Archives

2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 before 2018

Hello, Dmartin969,

If you are going to tag pages for speedy deletion, you have to know, thoroughly, what the WP:CSD criteria are and when they apply. So please review this policy page or cease tagging pages for deletion. It also helps if you use WP:TWINKLE which will prompt you and present you with different possible CSD criteria depending on which namespace the page is in. But you can't just make up your own reason for why a page should be deleted via speedy deletion. If you use WP:PROD or WP:AFD, you can present an argument for deletion but that's not how speedy deletion works. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:35, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: is right. Your behavior on the Mary Reed House clearly shows you don't understand the WP:CSD policy. If an editor other than the creator removes a speedy deletion tag in good faith, it should be taken as a sign that the deletion is controversial and another deletion process should be used.

Do you have a WP:COI with that place or its owner or occupant? Toddst1 (talk) 07:43, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My comments above were assuming good faith in the context of your shenanigans on Mary Reed House. I looked further and see you did the same nonsense at Guy C. Barton House. The next time you post nuisance CSD and/or PROD templates on a well-cited historical landmark, no such good faith will be assumed and you may be blocked. Toddst1 (talk) 08:38, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Toddst1: I mistakenly used PROD, and not AFD, and for that I apologise. Your accusation of a COI was baseless. Furthermore, the rude comment made in your edit summary on Guy C. Barton House was uncalled for. I am a member of Wikiproject Omaha, and obviously care about the history of the area, that does not mean that every single house needs a Wikipedia article. You've clearly been here a while, but in that time you seem to have forgotten that civility is one of the pillars of Wikipedia. –DMartin 08:48, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you remove or change other editors' legitimate talk page comments again, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Reed House, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Removing my comments is completely unacceptable: [1] Toddst1 (talk) 09:28, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dmartin969. Thank you for your work on Holy Family Shrine. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with ((Re|SunDawn)). Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 11:40, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		The Categorisation Barnstar
		For your work on categorizing the articles about Holy Family-related places. You showed initiative, curiosity, and cooperation! ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:35, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I said at both Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guy C. Barton House and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Reed House, I think those deletion nominations are fine, and I do think that it is good for wikiproject NRHP and other groups of editors to be questioned sometimes.

You probably don't need my help, but I do mean it with my offer to raise issues at wp:ANI or elsewhere. Often is easier and better for someone else to raise issues, if there is a pattern to be addressed. I do apologize for what went on there.

As an aside, really: if perhaps you do have local association and/or do in fact view Wikipedia coverage of historical-ish places in Omaha to be overly generous, I would be interested in helping to address that. Although in my editing I mainly build up coverage about historic places, I and other NRHPers also know that separate articles are often not justified and can seem to be inappropriately calling for even more treatment. Alternatives such as abbreviated treatment in a city or neighborhood article, or merger of separate treatments into one list-article (leaving no redlinks suggesting expansion is wanted, at the same time as providing better treatment of multiple places in context together), can often be more appropriate. I'd collaborate to better address Omaha "landmarks" if you're interested.

I see you've been contributing since 2009, great! I hope you keep on truckin', keep on with your good work. sincerely, --Doncram (talk,contribs) 23:11, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Again, thank you. I plan to take it to ANI once the deletion to discussion is closed. It seems they've already had to resign from being an administrator after a complaint was filed against them. Judging by the way their user page is phrased they seem to enjoy causing controversy. –DMartin 01:54, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Southern_Federal_District&diff=1134103330&oldid=1134097484 stop it 89.14.39.135 (talk) 01:19, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@89.14.39.135: You removed content without giving a reason. Edits that do not comply with Wikipedia policies will be reverted. –DMartin 01:34, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I reverted your edits. WP:COPYVIO and nonsense insertions are no help for WP. 78.55.133.227 (talk) 02:10, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COPYVIO

Your repeated insertion of copyrighted material without proper attribution is bad for the reputation of WP. Please stop it. 78.55.133.227 (talk) 02:11, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:3RR

Please ask an admin to block you, as you violated WP:3RR 78.55.133.227 (talk) 02:12, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting vandalism is not covered under the three revert rule. Someone has paged an admin to the article's talk page to weigh in on that dispute. If you want to contact them too you can use the Administrators' noticeboard. –DMartin 02:15, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Incidents regarding edit war on Southern Federal District. The thread is COPYVIO and admin right abuse at Southern Federal District by IronGargoyle. Thank you. Please note that this discussion was started by the anonymous user, but they did not inform everyone involved so I am. –DMartin 02:34, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CANVASS

WP:CANVASS https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Philipnelson99&diff=1134116350&oldid=1134105860 77.191.245.57 (talk) 04:03, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I've semi-protected for a while though. Acroterion (talk) 04:06, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Acroterion:Appreciate it. This is getting old. –DMartin 04:07, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

hello Dmartin969. I need help outhere and since you are an experienced member I'm assuming you can help me out here. My question is how do you add a photo on an article, e.g. someone picture or album artwork CJ ROKA (talk) 06:02, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@CJ ROKA:Welcome to Wikipedia! You can find instructions on adding photos to the encyclopedia at Help:Pictures. Only certain specific images are allowed on Wikipedia, you can find the rules at Wikipedia:Image use policy. Most importantly: photos must be freely licensed or in the public domain, this is going to exclude most images you would find online. In some rare cases copyrighted images can be used under fair use, but make sure to read that policy carefully if you intend to upload something copyrighted. If you have any images that are your own work and that you are willing to share, you can upload them to Wikimedia Commons, I'm active over there too at commons:user:dmartin969, if you need any help wiht that project. Feel free to let me know if you have any more questions. –DMartin 06:10, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Places named for the Holy Family has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Bearcat (talk) 17:50, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Re.: your revert of vandalism on
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Vectorskin2010fan&diff=next&oldid=1134705582

The revert itself was warranted.

What I was missing was the reason for the revert, in the summary.

At the top of the history there appears only WHAT has been done but not WHY. The concerned or interested has to scroll down and study the actual difference to understand.

I learned that, in the summary of an edit, we should always give the reason, especially for a revert. I'm not sure, whether the recipient of a revert notification can immediately see the reason/summary in the notification, but he can at least see it when he clicks on the notification.

It's just one "word": "vand" which should be added.

I know there is lots of vandalism to be corrected, and few who do this job and it seldom gets thanked, but you probably also know that a notification about a revert instantly raises the adrenalin level i.e. causes stress.

If I reverted vandalism on the user page of someone else, I would (probably) write: "3rd party vandalism".

Ping welcome, Steue (talk) 11:43, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dmartin969

A: Are you serious to place this box under the heading "Serious"?

B: If I may ask: Where do you do this; because: in the WP it is not possible, not even in Talk or on one's own pages.

Ping welcome, Steue (talk) 12:58, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When you own something, anything the entity does on your watch goes on your docket.

Sports team owners are considered as champions because nothing major happens (trades/free agents/hiring coaches and front office) unless the owner signs off, since he pays the bills.

He's not a player, but he pays the players on the field...he didn't hit the home run, but he signed the guy that did, so if the Ricketts family didn't sign the check to bring the player in, the player doesn't hit the home run to win the game, and the Cubs don't win the Series. Vjmlhds (talk) 15:07, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at all the other team owners' pages and it isn't included in any of their infoboxes. He also isn't even the primary owner, his brother is(and it's not in his infobox either). I'm not saying it isn't worth mentioning in the article, but including it in the infobox is not necessary and not standard. –DMartin 17:49, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you look, you'll see it IS in Tom's infobox. Now full disclosure, I added it - but in 2018 - and it's been there ever since (and also full disclosure, I haven't touched Tom's article since 2018 either), so its been in Tom's infobox for 5 years with nary a fuss, so there shouldn't be any with Pete either. Vjmlhds (talk) 23:59, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to your Delta comment on my Talk page, just to keep it together. Ex nihil ^(talk) 19:13, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was pointed out to me that strictly speaking you were both edit-warring, in that User:LiteraryEditor414's edits were not vandalism. They were disruptive in the sense that they were removing the sourced Spanish origin from the infobox, but ideally you should have redirected LiteraryEditor414 to the talk page to review the sources and discuss how an addition origin could be added, provided that there were reasonable sources for that. (I'm assuming this could be a case like Karen (name) where there are unrelated language variants that happen to be spelled the same in English). In the future, please be wary of going over 3RR when another editor's edits are in good faith. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:07, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

At the time the edits were indistinguishable from vandalism. The only time they used an edit summary they implied that hey were trying to censor Wikipedia, which is something I'm always very keen to prevent. One of the notes I left on their user talk specifically said to use the articles talk page, and linked to it.

Not trying to get defensive, just explaining my thinking process. –DMartin 14:17, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on School Districts of Omaha, Nebraska requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 deleted 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. – dudhhr ^talk _contribs (he/they) 21:43, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dudhhr:So I was trying to create Category:School Districts of Omaha, Nebraska, and seem to have created this page accidentally. Thank you for noticing. I support this deletion. –DMartin 21:46, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Mcmatter was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Citation Needed and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 23:33, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dmartin969, I've begun working on the copy-edit you requested at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page for the article Holy Family Shrine. Please feel free to contact me and to correct or revert my edits if necessary. The person who loves reading (talk) 01:37, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dmartin969. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Holy Family Shrine at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! The person who loves reading (talk) 01:37, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dmartin969. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Citation Needed, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:02, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dmartin969. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Citation Needed".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:18, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Amos Yee Mugshot.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. 廣九直通車 (talk) 13:45, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Richard Barnett mugshot.webp. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text ((Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>)) below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at WT:NFCC § US Capitol attack participant photos. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:01, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Richard Barnett mugshot.webp, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:49, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Salim Hamdan.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:27, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]