 50. Δρ.Κ. <sup>λόγοςπράξις</sup> 16:51, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
      • No worries, with a little copy-paste magic it only took 10 minutes to prepare the list. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:55, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
        • Your efficiency is only matched by your hard work. :) Δρ.Κ. <sup>λόγοςπράξις</sup> 17:07, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

RevisionDelete request

Hello Diannaa. You are named as one of the Wikipedia administrators willing to handle RevisionDelete requests. Would you be so kind to hide the pen-ulimate edit on the page Tetseo Sisters on the basis of clause 2. for RevisionDeletes "Grossly insulting, degrading etc.". I am not familiar with the way, English wikipedia handles cases like that. In my opinion this should be removed by oversight thereafter. Thank you in advance. --Gerald Fritz (talk) 17:26, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Mr Fritz. I have rev-deleted the edit and notified the oversight team using the instructions at WP:Oversight. Thank you for reporting. -- Diannaa (talk) 17:33, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Good morning, Diannaa. Thank you very much for your help. --Gerald Fritz (talk) 08:15, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Auschwitz image

I have noticed that back on 17 August 2013 you removed this image: File:Map auschwitz deportation 4499-Cut.jpg from the Auschwitz concentration camp article. Was there a reason why you did this? - Hoops gza (talk) 08:50, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

I assume it's because it only covers a certain time range. However, I have not come across a more comprehensive map for this topic. - Hoops gza (talk) 08:52, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

The original source image, File:Map auschwitz deportation 4499.jpg, shows that it is a photograph of a graphic hanging on a wall somewhere, not the creation of the uploader. Therefore the image is likely a copyright violation of this derivative work. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:24, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

We do not know if the uploader created the graphic themself, however... - Hoops gza (talk) 04:57, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

I think it's highly likely that it's hanging on the wall in a museum somewhere; it looks professionally done. I am going to nominate both images for deletion, and then we can re-add it to the article if it survives the deletion process. commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Map auschwitz deportation 4499.jpg. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:47, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Question

If you change your username does every time you've signed off ~4x in the past also change to your new username? And what about subpages? Can you tell me something about all this? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 15:09, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Changing username. Old signatures are not changed, nor are places where the old user name was mentioned on talk pages, and thus previous user names can be found by looking at an editor's early contribs. Edit history (i.e., diffs) is changed. Sub-pages are automatically moved to the new name. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:34, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

I see. Thank you very much. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 15:36, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Logos

Hi Diannaa. I was a little confused as to why you would revert the Tapad and Code42 logos back to historic versions, rather than the current logo. I noticed that in one case you cited an ANI string, however I uploaded both of these images and have no connection to the editor in question. CorporateM (Talk) 10:20, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Corporate M. The replacement svg logos (File:Tapad Logo.svg and File:Code42 Logo.svg, uploaded by Patrick O'Canada) were deleted, and the previous logos (uploaded by yourself) were restored, as we know for sure we have a right to display them here. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:16, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Oh I see. Someone replaced the logos I uploaded with SVG ones and the SVG logos were rmoved. My apologies. Both of those are pages where I have previously updated the logo; the edit summary, "restore previous logo", made me think you were restoring the old one. Sorry for the confusion! CorporateM (Talk) 14:27, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm glad you understand now, because I had a heck of a time figuring out how to explain it! More coffee needed -- Diannaa (talk) 14:41, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Josef Mengele

Thanks for copyedit double check. I was rushing when I did it but thought I had reworded it sufficiently. Obviously not. Thanks, again. Quis separabit? 00:09, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Arbcom

Hi Diannaa, somewhere I think I saw you mention that you're very protective of your privacy, and I presumed that might preclude you from wanting to run for arbcom. (Although serving on arbcom doesn't imply you have to give up any privacy, but it's tricky.)

Just in case that's not the case, please do consider running this year, since you would certainly get elected and you would bring some sense to the organisation!

Please give it some thought... you would need to make a statement of intent at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2014/Candidates in less than 48 hours now, but the statement can be short and you can refine your position a great deal after that in the questions, of which there are many.

I should mention that one candidate last year didn't bother answering any of the questions at all, and still got elected anyway.

Most of the candidates this year are not even admins.

Please give it some thought if appropriate. Thank you. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 00:58, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Graphic representation of Diannaa at teh Arbcom

Thanks for the suggestion Demiurge1000! But I think I would rather edit than settle disputes. I'm not sure I'd be very good at it tbh -- Diannaa (talk) 01:04, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 November 2014

• In the media: Amazon Echo; EU freedom of panorama; Bluebeard's Castle

• Traffic report: Holidays, anyone?

• Featured content: Wikipedia goes to church in Lithuania

• WikiProject report: Talking hospitals

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:45, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Email

Thank you so much for your helps. Can you help me again ...

Hi there. I have gone ahead with the request. Please let me know if I misunderstood what you needed, -- Diannaa (talk) 20:20, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much. You helped me a lot. Pardon me, because last time I forgot to sign this letter, I was full of sorrow. In my user page I described what's happening in Wiki Farsi administration policies and is turning Wiki Farsi to a non-neutral and a weak system. For example the article Export of revolution in Farsi is nominated to merge to the Islamic export revolution policy of Iran(Fa) and the article is claiming that the Export of revolution is a policy has been started by Iran first. And there is nothing about Proletarian internationalism or Domino theory in that article. Also about the Farsi wine article in its medicine part the article has Islamic clergy one-sided (misled and not neutral) contents instead of scientific contents and references. I tried to correct many articles and wrote Domino theory in Farsi and concurrently I have noticed there are many faults and defects in Wiki Farsi because of Farsi administrator policies. Finally when I corrected some Qur'an translation article, one admin used a robot to undo all of my accurately edited articles (8 articles) and removed many good references such as this http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/aa21.htm in wine article and I couldn't do any thing even when I started a debate in The administrator announcing board of Wiki Farsi. I've described in my page more :)
Forget it I can't be useful for this people, here in my city(Tehran) if a human know some thing and bring acceptable proofs to make a scientific or neutral encyclopedia must become silent and even this have been affected on Wiki Fa administrating policies.

--Abbas hashemian (talk) 16:19, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

at it again

• Special:Contributions/69.31.216.250

- Hoops gza (talk) 23:52, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

None others to report at this time, but for your reference, I have created a User:Hoops gza/Boy band vandal IPs in case you need that as well. - Hoops gza (talk) 00:13, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

I also think that you're being too nice to the vandal, as this is clearly a case of long-term abuse at this point and will persist as long as the vandal has access to Wikipedia. - Hoops gza (talk) 00:14, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

I have all these IPs and check them once a week on Saturdays. Telus will from time to time assign people new IPs (I have had four since I opened my account in 2009) so I am comfortable with escalating the blocks in the usual way. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:22, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

What is the usual way after six months? Could I please have a few in a row? - Hoops gza (talk) 00:33, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

The usual progression is to choose block length from a pull-down menu, which offers a range of very short blocks of hours or days, then progresses to one week, two weeks, one month, three months, six months, one year, two years, three years. I would hesitate to block for anything longer than one year for this particular vandal, as he's not (relatively speaking) that disruptive, he's really easy to spot, and Telus IPs are only semi-static. Locations where he seldom visits (Calgary, Edmonton) I am less inclined to issue a long block.

• Special:Contributions/64.178.130.132 - geolocates to Grande Prairie, used in April, May, and briefly in October. Not one of his main locales.
• Special:Contributions/69.31.216.250 - geolocates to Grande Prairie, currently blocked for 6 months, block expires May 18, 2015
• Special:Contributions/70.72.136.208 - geolocates to Calgary, used this IP for one day in August, obviously not somewhere he goes often.
• Special:Contributions/75.156.169.183 - geolocates to Grande Prairie, repeatedly blocked, currently serving a 3-month block which expires on December 27
• Special:Contributions/75.159.118.134 - Geolocates to Grande Prairie, repeatedly blocked, but he has not used this IP since June
• Special:Contributions/162.157.152.134 - Geolocates to Grande Prairie, repeatedly blocked, most recent 6-month block expired on Nov 6
• Special:Contributions/198.53.122.29 - Geolocates to Grande Prairie, currently serving a one-month block which expires December 8
• Special:Contributions/198.53.122.87 - Geolocates to Grande Prairie, current 3-month block expires on December 27
• Special:Contributions/206.75.168.247 - Edmonton, not one of his usual haunts. Most recently blocked 48 hrs, on November 12. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:01, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Tree of 40 Fruit images

Hi Diannaa,

I noticed you deleted the image I uploaded for the Tree of 40 Fruit article. If I understand it correctly, it was because of an improper license. We have permission from the artist to use the images he provided, but they are still under copyright protection. We are only allowed to use them on Wikipedia, but do not have any other permission. I also understand there is a possibility to use "non-free" content if there is no applicable alternative available. As this is an Art project, and there are no other "free" images available, I assume that this exception applies to this specific content as well.

Please let me know if this works and thank you for your help.

Sincerely Germata (talk)

Hi Germata. Non-free images are not allowed in draft articles. Please let me know if and when the article is accepted, and I will help you get the image uploaded. Please note also that non-free images are not allowed in galleries. It's considered over-use of non-free images to have a lot of them in one article. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:27, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. I will let you know once we are done. Is there a specific amount that is allowed to be used? Germata (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 13:31, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Please select one photo. It needs to be low resolution (approximately 400 x 400 pixels or less). -- Diannaa (talk) 15:23, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned talk pages

I note that you have tagged a lot of orphaned talk pages with {{g8-exempt}}. Often they only contain a disagreement from someone about WP:NFCC#1. File talk:Sami ul-Haq.png is one such example. Is it really useful to keep these around forever? If you just want the user to be able to read the reply, you could add something like {{#ifeq: {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTYEAR}} | November 2014 | {{g8-exempt}} | {{db-g8}} }}, which would preserve the page for the rest of the month but automatically nominate it for speedy deletion next month. --Stefan2 (talk) 16:01, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Looking at the rules Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#G8. Pages dependent on a non-existent or deleted page, it says that image talk pages for images that exist on Wikimedia Commons are G8 exempt. Images tagged with {{Rtd}} automatically get tagged with a G8-exempt template. Templates {Rtd} and {Rb} are used in conjunction with {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed}}. Deleted pages are kept indefinitely (they are merely hidden from view), so it doesn't matter as far as the amount of server space required. So there is in my opinion no advantage to increasing the administrator workload by later going back and deleting this pages. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:43, 19 November 2014 (UTC) Deletion discussions that are not logged elsewhere should not be deleted, according to the policy page. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:40, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2014 November 6

Hello! I'm not sure if you are the right person to contact about this, but can you or someone please close this discussion? It has been open for nearly 2 weeks. Thanks for any help! -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:54, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

 Done -- Diannaa (talk) 19:30, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:36, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Help with a file

I notice that this file that I updated File:Max Pauly.jpg keeps showing in its original, more pixelated version before finally showing up in the higher quality form. Could it be because the original version is still there in the file history? I don't know much about how files work, but I would appreciate it if this problem could be fixed. - Hoops gza (talk) 03:22, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Err, a more pressing matter, I'm guessing that you're checking on the Only the Young issue. Those might be different songs. A lot of stuff might have to be changed. - Hoops gza (talk) 03:54, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

The image looks okay to me. Sometimes the thumbnail takes several hours to resolve. Regarding the article, there was a move-over-redirect request to move from Only the Young (Brandon Flowers song) to Only the Young (song). But all the page history was at Only the Young (The Killers song), so I moved that. The requestor said there was only one song by this name, but now that you mention it, I see we also have a song Only the Young (1983) by Journey and an article Only The Young, which redirects to an X-Factors article. I will look at this when I get home from work -- Diannaa (talk) 15:19, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Someone has already changed the Only the Young stuff a little, so that the song disambiguator is a redirect that points to the dab page. Perhaps the song disambiguator redirect should be deleted altogether. - Hoops gza (talk) 00:51, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Gimme some links, Hoops; I'm not sure what you mean. Do you think Only The Young should be deleted? I don't agree with that. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:56, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Only the Young (song) was moved to Only the Young (disambiguation) by another editor, creating a redirect. This does not make good sense because Only the Young is a song and serves as the primary topic, while there is more than one song on the Wikipedia with this name. Therefore, I would suggest deleting Only the Young (song) altogether and improving the hatnote at Only the Young. - Hoops gza (talk) 04:57, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Requesting a mass rollback

On Special:Contributions/75.17.119.123. Not vandalism, per say, but they are adding categories which do not exist and probably cannot exist due to not being defining. For instance, what is a "ward of the court" supposed to entail? There is not just one court in the world. Do you see my point? - Hoops gza (talk) 20:49, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) Is there really much point in a mass rollback? There aren't that many edits; go through them manually, check if they're remotely valid, and if not, roll them back yourself. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 21:00, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
• There's a mass rollback script available at User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/massRollback.js. I don't think you have to be an admin to install and use this script. -- Diannaa (talk)

Martin Bormann

Hi. You reverted a couple of my edits; the problem is that you've restored the passive voice, which most people consider to be inferior English as well as usually sounding pretentious. However, if you must have it so, you may. I've restored the hyphen you deleted, which is definitely necessary in the phrase. (Compare "the best known plan" with "the best-known plan"; removing the hyphen alters the meaning.) Harfarhs (talk) 22:55, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Human evolution

Extend PC time? --George Ho (talk) 04:27, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Question

What's up? Regarding this, I like to know why such image gets nominated for deletion and not this, this, this, this, or these?--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 20:54, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

• File:Rewards for Justice Mullah Omar.png was already nominated for deletion at WP:PUF, and the decision was to keep the file as non-free. Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2014 September 24#File:Rewards for Justice Mullah Omar.png.
• File:Zia ul-Haq.png, File:Mullah Dadullah.png, File:Hakimullah Mehsud.jpg, File:Phaedon Gizikis.png, File:Zia ul-Haq.png, File:Abu Ayyub al-Masri.png, File:Obaidullah Akhund.png: does not portray a living person, so the images qualify for fair use.
• File:MILFflag.jpg is tagged as {{PD-shape}}. If you disagree with this tag, please feel free no nominate the image at WP:PUF.
• File:Ahmed Abdi Godane.png is already in the queue for F5 speedy deletion as an orphaned non-free file.
• File:Bashar al-Assad.png appears to be in the public domain in the United States, as it was published in Syria in 2004.
• File:Saddam Hussein.png: We don't have enough information as to who took the photo, and when and where, to determine its copyright status. I have listed it at WP:PUF: Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2014 November 24#File:Saddam Hussein.png.
• File:Abid Hamid Mahmud Iraq.jpg: We don't have enough information as to who took the photo, and when and where, to determine its copyright status. I have converted the templating to fair use, for use in the one article.
• File:Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri.png: The image is already listed at WP:PUF: please see Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2014 November 17#File:Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri.png
• File:Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri portrait.png: I was unable to determine anything about the copyright status of this image as the source website is hopelessly 404. My feeling is that the image is PD in its source country and the United States.
• File:U.S State Department photo of Muhsin al-Fadhli.png Currently tagged as PD as a work of the US govt. If you wish to dispute this, the place to go is WP:PUF.
• File:Al-Furqān Media Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.png: Qualifies for F11 speedy deletion, as the source webpage does not provide any copyright information.
• File:Logo of the Iraqi Ba'ath Party.png: Non-free logo, correctly tagged and sized for fair use.
• File:Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri video.png, File:GMCIR fighters.png, File:Army of the Men of the Naqshbandi Order Officers.jpg, File:Qasem Soleimani.png: Taken in Iraq or Iran. According to the info on the Commons, these countries are not party to the Berne Convention, the images are PD in the US but may be copyright in the source country.
• I have listed these ones for F7 speedy deletion, as they are non-free images of living people: File:Mokhtar Belmokhtar.png, File:Abdul Ghani Baradar.png, File:Wakil Ahmed Muttawakil photo.png, File:Abu Musab Abdel Wadoud.png, File:Abdul Salam Zaeef.png. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:17, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Re: November 2014

Hello, I have reviewed your message that you left on my talk page regarding the amount of images that I have uploaded, and that have been listed for deletion. I am relatively new to Wikipedia, I began on the 6th of August on my other account, StanTheMan87. The vast majority of the images that I have uploaded, I used an already existing template that was used on an already existing image file on either Wikipedia or the Wikimedia Commons. I don't know why as soon as I start uploading images like the ones already uploaded by other users, that they get declared as 'Possibly un-free', 'Copyright violations', or 'Missing evidence of permission.' I will say this, I can find 5-10+ images on both English Wikipedia and the Commons that have been uploaded in the past 5 or so years with the exact same amount of information that I have used in the files that I have uploaded. If it wasn't a hassle for those users to upload those images less than 5 or or more than 5 years ago, why is it a huge hassle for me now? There is absolutely no way that I am revealing these image files. I want them to remain on Wikipedia or the Commons regardless if they are actually un-free or not, as they are incredibly useful to their respective articles. Only a handful of the images that I have uploaded have been unique to me, as in ones where I didn't use a certain lay out, template or whatever it may be, the use of certain phrases, words etc. I don't mean to sound hostile, but it has annoyed me considerably that I upload images more or less identical (in terms of licensing) to ones already uploaded and used, yet mine are flagged for deletion.

I have a query however. You have listed these following files for deletion:

1. File:Wakil Ahmed Muttawakil photo.png
2. File:Abdul Ghani Baradar.png
3. File:Abdul Salam Zaeef.png

You cited here [3] that many of the images coming from Iraq/Iran were in the PD in the United States, as these countries are not signatories to the Berne Convention. Can the same account for those images whose origin is from Afghanistan, also a non-signatory to the Berne Convention? If not, then what's the reason? StanMan87 (talk) 06:09, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

There's nothing on the source websites for these three images indicating where, when, or by whom the photos were taken. If you can locate a source that proves that the photos were taken in Afghanistan, then they could be re-tagged as PD, according to information here. If we don't have adequate source information to determine the copyright status of an image, we have to err on the side of caution, regardless of the usefulness of the image, because we are obligated to comply with the copyright requirements of the website. If you locate other images that qualify for deletion for copyright reasons, they should be nominated for deletion. Anyone can do this; you don't have to be an administrator. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:25, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Wakil Ahmed Muttawakil photo.png --> http://news.yahoo.com/pakistan-releases-top-afghan-taliban-prisoner-072422729.html "This March 4, 2001, file photo shows Taliban's then-Foreign Minister Wakil Ahmed Muttawakil in Kandahar, Afghanistan."

I can't find sources explaining locations for the other two though, but other images with that information should suffice. Also, File:Mokhtar Belmokhtar.png was produced by a recognized terrorist organisation, al-Mulathameen Battalion [4]. Does this disallow any copyright on the material they produce under U.S copyright law, or even international copyright law? Surely material produced by recognized terrorist organisations are exempt from copyright protection. StanMan87 (talk) 11:10, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be any such clause in American copyright law. Copyright law of the United States is where I checked. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:30, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Abdul Ahad Mohmand image

Hey thanks for the message. Can you check if the image is fine now here and can you also check if this image is fine here — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saadkhan12345 (talk • contribs)

Another admin has deleted the photo File:Abdul Ahad Mohmand.jpg. The photo has now been deleted three times - twice as a copyright violation and once as violating our non-free image guideline. It's a non-free image of a living person, which fails our fair use criteria. The second photo File:Benzair, Murtaza, Shahnawaz and Sanam (Only Sanam is alive).png has been nominated for deletion by another administrator as not meeting our fair-use requirements. If you disagree with this nomination, please follow the instructions on the file description page. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:32, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

I fail to understand something, you say that File:Abdul Ahad Mohmand.jpg is a non-free image of a living person, which fails our fair use criteria. So, how come File:Rewards for Justice Mullah Omar.png, which is also a non-free image of a living person (Mullah Omar), allowed in Wikipedia?--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 03:11, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

The image was kept as the result of a deletion discussion: Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2014 September 24#File:Rewards for Justice Mullah Omar.png. -- Diannaa (talk) 03:14, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I was the nominator. [5] The uploader claimed it was a free image but after a long discussion I proved it wasn't and then User:TLSuda decided to keep it by stating "change to non-free". So, if it is non-free then how does it meet our fair use criteria? The subject is a living person.--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 03:26, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

You need to ask the admin who closed the deletion discussion. -- Diannaa (talk) 03:49, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

It's useless to ask him, he'll just say that he only switched it from free to non-free. The fact is that it cannot qualify as fair-use for Wikipedia purposes and I'm sure you can agree. Also, regarding your this edit, what makes you think an Afghani citizen created that photo? It provides credit as AP (Associated Press)/ Kamal Khan, how do we know that Kamal Khan is not a Pakistani citizen? Besides, the photo was published in the United States, and likely never in Afghanistan because that country had no TVs and internet in March 2001.--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 07:09, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

You are free to nominate the image for deletion. The place to go is WP:PUF. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:18, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Suspected copyvio at Commons

Hi Dianna. Sorry for the disturbance but whenever you have the time can you please check this Port of Gemikonagi picture which is a suspected copyvio. The uploader Hadgimarvi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is a also a sockmaster and copyvio violator as per my talkpage section where I pinged you from. Thank you again. Take care. Δρ.Κ. <sup>λόγοςπράξις</sup> 15:39, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

The photo looks old, and is unlikely to be the uploader's own work. But I haven't found anything searching Google; I suspect it's copied from a book. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:46, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

That was my first guess exactly, that it was from a book. This is obviously a general question, and one I suspect is frequently asked at Commons, but is there something that can be done about this, or since it cannot be proven, it is left as is? Δρ.Κ. <sup>λόγοςπράξις</sup> 16:15, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Someone has nominated the file for deletion: commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:A view from the Ancient City Of Soli Vessels at the Port of Gemikonagi, Lefke Cyprus X.JPG. It's easy to do on the Commons, as depending on how you have your preferences set, there is a link on the left of the page to do it. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:43, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much Dianna. I was on my way to tell you, but I see you have all the details. :) Thank you also for the information about the preferences. I didn't know about that. Truth is I avoid Commons since they once tried to have my Rolex declared a fake and they wouldn't come up with a straight answer as to why. I haven't uploaded any pictures since. Δρ.Κ. <sup>λόγοςπράξις</sup> 20:39, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

deletion of File:Stevennielson.jpg

This is a verifiable image, administered by the LPWA and ballotpedia. Why did you delete? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eisenmond (talk • contribs)

In order to better protect the rights of copyright holders, we can't take your word for it that you have permission to upload the image to Wikipedia. What you have to do is get the copyright holder to send an email to the OTRS team releasing the material under a license compatible with the images being displayed here. There's instructions at WP:Consent. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:29, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Hermann Fegelein

I found and bought another book on Fegelein. It provides more detail of the atrocities and crimes he was involved in and gives a bit more info on why he received the Knight’s Cross in its various grades. If you have no objections, I will integrate this info into the article or post it on your talk page. Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 18:12, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Please go ahead and work directly in the article. User:Kierzek or myself can let you know on the talk page if there's any questions, and we will likely copy edit the new material once your additions are done. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:38, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good. Kierzek (talk) 20:46, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Adrian Năstase

I appreciate the semi-protection you placed on this, but the disruptive IP also has an account, who seems to be, shall we say, not here to build an encyclopedia. - Biruitorul <sup>Talk</sup> 19:40, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Blocked. The various IPs are too widely spread to use a range block; there's collateral damage, even with a fairly narrow block. The semi-protection will keep him away until 25 December, unless he has some sleeper accounts that we don't know about. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:02, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Prepare to be disgusted

I did not know whether I should speedy this, Template:Canadian Boar Semen, since actual sources were apparently provided. Still doubt its notability even if it is authentic. No, I did not care to read through the material very much. - Hoops gza (talk) 00:28, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

I was brave and BOLD and looked up all the sources. They are, indeed, legitimate companies and organizations. The book referenced is a legit book as well. The sources do need to be linked to actual sources/article, but it is legit article. Though, I am curious as to why it is a template.

As for notability, with that many references, I think it is notable. Plus, if artificial insemination can be done with cows (there's an article for that), I wouldn't doubt it would be possible with pigs.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to find some brain bleach. Yech! - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:44, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

The text is also available as User:Killick1/sandbox, so I listed the template at TfD. If the text is notable as an article, please move the user sandbox to the main namespace instead of the template as the user sandbox, unlike the template, contains the edit history. --Stefan2 (talk) 00:51, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

(ec) Bearcat deleted the same article yesterday Canadian Boar Semen as G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion. It's an advert disguised as an article, as well as being misplaced in template space. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:53, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

If that is indeed the case, shouldn't it just be speedied? - Hoops gza (talk) 03:03, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Yah. -- Diannaa (talk) 03:09, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Portrait of Xiao Hui Wang Black Background.jpg

Hello Diannaa;

I apologize for any confusion. This is my fair use rationale summary. As you may recall, in my previous upload of this image, I listed point by point how, in my view at least, this image passed all the tests. I will explain again if necessary, point by point. However, the stated reason for deletion was that this is an "image of a living person". My argument essentially was that there is currently no free equivalent of this image, as per my research, and it (in my view) is not easy to make one (how would one create one?). The person is a public figure of international renown, and this image is from her public Weibo profile (http://www.weibo.com/wangxiaohui2010), where the copyright status is unknown. Can you please explain how an image like this would not be fair use as opposed to the one for, say the Tom Cruise article, is? Was it public domain?

Another reason it was deleted was that it was not used in any article yet; however, that is because I was not done preparing the basic article. I now have, and will include the formatting in the draft on my page if the image is approved. Would the image, or another, be acceptable? My intent is not to rile any feathers, just to upload an image that complies with the policy

Piotr (Venezuela) (talk) 08:45, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Piotr. Wikipedia:Non-free content#UUI is the relevant content guideline. Images of living people are not as a rule eligible for fair use. The first image used in the Tom Cruise article (File:Tom Cruise avp 2014 4.jpg) has an OTRS ticket, which means that the photographer has sent an email to Wikipedia giving permission for us to use the photo and releasing it under a compatible license. If you don't have a photo of Xiao Hui Wang that you took yourself, you might consider contacting her and getting an image released under license in the same way. The instructions as to how to do this are at WP:consent. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:20, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Cure Bowl logo

It's fine to delete it. Somebody converted it from a .jpg to a .png file Roberto221 (talk) 10:38, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Hitler photo

Would a photo such as this make a good addition to Hitler's article? - Hoops gza (talk) 05:57, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Good idea; also see my note on the Hitler talk page as to the date of the photos. Cheers, Kierzek (talk) 17:40, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Could you please go thru this article?

Hi Diannaa, sorry to trouble you but could you please go thru this articel? Mumbai Fire Brigade has a lot of content that I believe is either OR or a copyvio. I'm hoping that your experience in such matters would hep out. Thanks. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 06:07, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

I didn't find any copy vio, using this tool. As is common for articles about India, most of the article is unsourced. User:DMacks has made some large cuts since your post. I will go over it as well and trim a few things. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:22, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Yes, I did ask DMacks to have a look too. He removed some amount of copyvios and OR. Once again, thank you. :) --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 17:36, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

I did in the end find some copy vio, from one of the book sources. This is something that the automated tool does not catch. The only remaining problematic part of the article is events of the 2008 attacks, which remains unsourced. -- Diannaa (talk) 17:56, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very very much! This really helps a lot. As for the 2008 issue, I'll find a ref in some local newspaper. Once again, thank you for the great job. :) --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 18:04, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

File:El tanbura first album.jpg

You deleted this as F5, but it says that the file currently is used in El tanbura, where it appears to violate WP:NFCC#8. What should be done with it? --Stefan2 (talk) 00:53, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

I have restored the file and re-nominated under the correct criterion. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:21, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Bruno Gesche

D-- I did some ce work to this article recently but frankly the article text bothers me; it reads too much like it comes out of an uncited book. I believe it may have copy right problems in the text which has been added by others over time. Can you check it when you get a chance for that? I would appreciate it. Kierzek (talk) 01:17, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Most of the content has been there pretty much since the beginning, all added by a user: Dok101. See for example this diff. Nothing is turning up using a Google search. The source book Hitler's Personal Security by Peter Hoffmann does not seem to have been copied from. There's another book listed, but it's in German, and is not available via Google. I have hit a dead end here. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:39, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Reply to post

Diannaa,

Thank you for your reply to my request for help! Your reply to what I posted on my talk page was

"We don't make subpages in main space. Please break the topic up into a group of articles. Each article should be no more than 10,000 words."

So, it seems there is a misunderstanding in terminology. What I've called subpages are probably what you mean by articles. My original version of light front quantization was much too long, and I broke into one main page and a group of four additional articles. Only one of these (sub) articles was posted after I submitted the four on 30 August, and that one was posted incorrectly, at light-front quantization. Please go to my talk page to see more details, and please let me know what I need to do next, so that this group of articles can be installed correctly.

Thanks again!

John HillerJR (talk) 15:36, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:02, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you!

Diannaa, Thank you for your advice! I've restructured the content for my group of articles and found that I could change the one incorrect name by 'moving' the orphaned article. To complete the group I have uploaded a new article, which is now waiting for review. The group comprises Light front quantization, Light-front quantization applications, and Light-front computational methods. The third one is the one up for review.

John HillerJR (talk) 13:48, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

File Vincent logo

Hi Diannaa,

The image is still in use on the Vincent Aviation page thanks. CHCBOY (talk) 07:55, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Vincent Aviation logo.png is in use, and File:Vincent Aviation logo.jpg is not. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:47, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Licensing of images

Hi, have these images entered the public-domain yet?

1. File:Aribert Heim.jpg
2. File:Josef Mengele.jpg
3. File:Eichmann, Adolf.jpg

--Ritsaiph (talk) 16:38, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

the Hirtle chart is used to determine copyright status. For these three photos, see the section titled "Works Published Abroad Before 1978". We don't know enough about the publication history to determine the copyright status of these three images, because we don't know who the photographer was or when they died, and we don't know whether or not the photos were ever registered with the US copyright office or if the copyright was renewed. In cases like these, we have to assume the images are still under copyright. Hence they are tagged as fair use. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:28, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Does this mean that File:Alois Brunner 1940.JPG must be deleted? --Ritsaiph (talk) 06:38, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

The image should have been uploaded locally and tagged as fair use. It should not be on the Commons. I will fix it -- Diannaa (talk) 15:47, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

File:WrestleMania31logo.png

Thank you for informing me with that template notice that the image had been removed. It was not removed with a valid reason, and has been restored to use until one is provided. I'll keep an eye on it in case it happens again. CRRaysHead90 | <sup>#RaysUp</sup> 02:01, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt action. It sure looks like it's still the current logo, looking at the official website here. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:05, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

December Wikification drive.

Greetings! Just letting you know the December wikification drive has been started. Better late than never. Cheers! :) Heading for the 20's, living in the Wild Wild Wikipedia! (talk) 18:44, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

File:San Juan Bautista District, showing relation to villages of San Juan Bautista, El Carmen, Olive and others. This District is just to north of city of Ica, Peru, and is primarily agricultural.jpg

I'm a little late responding to this note in my talk page (I don't even know yet what a talk page is .. ;-) So, I am trying to have an informed dialogue about what this problem is that your signature was addressing. I personally created this image so I am having trouble understanding why it was removed or if it was removed or what file permission problems you are pointing out.

Agthorn (talk) 18:14, 5 December 2014 (UTC)AgthornAgthorn (talk) 18:14, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

I deleted the image in April 2013. The problem is that the image was previously published elsewhere online (at http://www.lamaministry.org/?q=media-gallery/detail/31/657) before you uploaded it here. What this means is that you will need to prove you are the copyright holder or have the copyright holder's permission to publish the image on this website. There's instructions how to do this at WP:Consent. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:13, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Scout Image

Whats wrong with this screenshot I uploaded? What kind of rational / copyright notice am I supposed to add? -- Wonderfl <sup>(reply)</sup> 07:47, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

It was missing a license tag. I have added one. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:20, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

GOCE November copy editing drive awards

		The Minor Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Diannaa for copy edits totaling between 1 and 3,999 words during the GOCE November 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:13, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

The Holocaust definition, once again

I don't know what possessed me to plunge back in to this, as you can see (in two places on the Holocaust talk page) I made the mistake of reverting an insertion which added in 5 million non-jews to the total figure for the definition of the Holocaust (as separate from Nazi genocides). It is clear from the discussion that more sensible (and experienced) parties are need--I hope that they haven't all been scared away. Any suggestions? --Joel Mc (talk) 13:11, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

No, I don't have any suggestions, and I am not planning on participating. Sorry, -- Diannaa (talk) 15:29, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Probably beating a retreat is in order for me. Even in deep retirement I don't really have time to spend going in circles. Thanks, also, for all the good work you have done on the Nazi pages, particularly Eichmann and Himmler (the Longerich book is brilliant). Merry Christmas.--Joel Mc (talk) 08:02, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

That's my thinking as well: my time is better invested elsewhere, unfortunately. Maybe someday. Good to hear from you. Regards, -- Diannaa (talk) 14:41, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Wrong article Delection

This article Ebun (2014 film) did not infringement on any copyright with http://www.oloriharbeesorlarblog.com.ng/2014/12/saint-joseph-ovensehi-director-of-gift.html?m=1)

i was the one that sent the press release and images to the blogger to feature on his blog, so the content still belong to the movie producer.

so i dont know why you will delete the articles with out proper findings how can a blogger have right to movie poster and release, which was original sent to him by the producer of the movie

i want to to recreate this article

hope to read from you soonest

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterodionjohn (talk • contribs) 08:08, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images that have already appeared elsewhere online. The article will be deleted. If you are the the copyright holder, or the copyright holder has given permission for the material to appear on this wiki, what you need to do is get an OTRS ticket in place on the article. There's instructions at WP:Consent. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:39, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello

Hello Diannaa it is I. I think you know who I am, you can probably tell by my IP adress, and I just want you to not block me this time. I know what I did wrong and I am very sorry for doing so. That article I wrote was very defamatory and does not belong on wikipedia. I am sorry for posting such an unjust thing and I want you to know that I am very sorry for doing so. I also attempted to vandalize your page and I am sorry for that. I am just a 14 year old kid that tried to hide behind his computer and do stupid things. I am sorry for what I did. Please forgive me for vandalizing your page and writing the Blake Zarroff article. I am sorry. 96.18.103.195 (talk) 00:09, 9 December 2014 (UTC)Alex

Copyright verification

One user recently inserted a quotation on Voltaire, it is copied from dailystormer, an unreliable citation. My question is, if it is violating copyrights. Also if it is not violating them, then I can copy the actual quote from this page(A reliable citation)? Bladesmulti (talk) 09:41, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

It's okay to use short quotations of copyright materials, please see WP:NFCCP for the exact policy. The copyright has expired on Voltaire's writings, and possibly on the translations too, depending on what year they were produced. (Translations generate their own copyright.) -- Diannaa (talk) 16:06, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

7-inch Single Picture Sleeve Image

Hello Diannaa,

Was your recent flagging of the picture sleeve image of the 1958 7-inch single release of the Harry Simeone Chorale's version of "The Little Drummer Boy" due to the fact that the image is not used in another article on wikipedia? I thought it was eligible for display in any wikipedia article due to the fair use clause without being in violation of any copyright statutes?

Thanks.

Sliv812 (talk) 17:44, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

The image was not displaying, because someone entered the words "By: Jack Hansen" in the field after the file name, which broke the info box. I have fixed the problem and removed the deletion template from the file. Thanks for reporting this problem. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:21, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

This is not exactly Wikipedia-related, but it's extremely important to me on a personal level so would appreciate a reply

I know this is going to sound like a stupid question ... but It's imperative I get this completely right. According to this source, Moscow Time is 3 hours ahead of Coordinated Universal Time. This would mean that it's currently (notice the time I saved this edit) 22 minutes passed 1 in the night in Moscow, right? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 22:22, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

yes, correct. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:27, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Brennan.jpg

Could you check what's in the deleted revisions? Files with this name have apparently been deleted a couple of times for various copyright reasons, and I'm wondering if the problems also apply to the current file. --Stefan2 (talk) 23:23, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

The image was repeatedly re-uploaded by user:Percypage and repeatedly deleted. In one upload, he notes that the image is "Photo credit: Bob Blakey", and in another he states it "belongs to me and is featured on my website: www.brianbrennan.ca". I don't think we have adequate source info or proof that we have the right to display the image here. Qualifies for speedy deletion under F4 and F11. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:47, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Two big ones down!

--Mkativerata (talk) 19:36, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Range block calculator

I saw your post at VPT. I don't have the time to work out how labs operates but it's conceivable that I could make a module to calculate a simple IPv4 range. The usage would be that you would preview a sandbox containing something like:

{{#invoke:ipv4range|ipv4range|11.22.33.44|11.22.28.5|11.22.140.9}}

The preview would show the result, namely a single CIDR range such as 11.22.48.0/20 or an error message if the IPs are not covered by a single range with /16 or a larger number. (I made up that result—it is not correct for these IPs.) Would that be useful? Did the real tool output multiple CIDR blocks if required to cover the IPs? That, and IPv6, would be rather more tricky. Johnuniq (talk) 03:37, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into this. For the old tool, I would list the IPs in a box, and the calculator would provide the range under which the IPs all fell, and state how many IPs are in the range. For example "190.106.222.0/25 (up to 128 users would be blocked)". The tool would only generate one result, no matter how large the range. If it looked like there was too much collateral damage, I would split the IPs into smaller groups to try to find the narrowest possible range that would do the job. Calculating IPv6 blocks was not possible with this tool. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:29, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Please try {{blockcalc}} and let me know if it does the job. I haven't given it a detailed check yet because I want to see if it is useful before spending more time on it, however, it seems to do what you describe. In case you're wondering, there are many templates that have a name beginning with "IP" so logical names like "IPrange" or whatever are a bit crowded. I wonder what tools other admins use. If you think it's worthwhile, it would be good to get other people looking at it. Johnuniq (talk) 07:00, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

The tool works, and is very fast. Thank you very much! -- Diannaa (talk) 15:26, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Doubt

Please explain what is right and wrong symbols suggest in this page.--Vin09 (talk) 05:57, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

A red X means that no copyright violations were found. A green check mark means that copyright violations were found, and the specified action taken. If you look in the edit history, the edit summary for the removal of the content lists the source from which the copying occurred. A question mark means that it's unclear whether or not a violation has occurred, usually because the source is not accessible. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:21, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Your misadministration

I suggest you don't blindly accuse people of sockpuppetry because they say things that do not fit your views, specially when you do not check the country the IP is located in or how old it is first. Furthermore I also suggest you quit your censorship, the reason for me getting into that discussion in the first place. 80.61.189.47 (talk) 15:24, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Matt Smith (actor)

I was asking for extension on already-PC-protected page. Why turning it down, even when one editor frequently watches it? --George Ho (talk) 19:58, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

The protection has not yet expired. Pages are not protected pre-emptively. In my opinion, the level of disruption does not warrant PC-protection. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:19, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

GOCE copyedit quality

Hi again, Diannaa. It's election time again at the Guild, and there is a minor discussion of how to maintain copyediting quality. When I joined four years ago, you were checking copyedits and I liked your approach (basically, a simple "Nice job"). Do you remember what you did for subpar copyedits? I'm trying to strike a balance between the carrot and the stick :-). All the best, Miniapolis 21:42, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Normally I would re-do the copy edit in one pass with a clean diff and cover additional points on their talk page regarding stuff that was not obvious from the diff. I would always open with comments on what they did right and thank them for participating. I would not copy edit as many articles myself during drives where I did a lot of reviewing, as it's time consuming, as there's teaching involved. Here's two sample reviews: User talk:Diannaa/Archive 6#Check yet another newb's work?; User talk:Diannaa/Archive 6#Review of copy-edit. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:42, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, and you're right about the choice between copyediting and reviewing during drives. Miniapolis 03:16, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Early popes

Hello Dianna. There's a crowd in the Philipines vandalising dates of early popes - see my contribs and I'm getting tired - what's the word, whack a mole. Anyone out there feels like doing some reverting? SlightSmile 01:26, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

• 119.93.139.143 (talk · contribs)
• 119.93.41.174 (talk · contribs)
• 122.3.85.113 (talk · contribs)
• 122.52.147.193 (talk · contribs)
• 124.107.71.99 (talk · contribs) -- Diannaa (talk) 02:02, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gold Beach

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Gold Beach you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Nick-D -- Nick-D (talk) 07:20, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

16/32 bit C Programming

Hi. You deleted the subject page twice, for being a copyvio of http://susantk.wordpress.com/1632-bits-programming-concept/. Thank you for that. Based on their user talk pages, it appears that two distinct users with similar names created those instances you deleted, Monalisha143 (talk · contribs) and Sonalisha (talk · contribs); thus I suspect collusion or some other sort of chicanery. I can't definitively confirm that activity with page creation logs. If you can confirm it, please consider starting a WP:SPI. Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 18:42, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jeff. No need to add to the backlog at SPI; it's obvious the accounts are related. Note they thirdly created the article as 32/16 bit C programming, which is now a redirect to C (programming language). Neither account has edited since the 9th, so I suspect they will stop, as their sole primary purpose here was to created this one article. I have added a sock template to Monalisha143, as it was the later acct. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:00, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 19:08, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

La La

This is La La Anthony...I personally wanted to thank you for removing my birthdate as it was wrong. Thank you so much Diannaa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lalaanthony625 (talk • contribs) 01:04, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Commons and redirects

When deleting a file per F8, remember to check if the file has any redirects. For example, File:The Lord Watson of Richmond.jpg, which you just deleted, has a local redirect. When a file is deleted, all local redirects immediately stop working, so any page(s) using the redirect need to be updated, and the redirect presumably needs to be deleted, although I'm not sure which criterion to use. If a redirect is useful, you can create one on Commons instead. --Stefan2 (talk) 01:15, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for semi-protecting my talk page while I was blocked.

Lightbreather (talk) 19:49, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gold Beach

The article Gold Beach you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Gold Beach for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Nick-D -- Nick-D (talk) 10:41, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Congrats, Kierzek (talk) 14:14, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, -- Diannaa (talk) 15:10, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

IP whose edit was reverted

Is possibly a sockpuppet pf User:Sven70 - see User talk:163.32.125.221. Perhaps you've reverted another sock of Sven's. Dougweller (talk) 14:07, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Widening range block to 163.32.124.0/23. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:00, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Would you mind

taking a quick peek at the phiti licensing for File:William Coleman Memorial Fountain, Sacramento, California, USA, Ralph Stackpole, sculptor.jpg and let me know if I have got it right? Carptrash (talk) 15:39, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that's exactly what I had in mind. Thanks, -- Diannaa (talk) 19:34, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Creative Commons

Does Creative Commons License apply to the entire world or only in the United States? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 21:14, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Worldwide. See for example cc-by-2.0. Creative Commons license -- Diannaa (talk) 21:20, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Seasonal Greets!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015 !!!

Hello Diannaa, May you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New year 2015. Happy editing, The Herald : here I am Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Pilot error

I did some housekeeping, which backfired. Are these templates substitutable (there's template code only in edit mode—no documentation)? As if you couldn't tell, these were my first template deletions (and may be my last :-)). All the best, Miniapolis 18:29, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

I tested a few, and some of them substitute okay, and some don't. An option to deletion would be to mark them as {{Deprecated template}} so no new uses take place. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:06, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Will do, since I restored them. Thanks, and happy holidays! All the best, Miniapolis 02:49, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

All the best to you also. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:53, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Deleted Image

Please help me understand why you deleted an image of the new pasta type Anelloni which the copyright holder had specifically distributed for usage in articles such as this one, and when no other images are available anywhere on the Internet. If you insist that this is according to Wikipedia's policy then Wikipedia's policy is in error. I find it laughable that someone should have to create a plate of this specific type of pasta from scratch, then take a photo of it, just to bypass the use of an image that the copyright holder has already granted permission on. No one is going to put in several hours of effort to duplicate an image that will take up an area the size of a postage stamp in one minor article and that has already been granted permission. Jtrevor99 (talk) 23:12, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

File:University of Warwick - Anelloni.jpg. The way the pasta is laying on the plate, it's impossible to tell that it's in ring shapes or that there is anything at all unusual about it. The photo does not tell us anything that cannot be described using words alone. It therefore fails WP:NFCC #1 and #8. Sources such as this one where the image is marked © University of Warwick demonstrate that the image is copyright, and that the copyright holder has not granted permission for the photo to appear here or anywhere else, but does indeed reserve copyright on the image. If you disagree with the deletion of the image, the place to go is Wikipedia:Deletion review. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:26, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. It's not worth challenging as I know I wouldn't win that fight. My "beef" is with Wikipedia's policy itself, not your interpretation or enforcement of it; in this case that policy resulted in a decision that runs contrary to common sense. Wikipedia was granted permission as the photo was part of a press release the University of Warwick distributed on this subject. And, while the photo indeed could be recreated, the amount of effort it would take relative the importance of that photo makes it very unlikely anyone will do so. Oh well - perhaps I'll be surprised! Jtrevor99 (talk) 23:40, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Enjoy!

		Happy Holiday Cheer
		Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an Awesome Holiday and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys! Paine

Allies of World War II talk page debate

Hello, I do understand that some of the editors do not agree with me. But, the material is long standing and a debate should be allowed to take place it was only started on December 20th. The previous removal of material was arbitrary and without a formal discussion on the talk page. I object to the bullying by other senior users who simply removed the material without opening a discussion, then started to accuse me of edit warring. I think the History page of the edits speaks for itself. They, not me are breaking the rules set out in the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. A proper discussion needs to run its course. Especially that some users asked for sources which I'm looking for at the moment, I should be afforded the opportunity to find them! --E-960 (talk) 00:24, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Replied at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Calidum is arbitrarily removing material up that being discussed on the Talk Page -- Diannaa (talk) 00:39, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

NLMUSD

Thank you for deleting the redirect. I accidentally userd articles for creation. I meant to create it without the use of articles for creation. I created it and tagged the page for deletion. Sorry for the bother and thank you for your assistance,
STJMLCC (talk) 05:01, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Allies of World War II Discussion

I would like to protest the way this debate was carried out… initially long standing material was removed with out opening a discussion, when I reverted the edit, it happened again. Eventually, one of the editors opened a discussion. But, other editors kept removing the material in question and after only 12 hours it was decided that the debate is settled and content removed.

This is not how a debate should take place, with bullying or attempts to block the opposition. A debate should be open for more then 12 hours to allow time for other editors to notice the discussion, make their voice heard and have the process rushed by a group of editors who form a clique. There may be other editors who oppose this change, but because the debate was rushed and closed in less then a day, they did not have the time to notice the issue. Not everyone sits around scanning Wikipedia.

These editors who opposed me, are the very same edits who on the WWII page started a RfC to remove content for the WWII infobox. All of them jumped in at the same time and voted to remove content, now they moved to the Allies of World War II. Yet, none of them were present when just a short time ago the Allies of World War II page was in sore need of serious clean up (fixing some very basic issues) which is what I did. I'm standing up to a group of editors who obviously want to impose a POV and as noted earlier use coercive tactics to do so. Some of them did not bother to edit anything on the page until this debate opened up, and on cue started to show up to close rank and shut down opposition. If you think I'm making wild accusation just look at the recently closed debate on WWII talk page, and compare the names, and if any of them bother do do any previous work on the Allies of World War II page.

What happened to the standard approach, someone makes a change, another editor objects reverts, and a discussion takes place and is left open for a couple of days? Instead we see this group of editors use every underhand method to cause confusion in the process and blame the opposition for edit warring. --E-960 (talk) 10:50, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

You've said quite a few incorrect things in the above post:

• The content wasn't long-standing; it was added on November 8 when you added the info box. This is only five weeks; that's not a long time, not even in Internet years.
• The debate was not open for twelve hours; the first talk page post on the topic was at 21:46, 19 December 2014. You opened the ANI thread at 23:41, 20 December 2014, 26 hours later.
• The RFC on the WWII info box was not opened by the very same editors; it was opened by The ed17, who did not edit or offer an opinion at the other article. Of the five editors who offered an opinion on Allies of WWII, only two offered an opinion during the RFC at WWII.
• I'm not seeing any evidence of collusion, POV pushing, or coercive tactics. Sure, there's some editors in common on both pages, but that's not unusual, as the material is related. They probably have both articles on their watch-list.

As it stands right now, there's five editors opposing the inclusion of the content and only one in favour. It's unlikely that enough editors would show up supporting the inclusion of the content to sway the consensus, no matter how long the debate is left open. Regardless, once the content has been challenged, it should stay out until the matter is settled. The BRD cycle calls for Bold addition of content - Revert addition of content - Discuss. It's not B-R-R-R-R-R-R-D! As soon as your addition is challenged and removed, you need to go to the talk page to justify its inclusion. You don't get to edit war to have the page at your preferred version while the debate is underway. That only leads to edit wars and hard feelings, and is contrary to the BRD cycle. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:18, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Vandalism

I'm befuddled that the IP address 82.134.28.194 has not yet been banned or at least blocked from editing. The talk page of the address in person is filled with warnings and whatnot. What's your take on this? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 01:30, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

The IP seems pretty static, but they are never permanently assigned. There's been no edits from this IP since September, so there's no reason to block. -- Diannaa (talk) 04:33, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Military Historian of the Year 2014

		The WikiProject Barnstar
		For your extensive contributions to the Military history WikiProject, as evidenced by your nomination in the 2014 "Military Historian of the Year" awards, I am delighted to present you with this WikiProject Barnstar! TomStar81 (Talk) 02:30, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much! A real honour -- Diannaa (talk) 04:36, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Congrats. Kierzek (talk) 16:47, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Copy vio

You are investigating my copyright materials. I already asked you doubt regarding "X" and "right" mark. You told for right mark copy vio is found and specified action will be taken. One of my article Economy of Telangana was deleted. So, atlast after thorough investigation. If such things are found, will I get blocked for copy vio?--Vin09 (talk) 06:12, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

No, you will not be blocked for this, because you made no edits to the article after the CCI case was opened and you assured us that you now understood our requirements. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:52, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Doubt

Kollur mandal, Chirala mandal, Penamaluru mandal and many article of upto 30 I have used same kind of sentences, but those are not copied from any site. Say, "Kolluru mandal is in Guntur district" and in rest of the pages I have replaced kolluru with specific mandal keeping the sentence same. I've asked another editor who was investigating my copy vios, he told those are not copy vios as they are your own sentences. So, any comments from you. You can see my user page at this where it is titled Mandals(40).--Vin09 (talk) 07:25, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

There's been lots of cases where editors write a set of new articles on a given topic (for example sports teams, football players, railway stations, etc.) that are very similar in their wording. This is okay to do as long as you are the author of the copied material. It is not considered as a copyright violation. If you copy someone else's writing from one Wikipedia article to another, you are required to mention it in the edit summary to give proper attribution. There's also templates available that can be placed on the talk pages of the two articles. There's more information on this topic at WP:copying within Wikipedia. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:15, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Merry Merry

To you and yours

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:33, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

You're killing wikipedia

Congrats, you're already aware of this, just thought I'd scratch it into the record. 76.68.49.155 (talk) 08:46, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

"Killing it softly with her song". Diannaa, just ignore "the Ebenezer Scrooge". Kierzek (talk) 16:51, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Hey stop killing Wikipedia! SlightSmile 18:24, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

I am the Tony Soprano of Wikipedians. You heard it here first ~! -- Diannaa (talk) 19:34, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Inappropriate edits and associated edit summaries

Hello there! I've found you via Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to handle RevisionDelete requests; could you please have a look at the recent history of the Talk:GeForce 600 series talk page, and its associated article? In a few words, one IP address keeps insulting me, without expressing any willingness to discuss the issues politely and calmly. What would be the chances for hiding some of those revisions, please? It isn't that I'm highly offended by those, it's just that I find them totally undeserved. Any help or insight would be highly appreciated! — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 18:37, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Done. 124.82.32.39 is the same person as 210.187.216.58, so I have blocked the IP for block evasion and personal attacks. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:55, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much, and thank you for handling it so quickly! — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 20:03, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Guatemalan IP back after IP rangeblock expired.

The Guatemalan vandal (190.106.222.86 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)) is once again changing dates to albums without a source after the rangeblock expired, this time not only Latin albums but also English-language albums as well. On an unrelated note, happy holidays! Erick (talk) 22:29, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Erick. 190.106.222.0/25 blocked for 6 months. Best wishes to you at the holidays, -- Diannaa (talk) 22:33, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Frohe Weihnachten 2014

D-- I hope you have a relaxing Christmas holiday. Cheers, Kierzek (talk) 14:15, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! Best wishes to you also. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:40, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

"And God bless us, every one"

Merry Christmas my friend. All the best to you and your family. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 21:48, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! Best wishes to you also. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:20, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Merry Xmas!

	Merry Xmas!
	Merry Xmas and a Happy New Year! 5 albert square (talk) 23:56, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Best and Brightest of the Season to you and yours!

Hi Dianna. I wish you a very Happy Holiday Season and a Happy New Year! Take care. Δρ.Κ. <sup>λόγοςπράξις</sup> 00:46, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi, thanks for deleting the inappropiate edit in my talk page. I was AFK so didnt have the time to remove it myself. Cheers!! MbahGondrong (talk) 20:28, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Glad to help. Best wishes, -- Diannaa (talk) 20:31, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Cigarette packets in Australia

Hi Diannaa. I am somewhat annoyed that an image I up loaded to this article has been removed on grounds of copyright. There is a discussion on the deletion page. I am contacting you because you uploaded it to the commons. I gained the impression from the discussion that my original image on en.wiki might still exist and be usable, because the restrictions on the commons were more severe. In any case I can't find my original image. If you read my comments on the discussion page, you will understand why I think the image should have remained on the article. It should be possible to show this image for the historical record. It shows the health warning images designed, and mandated, by the Australian Department of Health. Best wishes --Greenmaven (talk) 01:46, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

I will get it set up for fair use. Stay tuned -- Diannaa (talk) 01:53, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Finis: File:Australian cigarette pack with health warning December 2012.jpg, and added to the article. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:08, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Diannaa. You are a gem! --Greenmaven (talk) 02:44, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thanks for your many contributions to Wikipedia. You have been one of my unofficial mentors. Kind regards. Greenmaven (talk) 02:47, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much ~! -- Diannaa (talk) 02:53, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

User:PSBaritoManiakk

Could I get you to block 107.167.99.143 (talk · contribs). The IP is being used by PSBaritoManiakk (talk · contribs), whom you blocked yesterday, to continue the same behaviour that you blocked them for. Take a look at the edit summary to this edit in particular. Thanks in advance. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:32, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

I have blocked for 2 days. The IP is a cell phone. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:39, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Jasmina Keber, speed badminton World Champion 2013.jpg

You deleted this as F11 back in 2011. The file information page is now unavailable, but there is still something broken left of the file, and MediaWiki suggests that the file is on Commons as File:Jasmina keber WM2013.jpg. Does the permission problem also apply to the file on Commons? --Stefan2 (talk) 16:07, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

The image was first uploaded to sl.wiki and was uploaded to en.wiki a few minutes later by the same user. There's nothing like it found in a Google search. The en.wiki copy has the boilerplate messages "Sent to me personally" and "Evidence: Will be provided on request" that we often see when a paid editor uploads an image of their client. I restored and re-deleted the file, and can confirm that it is the same photograph. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:18, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

I guess that the file should be nominated for deletion on Commons due to the conflicting source information, then. I discovered that there were 63 files on Wikipedia without a file information page. This was one of them, some are listed at WP:REFUND#Various file information pages and most were orphaned non-free files or broken files which I simply tagged with {{subst:orfud}} or {{db-f2}}. --Stefan2 (talk) 16:31, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Diannaa. You have new messages at WP:AIV.
Message added 16:43, 29 December 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Narutolovehinata5 <sup>tccsdnew</sup> 16:43, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Rsjhnson.jpg

I was wondering if you had an opinion on the use of this image. I want to use it in the Egon Mayer article. Thanks in advance MisterBee1966 (talk) 19:42, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

The image was first uploaded here, without a source, in January 2006. It was deleted as unsourced in May 2006. The same fellow (User:Albert Lowe) re-uploaded the image in May 2006 describing it as a 1944 publicity picture taken by USAAF. Someone copied it to the Commons in 2010. We still don't have enough source information to say for sure whether or not the copyright tag is correct. I was unable to find a source online that predates the upload. Since Egon Mayer is already a Good Article, I would not add it. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:52, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Concerning Template:User Kor

I'll put a redirect to the other one. I thought creating 2 would increase accessibility by utilizing 2 names... Nguyễn Quốc Việt (talk)

Okay, sounds perfect. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:24, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Regarding Template:Rfd2

Just wanted to inquire about your response to my protection request for Template:Rfd2. From what I have been informed of previously (and from somewhere I cannot recall off the top of my head), pages in the "Template" and "Module" namespace are exempt from the "can only be protected if there is proof of previous and recent vandalism" rule, provided that there is proof that the template or module either has a very high transclusion count or is part of a heavily-used process (such as the WP:XFD forums). Just curious ... what are your thoughts? Steel1943 (talk) 01:32, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

The template seems to have only three transclusions, as it has to be substituted. It does not appear to be a high-risk template for that reason. I will add it to my watch-list. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:37, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Understood, and thank you. Either way, it looks like the template ended up being protected by Fuhghettaboutit. I was more or less curious since I'm in an ongoing "quest" (you could say) to understand the general direction of Wikipedia so that I don't accidentally end up performing vandalistic or unnecessary edits/requests. Steel1943 (talk) 01:43, 31 December 2014 (UTC)