User talk:Jbhunley/Archives/2018/March

I screwed up on ANI

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Deletion_TBAN_proposal_for_Rusf10 and (diff)

It seems my comment looked too much like a new proposal and that you commented on it as it it was! It was not supposed to be a new proposal in itself and I am very sorry about that. I fixed it by 'hating' my comment to avoid anyone else thinking the same thing. However this means you have two identical comments on that thread now, you might want to remove one or add a note of explanation, I would have 'fixed' it myself if it wasn't a matter of removing/refactoring someone else's comment which isn't allowed. Thanks. Prince of Thieves (talk) 20:15, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

@Prince of Thieves: Sorry, I did think it was a new proposal and screwed things up further with my "making things clearer". I would say to go ahead and 'hat' the Opposes too since they are all part of the same thread and do not make sense on their own. Jbh ^Talk 20:45, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

No worries. I did that. Prince of Thieves (talk) 20:50, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Page redirection

Dear sir, thank you for reviewing the Page Kikira, It is important to note that this fictional character is very notable in Bengali Literature. It is not appropriate to move the page to Bimal Mitra since it has individual importance in Wikipedia. I have also put few references of English Text Book and newspaper link which may be reliable. It is my earnest request to revert and make it a different page. With regards, Thank you Pinakpani (talk) 18:17, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

@Pinakpani: Please see the guidelines for book-derivative articles. They say, in part, "...it is not normally advisable to have a separate article on a character or thing from [a] book..." Essentially, unless the character can be shown to be exceptionally notable - like Sherlock Holmes, we generally do not have a separate article on them. Typically characters should be redirected to the book/series article in which they appear and may have a section in that article.

If you feel the character is exceptionally notable, I suggest that you first write an article about the book or series they appear in. For an idea of the type of sourcing required for an article on a book please see the notability criteria for books. Jbh ^Talk 18:36, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Chetsford. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Blyew v. United States, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

Chetsford (talk) 18:20, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

@Chetsford: Thanks. I forgot to unclick review after adding the tag. Jbh ^Talk 18:23, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

@Jbhunley: - sorry, I think the bot left this message on my behalf. I only clicked unreview as I wasn't looking carefully and had seen you'd already reviewed it, so it was my mistake. Sorry for the confusion! Chetsford (talk) 18:26, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

No problem. I should have unreviewed it myself because I think it needs another set of eyes. There might be more copyright/close paraphrase issues that I missed. Enjoy your weekend! Jbh ^Talk 18:39, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Deletion of 'Homoplasy' page

Dear Jbhunley: On 3 March 2018,21:09, you marked the 'Homoplasy' page for deletion with speedy deletion-copyright violation tag. Would you be so kind as to explain why? Homoplasy is an important notion in evolutionary biology, and elements of explanation can be found for example on the cladistics page, in the paragraph about homoplastic character states. Thank you! Manudouz (talk) 07:48, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

@Manudouz: the article was tagged and deleted as a WP:COPYVIO because the content, or a large portion of the content, was directly copied from another site. Wikipedia requires all content to be written in your own words. If you wish to recreate the article please re-write it in your own words and then provide reference to reliable source(s) to satisfy the requirements of verifibility. Jbh ^Talk 16:18, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the answer. However, I cannot find which part of the Homoplasy page is involved in the copy from another site. The article content is quite short, and all three paragraphs (including the figure caption) are clearly sourced: Pages & Holmes (1998), Chirat et al 2013 (doi=10.1073/pnas.1220443110), and Henning (1966). So, could you clarify this point? -- Manudouz (talk) 16:42, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

@Manudouz: I can not say now since the article is deleted and with it the link to the comparison page. As I remember it 50-60% of the text was word for word from another web page. It was also, if I remember properly, written with so much jargon that it was impossible for a non-expert to figure out what it was saying and reword it in a copyright compliant manner.

This tool will allow you to examine the text of any Wikipedia page for flagrant copyright violations. You can also copy/paste various sections of the article text into various search engines to see what pops up. Both are good ways to check articles you write because often, especially with short articles, it is very easy to reuse phrases you have read or to use 'standard' phrases and definitions. Jbh ^Talk 17:04, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

@Jbhunley: All right. Thank you for the detailed information and tool. Manudouz (talk) 17:19, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Negative harmony

Hi there, I replied to your proposal with comments, which included merging the text into Ernst Levy. You didn't do that and the page has now been deleted. Please could you merge the text into Ernst Levy as suggested? Millstream3 (talk) 10:23, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

@Millstream3: As near as I could tell, based on scanning through Theory of Harmony and using the search function, the term is never used in the book. Nor could I find any reference to the term outside blogs and YouTube.

Wikipedia's notability guidelines require significant coverage in independent reliable sources to demonstrate the notability of an article subject. What this means is a source must be published by a third party with a solid reputation for fact checking and accuracy. We need this to be able to verify the information in an article. Without significant coverage it is not possible to have a Wikipedia article and without third party sourcing it is inappropriate to include the term in another article, especially since it appears that Levy never actually used the term. Jbh ^Talk 14:46, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi - you're right! I've just checked the book on Google Books. What he actually explains is an inverted approach to harmony based on an "undertone series". The term "negative harmony" does seem to have been a more recent coinage. But the concept is indeed Levy's invention. Millstream3 (talk) 08:40, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Until the term is actually documented in independent, third party reliable sources it is not appropriate for inclusion in Wikipedia. Nor, is it appropriate to tie Levy to the current concept until/unless such sources do so first. Jbh ^Talk 18:35, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

@Jbhunley: Agreed. The text should be reinstated under "undertone series" along with an explanation that "negative harmony" is not a term used by Levy or in anywhere else in academic literature. Millstream3 (talk) 07:19, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

User talk:Peacenik1

Thanks for once again pointing them toward OTRS. I hope they now understand. --Dlohcierekim (talk) 13:07, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

From Creator of Pierre-Louis Boitel, Boguslaw Wozniak, and Thomas Walls

I am currently searching for news articles directly. Thank you for your concern. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rigleybr (talk • contribs) 21:27, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Please see my earlier comment on your talk page. Also, please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's content inclusion criteria which for the articles I nominated for deletion are primarily General Notability Guidelines and notability criteria for politicians and judges. (Please remember to sign your posts with ~~~~. This will insert your user name and a time stamp when you save the page.) Jbh ^Talk 21:33, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Irrelevant?

Whether other articles have iTunes links or not is irrelevant. - That makes absolutely no sense. No Wikipedia page has special treatment over the other. In fact, like I said, the other references for the other queens got approved to be in their pages, something you didn't mention there. I don't see how an ITunes link for Aja, Bob The Drag Queen, Miss Fame, Violet Chachki, Pearl, Trixie Mattel, Courtney Act, Laganja Estranja, Alaska, Phi Phi O'Hara, Shangela, Jessica Wild, Bebe Zahara Benet, Nina Flowers, etc. is perfectly fine but somehow you think this one for Jiggly is a problem. Once again, that is very hypocritical. Just leave. the link. in. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ratherbe2000 (talk • contribs) 20:56, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

@Ratherbe2000: The short answer is - See WP:OTHERSTUFF. The long answer is that the iTunes links in those articles are not OK either and should be removed. They violate WP:ELNO#4 by linking to a site dedicated to selling something. As I said, if you put the link back in I will ask an admin to address the issue — that just means that instead of me asking you not to put the link in I will ask someone else to tell you not to put the link in or face a block. If you think am wrong you are welcome to bring the issue up at WP:ANI. There is a faint chance the editors there will agree with you but I really doubt it.

Please remember to sign your posts with ~~~~. This will insert your user name and a time stamp when you save the page. If you are unfamiliar with using talk pages check out this brief tutorial on editing talk pages. Jbh ^Talk 21:19, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

WP:ANI on New Jersey Deletions

Did you intend to remove my proposal to take the discussion of the New Jersey AFDs to Arbitration Enforcement? Robert McClenon (talk) 20:57, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: No I did not. Did I catch it in an archive? Jbh ^Talk 20:59, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: For some reason it was under a header of 2 Content dispute for the Portal talk:Current events/2018 March 6 article and I archived it somehow with this edit. I have restored it and will remove it from the archive. Sorry. Jbh ^Talk 21:10, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. I assumed it was an accident. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:29, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for reviewing Mithilaj Abdul Fasal ul Abid (talk) 14:51, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

@Jbhunley: hi, we have created a new article Draft:Aravind_V, Can you please do a review of this Article. if it is eligible please do move this to main space. Thank you. Fasal (talk)

Follow Up of Nomination of Deletion

Dear JBhunley, Thank you for checking in on Gotham City (Six Flags) page. I was in the middle of working on it, when you originally nominated me for deletion, and I was responding to the nomination, when my user page was deleted by user:RHaworth. Does this page being deleted mean that I am no longer an editor? When this is cleared up, I will continue working on the Gotham City (Six Flags) page. Chrisisreed (talk) 23:07, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

@Chrisisreed: No. It has no bearing on your status as an editor. Your user page was deleted for misuse of User space as I explained on your talk page. You are welcome to put some brief information on your user page but you may not use it to promote yourself or to create an article about yourself. Please see what I wrote in the section User space use on your talk page for more information and links to the Wikipedia guidelines which apply.

On the subject of the Gotham city article, please read the notability guidelines for organizations. In particular you need to provide independent, third party reliable sources to show it has notability independent of the park. It may be better to add some information about it, assuming there is some reliable coverage, to the Six Flags Texas article. Jbh ^Talk 23:24, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

@JBhunley: Thank you!.~~

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Like the guy who shows up at a barnraising to hoist the beams into place, you showed up to carry out the consensus to redirect to a newly created article under a new title by actually building a solid article. You are appreciated. E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:02, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

@E.M.Gregory: Thank you very much! It was refreshing comment on an AfD with someone amenable to working out a compromise solution better than either of the initial options which were on the table. Jbh ^Talk 19:58, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Please undo archiving

Can you please undo this? I unblocked the user because I realized I was WP:INVOLVED. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:41, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

@Bbb23: Thomas.W already got to it [1]. I will check the archive page and make sure it has been removed from there as well. Jbh ^Talk 17:07, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:08, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your input

I wanted to thank you for your input given at a recent AN/I discussion involving myself. Feedback is important to me, and I really appreciated reading what you and everyone else had to say on the matter. Thank you. Spintendo      07:30, 30 March 2018 (UTC)