This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

[1] I'm from wikiproject med, I just wanted to say thank you-- Ozzie10aaaa ( talk) 20:38, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, appreciated. It gets very tiresome and unrewarding being seen as the bad guy. It's nice to see that at least some folks understand that it is needed at times, and that this is a tiny part of what I actually do for the projects. -- Fæ ( talk) 20:44, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

update-they just blanked the page [2]..WOW (even though the supports are almost 200 [3])-- Ozzie10aaaa ( talk) 16:08, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

It's Jimbo's talk page. Despite the blather about free speech, the cohort that normally spend their time hanging out there can "disappear" anything they wish or that they think that Jimmy will object to. It's better to discuss in other spaces with a better track record and less drama, like Signpost, general noticeboards or mail lists. -- Fæ ( talk) 16:17, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

[4] yessssssss.....-- Ozzie10aaaa ( talk) 23:08, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

FYI, secondary source... http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/01/wikimedias-newest-board-appointment-steps-down-amid-editor-hostility -- Fæ ( talk) 23:11, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Integrity
		awesome work, above and beyond what any other editor has done! Ozzie10aaaa ( talk) 23:18, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for starting the meta discussion on Arnnon Geshuri. He could be useful to do a reverse anti-poaching on Lila Tretikov... anyone, come and hire her, we will give you money. One slight problem, I found out about it while searching why my bot couldn't log in anymore (WMF changed login procedures). Could there be a mention made somewhere on enwiki? Proposal pump or one of those messages at the top of watchlists? Bgwhite ( talk) 08:02, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

On logins, I did add phab:T124409 to a discussion about this on WP:ANI, and I think it was raised at the tech VP, but I have not used the noticeboards here for a couple of years, so I'm not the best person to ask. -- Fæ ( talk) 15:22, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Fae and Cullen328, I've made a request at MediaWiki talk:Watchlist-details#meta discussion on Arnnon Geshuri Bgwhite ( talk) 19:46, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

I also want to thank you for bringing the problems with Geshuri to the attention of the community. I have not reached out to you in the past two weeks because I did not want there to be any perception that we were coordinating our criticisms. But it was a comment you made at The Signpost that motivated me to take a deeper look at Geshuri. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:12, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. The article was very useful evidence, I doubt I'd have gone ahead with a vote without the facts being so clearly laid out. Being independent was wise, we would not want have rumours of some sort of dark anti-WMF conspiracy, when the issue at hand is itself mostly a result of the absence of real transparency at the top of the WMF... -- Fæ ( talk) 15:22, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Poof ( Bgwhite— Cullen328) . Cheers! {{u| Checkingfax}} { Talk} 11:17, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

		The Half Barnstar
		For instigating the removal of Arnnon Geshuri from the WMF. You get the right half for creating the vote of no-confidence. Cullen328 gets the left half for the essay about Geshuri. You two have really helped restore my faith in Wikipedia. Chris Troutman ( talk) 13:42, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:BoschTheCrucifixionOfStJulia.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 14:24, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

I'd like to use this photo [5] in the ship's article. However, the photo doesn't appear to be crown copyright and I'm wondering what license is appropriate.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 23:05, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

@ Sturmvogel 66: I agree there is no particular evidence that the photograph was taken by a member of the military, or that the photograph was crown property. However the photograph was taken during WWI, and the government had sweeping powers over all military information. We could assert that c:Template:PD-UKGov therefore applies. However, as there is no named photographer and we can presume that the IWM (as "the nation's war archive") have made all reasonable efforts to provide detail, then there is no significant doubt that we can claim c:Template:PD-anon-70-EU. I have had a search around to see if the photograph appears elsewhere, however though there are similar photographs, I can only find this one on the IWM site. Obviously, we can safely ignore IWM's copyright claims and demands for money, these have no legal basis.

P.S. http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205306109 would be worth uploading too. Thanks -- Fæ ( talk) 08:55, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for creating Byneskranskop, Fæ!

Wikipedia editor I dream of horses just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Is the under construction template still relevant?

To reply, leave a comment on I dream of horses's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

-- Fæ ( talk) 10:38, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

-- Fæ ( talk) 10:38, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

As a past contributor, you are invited to participate in the third annual Wiki Loves Pride campaign, which runs through the month of June. The purpose of the campaign is to create and improve content related to LGBT culture and history. How can you help?

1. Create or improve LGBT-related Wikipedia pages and showcase the results of your work here
2. Document local LGBT culture and history by taking pictures at pride events and uploading your images to Wikimedia Commons
3. Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project ( Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Looking for topics? The Tasks page, which you are welcome to update, offers some ideas and wanted articles.

This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. The group's mission is to develop LGBT-related content across all Wikimedia projects, in all languages. Visit the affiliate's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's talk page.

Thanks, and happy editing! --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 21:52, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For bravery and integrity during the Contribsx ArbCom case. Vordrak ( talk) 23:12, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

		The BLP Barnstar
		For commitment to the truth and integrity during the Contribsx ArbCom case. Vordrak ( talk) 23:12, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. It's a nice change to have some positive feedback for contributing to this this deeply unpleasant case. -- Fæ ( talk) 03:25, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm working on the article on HMS Thunderer and would like to use this photo [6] as it shows a model boiler built to investigate the boiler explosion aboard the ship in 1876. Their usage policy is pretty restrictive and I'm wondering if you've got any connections over there that might expedite its release for Wiki.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 19:34, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I can take a look but it is likely to be next week. At first glance this would need a special release as the photographer retains commercial rights. -- Fæ ( talk) 09:00, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Whenever you can get to it would be fine. I'm hoping that the photographer was a staff member so that's not an issue, but we'll just have to see.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 03:36, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

@ Sturmvogel 66: Collectionsonline contacted with a request. -- Fæ ( talk) 10:38, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Now had a reply. Disappointing result. Copyright is held by the Science Museum/Science & Society Picture Library and they are not prepared to change the CC-BY-NC-ND restricted copyright. I presume they make sufficient cash from selling copies of photographs to academics and popular science publications, that their policy is to never waive photographers' copyright. The Science Museum has a policy of allowing the public to take their own photographs, so I guess that someone could ask to see the model in the archives and get permission to take their own photographs, which they could then publish on a CC-BY-SA license. As the model was made before 1925, copyright of the model itself is unlikely to be an issue, though that would need a little research. I cannot see from the online catalogue where the model is currently held, I would suspect it is part of the archives at Milton Keynes, so a Wikipedian living there might be able to visit. -- Fæ ( talk) 11:39, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi Fæ, Apologies for the interruption. I have a response to your kind comment drafted, but am vacillating on posting it.
It does, however, end on a positive, and I hope, productive note - I thank you for the kind, and wise, suggestion that an RfC be raised, and concur.
Given that I am partisan on the content matter, would you be amenable to reviewing or co-authoring the text for the RfC question?
I am considering:-
1. Should this article include mention of comments/opinions in LGBT newspapers ( The Advocate, PinkNews) on the article subject & their speeches? 2. If included should this be: A. <proposed text>, B. <my revised text>, C. other ?
The C. other option is intended to be open-ended, to allow for compromise or better suggestions from editors as yet uninvolved.
Appreciate your thoughts and any reply. PS. It was pleasing to see criticising (not criticizing) in your comment. - Ryk72 ^'c.s.n.s.' 13:20, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for writing. I have some real life commitments today, but will probably take a look after that. Thanks -- Fæ ( talk) 13:49, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

 Done I suggest you add your best alternative to the !vote, however going for slight amendments to the text already proposed is the most likely way to get improvement in place. It is pragmatic to go for a simple yes/no !vote rather than give more options. Now back to those chores! -- Fæ ( talk) 15:42, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

While I do thank you, my stated intent above, and preference were to have workshopped and agreed some text here. There is, however, no use crying over spilt milk. Thank you - Ryk72 ^'c.s.n.s.' 19:57, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Fæ, I noticed your clarification request. Please accept my humble apologies. I was not aware of the restrictions, and would not have made the request above had I been aware (given that the request is close to the restriction). I earnestly hope that this does not cause you any further trouble; and again thank you for your calm and reasoned input into the discussion. - Ryk72 ^'c.s.n.s.' 12:03, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Barbara Sattler (academic) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. KDS4444 ( talk) 15:47, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

@ KDS4444: The speedy is just 3 hours after creation. In the light that the under construction tag was on the article, would you give a couple of days grace rather than forcing a preemptive decision? -- Fæ ( talk) 16:56, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

I have declined the speedy; anyone with an assertion of being in a named appointment at a British university does not meet A7 - ever. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:00, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Linda Hulin is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk 14:50, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Dear Fæ,

Googling my full name "Aryan Shahabian", the following page shows up in the results: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Aryan_Shahabian

I would appreciate if you could help me to know how it might be possible to prevent this page from search results. Is it possible for you to kindly delete it?

Best, Aryan Shahabian ( talk) 11:54, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I have not been an admin here for a few years, so I'll pass the buck a little as I can no longer do deletions. Though the discussion page is kept as a record of discussion, there should not be anything there against WP:BLP. Even though it will not be deleted, it can be suppressed from searches using the noindex tag, this will stop internal searches showing the page and may reduce the raking on Google (and eventually will probably vanish from their searches). @ WereSpielChequers: could you advise if this is allowed as a courtesy, and maybe noindex based on this request? Thanks -- Fæ ( talk) 23:13, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Fae, Hi Aryan, I've added NOINDEX to that page, hopefully that will solve the problem eventually, but it can be a few weeks from when we NOINDEX a page to when the search engines drop the old version. Ϣere SpielChequers 23:47, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

.. have passed a majority for suspension at ARCA. I'm still not a fan of yours but I'm pleased to see the past moving firmly into the past. Spartaz ^Humbug! 08:44, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the thought. After so much time we are all different people. Reading the case made me sad to think that the funeral I had to go to at the start of it was years ago. Those events are far more important to remember. -- Fæ ( talk) 09:55, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

She is probably Dutch, but I haven't found her biographical data. Xx236 ( talk) 08:19, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

I have linked the German page. Xx236 ( talk) 08:14, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't think to check. Nice that there is a photo to use. -- Fæ ( talk) 08:20, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Is she notable? A lecturer with no book? Xx236 ( talk) 08:32, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Being a director puts her over the edge. I would also count the multiple IOT appearances, this requires multiple recommendations from the academic community and for the producer to be convinced that she is one of the top experts for the topic. -- Fæ ( talk) 09:53, 29 December 2016 (UTC)