User talk:JJMC89/Archives/2024/September

This is an archive of past discussions with User:JJMC89. 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.

Archives

2015: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2016: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2017: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2018: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2019: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2020: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2021: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2022: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2023: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2024: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2025: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Why delete it? What's the point? Just leave it. No none is ever going to look there. Drmies (talk) 00:34, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Hey JJMC89! So about 30 minutes ago, you deleted File:Photograph of the August 2024 Mound City, South Dakota tornado.jpeg as a copyright violation. I'm a little confused, so hopefully you can answer a few questions I got. I'm presuming it is one of the few tornado photos on this webpage by the National Weather Service (I do not remember which photo it was, hence my assumption). So (1): Did Wikipedia receive a direct statement that the photo was copyrighted? (2) If not, was it tagged under the Template:PD-USGov-DOC-NWS or was it under some other copyright template? I'm just a little confused since it seems to have been speedy deleted before I could even assess what the problem was. So, hopefully you can clear up some things for me. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 02:58, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

You listed that NWS page as the source plus a direct link that is no longer accessible. We received correspondence stating that the image is copyrighted, would not be released under a free license, and had been removed from the NWS site. — JJMC89 01:32, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi there, the bot deleted the talk page for this category. I'm not sure of the reason for this. I think it is germane that this category to have a talk page. Can I recreate it? Or could you let me know the reason why there is no talk page? I am still learning the policies here. Thank you. Nayyn (talk) 14:22, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

As the deletion log notes, it was deleted because the category was deleted. I've now deleted the category again per WP:G4. — JJMC89 15:29, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Since I just heard you have some experience G4ing categories (1 and the above section; and this is just from this year) and I was asked by an admin to reach a more experienced editor, can you please G4 Category:Fulbright alumni, which is a recreation of the CFD-deleted Category:Fulbright Scholars? ミラP@Miraclepine 02:31, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

 Done — JJMC89 03:05, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I stalk deepfriedorka's talk page, and I saw in your recent edit that you were able to hide the username in the edit summary. How did you do that? GrayStorm^{(Complaints Dept.|My Contribs.)} 00:45, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

That particular one is from m:User:WhitePhosphorus/all-in-one. There are other user scripts listed in Wikipedia:User scripts/List#Rollback/reverting that allow you to customize rollback edit summaries. — JJMC89 00:58, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

cool, thxs GrayStorm^{(Complaints Dept.|My Contribs.)} 01:35, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi JJMC89. JJMC89 bot flagged File:Decriminalize Denver 2019 Poster.jpg as a #10c violation in its update earlier today, but it didn't remove the file from Drug liberalization#United States. Just curious as to why since the bot seems to have removed all of the other #10c violations listed on this morning's report. I've left the file as is just to give you a chance to look at it.

In addition, the bot also flagged File:Moving Shadow logo.jpg as a #9 violation in Andrewchawk, but the file was actually be used in Andrewchawk/Userboxes/MovingShadow and transcluded onto the user page. The bot doesn't seem to have seen that because the user had added WP:INCLUDEONLY tags to the userbox page. I'm not sure whether that was done intentionally to avoid bots or others from "seeing" the file's use on that page or just a quirky coincidence. I removed the file, but was just curious if there's a way for the bot to see such things. -- Marchjuly (talk) 20:34, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly. When a file is transcluded into a page, the bot will see it being used there but will not be able to find it in the page to remove it, which is the case for both. (The bot gets the file use from MediaWiki – what you see in the file usage section of the file description pages.) Had it not been for the <includeonly>...</includeonly>, it would have found and removed the userbox one. It does log when it cannot remove files (example), so that a human can review. — JJMC89 00:48, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining how it works. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:01, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello

My Wikipedia account was blocked on my iPhone, due to my having the Private Relay enabled. I did not know this was enabled, but now that I do, I actually have disabled it.

Sometimes I use my iPhone to edit, especially if I’m away from home, so wondered what I need to do to unblock myself from using my iPhone? I am currently messaging you on my iPad.

With kindest regards

Sophies mommy1988 (talk) 21:24, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

You shouldn't need to do anything if your keep the relay disabled. If you do still see the block message with it disabled, you may need to clear your cookies. — JJMC89 23:48, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Aha! It works! Thankyou very much! Sophies mommy1988 (talk) 00:38, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello. I'm the creator of the category "Dumbest Wikipedians."

Today, this category was deleted, although I don't have the full details on why. Your bot is repeatedly removing the category, and it's getting annoying.

Thanks for reading.

From Rushpedia, the free stupid goofball (talk) 20:11, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

@Rushpedia: in the edit that removed the category, there is a link in the edit summary to the discussion that ended with consensus to delete the category. [1] – Fayenatic London 22:13, 25 September 2024 (UTC) (WP:TPS)

As noted in the edit summary, it was deleted per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 September 16#Category:Dumbest Wikipedians. Therefore, you should not be adding it to your user page. The bot was doing what it was instructed to do by another administrator. — JJMC89 23:46, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

The ability to accept when consensus is against you is fundamental to how Wikipedia works. I've had to do that many times over my almost 100,000 edits, and while I've been annoyed I haven't willfully interfered with implementation of that consensus. We don't allow vanity joke categories, and don't allow pages to be in redlinked categories. If you (Rushpedia) keep this up you will run headlong into a block as WP:NOTHERE, especially since 42 of your 53 edits have been either to or about your userpage. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:12, 26 September 2024 (UTC)