User talk:Marchjuly/Archives/2018/December

A pie for you!

Sending this pie for the heck of it. Realized that our editing paths haven’t cross for a while, so I guess a fictitious pie will have to do. Steel1943 (talk) 22:25, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. Hope 2018 has been a good year for you and that you’re doing well. — Marchjuly (talk) 22:52, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

{ { - } }

Did you deliberately remove { { - } } from James Hoey Craigie. I've no idea what it did, or even how to find out. Jim Craigie (talk) 02:02, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I removed it. It's called Template:Clear and it can be used to add "whitespace" to an article. It didn't seem to be needed, so I removed it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:02, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

paid contribution

Hi Marchjuly, I've further clarified on the talk page that I am a self-employed freelancer who was paid directly by GetYourGuide to revise and update the page.Tlvernon (talk) 05:39, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

@Tlvernon: OK, thanks for doing so. For future reference, the statements you're adding to talk pages are OK, but it's probably better to use Template:Connected contributor (paid) instead. The template will always stay in the page's header, whereas a post might eventually be archived. You should even add such a declaration to the talk pages of drafts. It's also a really good idea to preface each edit summary you leave for any edits to the article with "Paid contribution: See talk page" or something similar since leaving a empty edit summary might cause confusion and also cause some editors to assume the worst. Finally, when you go back a re-edit a post like you did here, you should try follow WP:REDACT. Good luck with you're editing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:51, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks again for your help in clarifying some of these issues. I'll add the 'connected contributor template' to pages I'm currently working on, and also note on individual edits from mow on.Tlvernon (talk) 16:09, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

@Tlvernon: You're welcome. You should also check the last response left by David notMD to your Teahouse question because he brings up a good point. Happy editing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:36, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Copyright error on File:FaviconChzl.png

By the way, this is my own work. I did not get this from anyone else, I drew this, but did not copy it. Thanks Tornadosurvivor2011 11:53, 6 December 2018 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tornadosurvivor2011 (talk • contribs)

Hi Tornadosurvivor2011. You’ve describe the image as the “Chazlecorp Logo”. Is that the name of a company or organization? Most corporate logos, etc. are assumed to be protected by copyright unless it can be clearly established otherwise; so, if you this is not the case, then please add a completed Template:Information to file’s page to make copyright ownership easier to verify.

In addition, please also read WP:SIGLINK since there appears to be something wrong with your signature. — Marchjuly (talk) 12:53, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

This is my business. I established Chazlecorp on June 4, 2018. I have the rights to the logo. Tornadosurvivor2011 12:55, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Does your company have an official website or social media account, etc. where this can be verified? If not, you can send a WP:CONSENT email to WP:Contact OTRS for verification purposes.

Once again, there’s something wrong with your signature. Do you sign your posts using four tilde? — Marchjuly (talk) 13:03, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Flag vandal

1. I've blocked the IP that Dorsetonian mentioned, since it's definitely block evasion.
2. The IP you mentioned must have been a mistake; Special:Contributions/125.212.176.22, Special:DeletedContributions/125.212.176.22, and the IP's filter log are all blank. (I can't see how someone could do anything without showing up on one of these places.) Could you check to see which IP you meant?
3. I don't quite see the point of pending changes, since this person's hitting a lot of separate pages. Could you help me understand better? Looks to me like block-on-sight is easier than protecting, since it doesn't likely have any collateral damage, and either way we'll have to do a ton of actions if the person just keeps coming back. Nyttend (talk) 23:34, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

@Nyttend:. I have lots of flag articles on my watchlist because some editors tend to add non-free images to them by mistake. In the past month or so, I've noticed quite a number of questionable edits being made by IPs beginning with the number 125. for example, about 30 edits by IPs beginning with 125 have been made to Flags of Europe since around the beginning of October. About 40 edits have been made to Flags of Asia and about 80 edits have been made to Gallery of flags of dependent territories by similar IPs since beginning of October. There are more flag articles which have been effected. Almost all of the edits made have been undone fairly quickly and some of the IPs were even blocked, but a new one keeps showing up. Perhaps I'm too readily assuming these are all the same person here, but these edits do all seem to be trying be the same content wise. So, I thought pending changes might be a way to allow unrelated IPs to continue to edit the articles by requiring only requiring a review (regular pp stops them from editing altogether), and allow others to stop the 125 edits before they go live. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:11, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

headshot graphics

Hi Marchjuly,

Thanks for the assist with headshot graphics. None of the categories seemed to exactly fit when I uploaded. Also did not know graphics could be registered copyright free with wiki, and that seems like the best way to handle these moving forward.Tlvernon (talk) 17:25, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

@Tlvernon: A copyright holder can choose to upload their content to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons if they want; they just have to understand and be willing to do so in accordance with WP:COPY and c:COM:L. Basically, they need to be willing to give their WP:CONSENT and release their content as such. This does not, however, mean they're transferring their copyright ownership to Wikipedia; it just means they are releasing a "version" of their work under a license which makes it easier for others to freely use without having to worry about infringing on someone else's copyright. It also doesn't mean that any trademarks they might own over the content are voided. One of the important things to remember though is that such licenses cannot be revoked at a later date if the copyright holder changes their mind. Wikipedia and Commons are sister projects and there's lot of overlap in policies between the two, but there are some differences. Files uploaded to Wikipedia are local files that will only work in (English) Wikipedia, while files uploaded to Commons are global files that will work in any Wikimedia project; so, its generally preferred that "free files" be uploaded to Commons because it makes it easier for more people to use them and because Commons primary function is to host such files. The other big difference is that Commons doesn't accept any type of fair use/fair dealing content at all while Wikipedia will as long as its use complies with Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. This policy is quite restrictive though and there's lots of types of content which aren't allowed.

As for the photo of Sweeney you uploaded, relevant policy simply doesn't allow non-free images of living persons to be uploaded for primary identification purposes. This has pretty much been a constant for a long-time. There are certain exceptions, but these often require some serious discussion before they are allowed. Your best bet here is just to get someone to create a new "free" photo of Sweeney and have them upload it to Commons with the original exif data before publishing it anywhere online. The person creating the photo (i.e., the photographer) will be the copyright holder and they just need to create a Commons account and upload the photo. If they choose any of the licenses in c:COM:CC, they should be fine. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:06, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

New York City housing shortage

thanks for combining all the maintenance templates, but I thought the dissenters did a great job of plastering the article with warnings and it was kind of colorful before :-) Seahawk01 (talk) 02:33, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure if posting something such as the dissenters did a great job of plastering the article with warnings indicates a good understanding of WP:AGF or even WP:TMC. If you feel that all of some of those maintenance templates are no longer needed and should be removed, then follow H:MTR and remove them. If someone disagrees and re-adds, try to sort things out on the article's talk page. Templates tend to only be added by experienced editors when they feel there's a good reason to do so; so, finding out what those reasons are and addressing them is usually more helpful then automatically assuming WP:TAGBOMB, if that's what you're implying in this case. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:07, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. BTW, why don't people ping users when they reply? So, it is hard for me to follow WP:AGF in this case because I feel like IRC was used as a platform to attack me at several places on Wikipedia over the past several weeks. Or, if I wanted to be generous, I could say I raised the ire of some people on IRC and they responded in kind. Either way, it is in the past now. Seahawk01 (talk) 04:41, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Some editors don't like being pinged and find the notifications annoying; they add the pages they post on to their watchlist and keep track of things that way. These editors aren't shy about letting there dislike for being pinged known; so, best not to ping them once they've asked you not to do so. Some have opted out of all notifications, so even if you ping them, they won't get it. Most editors probably could kinda care less one way or the other, but can get annoyed if you repetively ping them in the same discussion over and over again. Try to think pinging like tapping on the bell in a hotel lobby; the first time is probably OK to get someone's attention, but doing it over and over again starts to get annoying. If they've responded to your thread, you can assume they are watching the reelvant page. Moreover, too much pinging can give the impression that you're requesting an immediate responses, sort of like rigning the bell for a servant, etc., which only further annoys people. All editors get WP:BUSY and often can't respond right away; or, they can and simply don't want to respond. If whatever is being discussed is resolved while they're absent, then that's the way the cookie crumbles. Now, if you prefer to be pinged each time someone responds to you, then you're probably going to have to make that known each time you post; even then though, you can't make someone ping you; so, it's probably best to add whatever page you posted on to your watchlist and keep track that way.

FWIW, I think you've got a difference of opinion over certain things with these other editors, but I don't think anyone has WP:NPA'd you (at least not from the comments I've seen so far). I can't tell you how to should feel, but nothing which was posted seem very WP:BITEy to me. Discussions sometimes can get heated, but disagreeing with someone doesn't mean you're necessarily attacking them as a person. As I posted in your Teahouse question and at VPI, once you add something to the article mainspace, it's there for anyone and everyone anywhere in the world to edit at anytime, and they don't need to discuss their edits with you in advance. This sometimes involves removing or deleting content not considered to be acceptable per relevant policies and guidelines. If you take something like this personally each time it happens to you, you're likely going to find yourself turning into one of these. When you start to feel frustrated about things Wikipedia, take the dog for a walk; you can always come back and edit whatever page was frustrating you again later on if you want. You also should try and listen carefully when multiple editors are disagreeing with you because that's often a good indication that whatever you're proposing might not be a good idea. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:31, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you

		A Barnstar for You				Happy Holidays
		Thank you for all of your work with non-free content. I really appreciate all of your responses on my talk page. You explain the policy and guidelines much better than I do in most cases.				Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you and yours!
— JJMC89 (T·C) 04:30, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Hope you have a Happy Holidays as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:39, 24 December 2018 (UTC)