User talk:Left guide/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Left guide. 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.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		This is for your contributions to Muhammad. Pachu Kannan (talk) 05:39, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@Pachu Kannan: Thank you for the barnstar, it's much appreciated! Cheers, Left guide (talk) 05:43, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for at least replying to my edit requests at Talk:List_of_genocides. However, two things:

1. How am I supposed to establish a consensus if I (as non-EC user) can't take part in discussions on the talk page?
2. I don't think a discussion or consensus is needed. The column in the table is clearly titled, and only about 3 rows deviate from the column title. Those should be brought in line with the title of the column.

AndyBloch (talk) 08:25, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

@AndyBloch: thanks for asking, that's a good question. Based on my understanding of WP:ARBECR, you should be allowed to make a new edit request that takes into account objections and concerns raised by the original responses from other editors. Left guide (talk) 08:35, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

So I have to sit quiet until they decide to have a discussion, and conclude said discussion, and then I can make a new edit request only (which by then someone would probably do themselves as the result of the discussion)? It's not even clear to me if I can respond to replies to my ECP edit requests, either within those blocks or elsewhere, even on a user's talk page like here. AndyBloch (talk) 09:14, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

@AndyBloch: I suppose, but I'm not 100% sure. You may want to file a request at WP:ARCA and raise these points there to ask for clarification from the Arbitration Committee about how the policy applies for your situation. Left guide (talk) 09:26, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Please attribute copy and paste edits made on behalf of other editors, when fulfilling edit requests. 84.250.15.152 (talk) 11:39, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. Left guide (talk) 19:54, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey, I saw you editing the Ecomony of England page, and thought I'd alert you to the fact the food and drink heading is largely unsourced. The alcoholic beverages section also feels like a list and isn't really that well written nor sourced.

Maybe a rewrite is needed? 2A0A:EF40:EFE:5801:A1F2:8C43:E9BA:2450 (talk) 12:04, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the alert. If there are specific sources or content you want to add to the Economy of England article, please post a request at Talk:Economy of England using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template and someone will review it. If you are referring to the Food and drink industry in England article, that is an unprotected page so you are free to boldly improve it as you see fit. I hope this is helpful. Best, Left guide (talk) 20:36, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey there, I saw what you wrote at Talk:Mossad , unfortunately I'm under a topic ban atm so I'd appreciate if someone implemented my request for me. JoeJShmo^💌 19:32, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

@JoeJShmo: The edit request template is really only appropriate for obvious fixes and uncontroversial changes. Threads with disagreements and extended discussion are beyond the scope of the template. In any case, your re-activation of a request in this topic area is a breach of your topic ban but as a courtesy I won't report you this time; I advise you to please drop this. Left guide (talk) 21:47, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

This is an interesting scenario as I opened the request before the topic ban. The topic ban was also intended, in spirit, more as a removal of ec status than a real topic ban, although technically you're correct. I won't open the request again, but I'd appreciate if you could implement it. If you read the discussion and zeros comment I'm fairly sure you'll see this doesn't need further discussion. Thanks! disregard. I'll just take care of it when I can. JoeJShmo^💌 21:55, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey, Left guide, it's probably best not to advise someone about what is an isn't okay w/re topic bans based on your own interpretation, as if you advise someone, and based on that advice someone makes an edit that is questionable, they could get blocked. If an admin advises them, they'll be able to say "an admin told me this was okay". Then it's on the admin. Valereee (talk) 22:07, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Ok thanks for letting me know. Left guide (talk) 22:09, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

The reason they concern me here is that the editor under discussion has a habit of seeking to turn things around on others. They will discuss and re-litigate anything and everything for as long as they are given openings to do so. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:52, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

@Timtrent: Yes, I am very much aware of that, as someone who has spent some time trying to work with that editor on the content side. The WP:GAMING and WP:WIKILAWYERING in a variety of flavors is very persistent. Thanks for dropping by. Left guide (talk) 20:59, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

I think there is a 'great' example in the USA who is several years older, and intends to become CinC once again, possibly for ever. For some he is a great man; for there, not so much. I base this comment on your recent discussion post 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:43, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

@Timtrent: Well, not sure if you knew, but some of the editor's ancestors he wrote articles about were somewhat high-ranking politicians, so the behavior presumably runs in his blood. ;) Left guide (talk) 21:51, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

@Left guide I fear I only follow the obvious US figurehead politicians. I also wonder eternally "Are these the very best the USA has?" But I digress.

Eccentric or not, the duration of this public pillorying is not kind. I like Greg despite his oddities, and I feel for him as a human being. There is no-one in his corner, the consensus appears obvious, and it must hurt to keep seeing a new signature. I know one, at least, who has chosen not to pile on. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:03, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

I wanted to bring to your attention that this topic has already been discussed and voted on, with the general consensus being that the NBA Cup should be included in the players' infoboxes. Here is the archived discussion for your reference. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_National_Basketball_Association/Archive_45#In-season_tournament_in_player's_infobox Raphael North (talk) 23:36, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Greghenderson2006 ugh.. Graywalls (talk) 20:32, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

@Graywalls: yeah I've been keeping an eye every now and then. Left guide (talk) 20:44, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

@Graywalls, Netherzone, and Star Mississippi: He's edit-warring the infobox back into his mother's category page at Commons; do you think this should be raised at the Commons ANI? I'm also starting to wonder if global sanctions may be necessary, but I don't know how that process works. Left guide (talk) 13:36, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

I'll be honest, I'm not sure beyond socks which are a button click. Do we know any commons or simple admins to ask? Thanks for flagging @Left guide Star Mississippi 13:44, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

@Star Mississippi: Thanks for the prompt response. Well here is the list of Commons admins, it looks like some are also admins here on en.wiki. Do you feel comfortable asking any of them to look into this? Left guide (talk) 13:52, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Happy to, but about to hop offline. I can do it when I'm back this weekend. Or you can do so citing this if you don't think it should wait. No preference Star Mississippi 14:09, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

@Star Mississippi: Alright thanks, enjoy your time offline. Left guide (talk) 14:14, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

If it is helpful to you, here is the old AfD for Patricia Ford Crass: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patricia Ford Crass. I think all these personal family genealogies should go, but am unfamiliar policy-wise on Commons. I don't know how things work that well on Commons (other than being able to upload copyright free or one's one images).

On a similar but related note, I recently submitted some obvious copyvio images that are not the COI/UPE uploader's work who is one of two editors who created a walled garden on the Munsi/Munshi family here on WP; (the noms seem to be stalled, I think). Not certain if it is because I made an error in the noms or what. Commons confuses me to no end, even though I am a visual person. Netherzone (talk) 14:37, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

It's not unusual for things to take weeks or months over there. Things run on a different pace there. Graywalls (talk) 19:36, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

@Ymblanter @Stifle I see that you're commons admins. Any suggestions on how to handle the above? If you're not familiar, Greghenderson2006 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) was site blocked here as a result of Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1163#h-Topic_Ban_or_Site_Block,_Greghenderson2006-20240804213000 as article space blocks did't work. He appears to have moved his family promotion to Commons (the article here was deleted). I don't edit commons. Any suggestions on the best next course of action? Thanks and let me know if this should move somewhere. cc @Graywalls @Netherzone Star Mississippi 22:40, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

@Yamla I don't think you're a Commons admin, but any thoughts on the above given the unblock you just declined. I know very little about Simple and Commons and how best to proceed, but I don't think another 11.5 months of this is viable. Thoughts or suggestions? Thanks! Star Mississippi 22:53, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

@Star Mississippi and Netherzone:, Greg's use of Commons as some sort of place to port out his Hendersonfamilytree Family Tree is something that's been going on in parallel with COI editing here, but not a new behavior. Resuming Carmelopedia on Simple English Wikipedia does look like littering elsewhere after being told he can't litter here. Graywalls (talk) 22:53, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm only an admin here. I must admit, I'm unsure what the best course of action is. We could ask for a global block, but I'm not personally familiar with the exact process for that. I'm also not indicating that's the right course of action in this case. --Yamla (talk) 22:58, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Yamla. I'm much in the same boat. @Graywalls @Left guide I'll see if I can do some digging in my limited time here. If you find an answer, please proceed without me as I'm in support of whatever the solution is. (I looked at https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ListUsers/sysop and the only editor there I'm familiar with is Vermont). Thanks all! Star Mississippi 23:07, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

I was under the impression that only a steward can do a global block. But I may be incorrect (and am not an admin so please take this with a grain of salt.) Netherzone (talk) 23:10, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm honestly entirely unfamiliar with that process so I was grasping at straws @Netherzone. I may well be wrong. Star Mississippi 23:27, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

I just had a look at WP:GLOBALBLOCK, it does seem to be a task requiring a steward.

Holy Mackerel, the time sink continues... Netherzone (talk) 23:37, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Just to acknowledge that I have read this and I am researching the situation. We apparently have a Wikidata problem as well, but I am also a Wikidata admin. I will come back asap. Ymblanter (talk) 06:53, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

After a quick look: They have built an (extensive) walled garden of interconnected items on Wikidata, and I managed to delete two of them (the problem was to remove backlinks), and I nominated two more for deletion. I guess eventually this will be cleaned up, but Wikidata block does not seem to be an option for the time being, since they are doing some good stuff there as well. Only if they start recreating the items it would be seen as problematic. Commons is similar, they upload files there which are mostly fine, and I will probably nominate some for deletion, but so far I do not see anything in their behavior there that would justify a block, certainly without prior warnings. I will continue monitoring the situation. Ymblanter (talk) 07:32, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Ymblanter. Left guide (talk) 07:52, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

What warning is even needed? See this: https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_deletion/Requests/2024/Cary_Stith_Cox Greg went and created an article on Simple English Wikipedia after it had been deleted from English Wikipedia/here on notability ground. I think bad faith advertorial intentions are made very clear by that. If someone receives a warning for littering in middle of the road, they don't deserve another warning for littering on the side of the road and I see how this isn't anything but that. WP:NOTHERE is very obvious. Intentions are to promote Henderson Family and bolster Carmel/Monterey/California stuff, most notably buildings and people. Graywalls (talk) 02:50, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Cary Stith Cox is one of Henderson's relatives according to his family tree, so he's starting at the beginning again, with family history on simple-wikipedia. On Spanish WP already started to edit on Carmel. It's like Whack-a-Mole without socks! Netherzone (talk) 03:12, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

FYI: Meta:Global bans — AP 499D25 (talk) 10:01, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I've been away a little while. Is this still an open issue, and if so can I get a short summary of what's needed? Stifle (talk) 09:08, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

@Stifle: It's been taken care of by another admin, thanks for checking. Left guide (talk) 09:26, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Look at this low effort copy pasta https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Campbell%2C_California&diff=9715964&oldid=9021020 It was just done the other day and no attribution about copying from en.Wikipedia or somewhere else in edit summary. Retrieval date: November 2019. I think Henderson at times just writes out whatever he wants to write and throw a source at it without even looking or just copy and paste from elsewhere. In fact, unattributed retrieval date discrepancy is often a sign of off-wiki composed, public relations editing. Graywalls (talk) 20:52, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Hey Graywalls, I don't have the energy right now to chase him around on other sister projects. I think I need a break from this topic area for my own sanity; it's more controversial and difficult than I expected. It's already hard enough to clean up the content here on en.wiki without him interrupting the process anymore. One suggestion would be to use templated user talk warnings on him for infractions you see on simple.wiki since back-and-forth discussion usually goes nowhere. You can also bundle diffs together from en.wiki and simple.wiki to demonstrate identical cross-project problems, and use all of that evidence (warnings and diffs) to build a case for ANI there. The one-strike rule there gives him almost no leeway. Good luck. cc @Netherzone: Left guide (talk) 21:25, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

I think it's important to consider that PRODs are a soft delete, so there's a real possibility that a certain individual could start editing again and that person could request WP:REFUND on all of them asking for them to restored while a proper consensus to delete by AfD is more robust and shameless re-creation of non-notable items can be easily wiped away by WP:G4. So perhaps maybe a list of very similar non-notable Carmel-by-the-Sea common houses (houses/buildings in one list) and common people/people in another list, then do a bundled AfD to ensure more sturdier deletion? Graywalls (talk) 19:46, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

@Graywalls - That sounds like a good strategy for several of the articles. I've been trying to focus on improving notable, or marginally notable articles by trimming them of puffery and fluff and some of the poor sourcing (not all the sources yet, as this is an ginormous task). Feel free to AfD any of the ones I've worked on. @Left guide has been tirelessly working on redirects, in particular the non-notable buildings, a huge and thankless task. What are your thoughts about redirects? Keep them or AfD instead?

It also occurred to me that it might be useful to identify the center of each walled garden so we might work on things systematically. IMHO, the Carmel Pine Cone is a central hub with over a thousand spokes in the wheel radiating outward. I'm not sure that the Pine Cone itself even meets WP:NCORP, since it does not seem to meet notability criteria for newspapers, and probably also does not meet GNG. Other mini-walled gardens are the Sargent articles, the Forest Theater articles, the pilot boat + captain articles in addition to the family articles and the Carmel/Monterey articles. A LOT to sort through, and check the sources for accuracy and reliability! Netherzone (talk) 21:51, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

@Graywalls and Netherzone: Thanks for the feedback and moral support, as well as ongoing cleanup assistance at the articles. A few thoughts for now, and I'll try to keep it as coherent and brief as possible:

• First off, if either of you wishes to revert sets of my redirects and open a bundled AfD in lieu, you have my blessing, totally fine. I'm mostly redirecting for the sake of efficiency to spare myself and others time; 400+ articles is a lot to work through.
• As for Netherzone's comment about walled gardens, I've actually been referring to the navbox templates like {{List of historic buildings in Carmel-by-the-Sea}} (and to a lesser extent categories) as a "hub" for these walled gardens, and generally within any one garden is an essentially identical set of sources (i.e. Valley, Arcadia, and Pine Cone is a ubiquitous combination) being spammed en masse, so it's remarkably easy to judge their notability in rapid-fire fashion and go on redirect runs accordingly, especially as someone who witnessed and participated in several of those source discussions at talk pages and RSN.
• I also tend to have a hard time judging notability for articles with more than about 25 unique references, so I've mainly been ignoring those or simply whittling poorly-sourced material piecemeal. If either or both of you are willing to take on larger possibly ref-bombed articles, it would be very helpful.
• Pilot boats is one key area I haven't touched at all since I don't have much prior familiarity with the sources or subject matter. Additional insights on the main sources being used in that walled garden would also be helpful.

Left guide (talk) 00:35, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

redirects are no biggies since it can be undone/redone whenever and it doesn't take any time from anyone else. I just have this feeling that if and when the Carmelopedia editor comes back, he's gonna try to WP:REFUND all the PRODs. So, if we can compile a list of things that's beyond salvage somewhere (perhaps here?) then send them ALL to a bundle AfD, that helps save community time over doing multiple AfDs. Graywalls (talk) 02:08, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

@Graywalls: I'm totally cool with having some discussions here, but I'd prefer not to have my talk page morph into a database or scoreboard of what is to be done with all 400+ individual articles. Perhaps we can start our own centralized "noticeboard" at something like WP:Carmelopedia. cc @Netherzone: Left guide (talk) 02:17, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

@Left guide:, Maybe we can do list building and discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_California and do it similar to Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/James_D._M._Beebe. I think limiting each nomination to 10 bundled per nom would strike a good balance between overly repetitive and too many at once. Graywalls (talk) 02:39, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Do you think it might get messy in such a large arena like WikiProject California, it takes a lot of explaining and time to fill people in on the long backstory, for example:Talk:List of historic buildings in Carmel-by-the-Sea.

How about the talk page for Carmel-by-the-Sea, California to start? Or how about here: Wikipedia talk:Walled garden? Not sure if these suggestions are helpful... Netherzone (talk) 02:41, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

I have no preference really. The only thing is we shouldn't drain too much of AfD volunteer time and should pre-coordinate things to minimize wasting their time by pre-baking the list before sending to AfD. Many of Carmelopedia entries do need a purge, but there's no rush, so, we can take our time. Graywalls (talk) 02:44, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

@Graywalls and Netherzone: I don't think coordinating this in the main Cali project is a good idea; in my opinion, that would unduly detract from the scope and focus of that project. Article talk pages aren't really the best place either. I'm starting a new task force at WP:WikiProject California/Carmel cleanup task force with shortcut WP:CARMEL. Left guide (talk) 03:07, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

That's brilliant! Netherzone (talk) 03:13, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

You are on record Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_California/Carmel_cleanup_task_force#Henderson_family_member_AfDs as collaborating with some other editors on the best approach to delete articles written by Henderson. You then started an AfD and "courtesy pinged" those same editors in the nomination, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Newman Post Card Co., who then all voted delete.

You know, most accusations of canvassing are hard to prove, there is usually plausible deniability. That is not the case here.

According to WP:CANVASSING

• Vote-stacking: Posting messages to users selected based on their known opinions (which may be made known by a userbox, user category, or prior statement)

It further recommends:

• The most effective response to quite recent, clearly disruptive canvassing is to politely request that the user(s) responsible for the canvassing stop posting notices

It goes on to say if that does not work to open a discussion at ANI.

I kindly ask, could you please not ping these users for AfD discussions? I loath ANI and don't want this to end up there based on repeated patterns of starting AfDs and pinging certain users with known opinions to participate. -- GreenC 06:30, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

At the AfD, I pinged everyone who was involved in the recent activity at the Newman Post Card Co. including the admin who declined the PROD, so it wasn't selective. However, that was the first AfD I've ever started, so if there's a problem with pinging everyone recently involved in an article there, I'll take this as a learning experience and cease doing that in future nominations. Left guide (talk) 06:36, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Per WP:APPNOTE, a general note to the WikiProject would be fine, the concern is when a select few members are notified and not others. Welcome to AfD land.—Bagumba (talk) 07:27, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Understood, thanks as always Bagumba. Left guide (talk) 09:21, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Is Sports Illustrated a good source for MLB news about teams acquiring players from waivers ReallyAmazingDude13 (talk) 23:39, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

@ReallyAmazingDude13: On its own, probably not unless the involved teams or league confirm the transaction. The advice you were given at User talk:Bagumba/Archive 36#Sports News source question is equally applicable here. Try to read and internalize WP:SPORTSTRANS for situations like this if you haven't already.

(p.s.) I saw you cross-posted this matter to Bagumba's talk page. In the future, please refrain from doing that since it could be seen as forum-shopping (it's also harder for people to track a fragmented discussion) — instead pick one page and ping other people you want to notify. Left guide (talk) 01:22, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@Left guide Never even heard of Forum Shopping but thanks for reminding me not to do it again as it just feels like there are new "WP:" articles with many rules on how the site is ran. ReallyAmazingDude13 (talk) 06:10, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@ReallyAmazingDude13: Left guide covers the major points. Also, the FanNation portion of SI is quite bloggy, and I would generally consider that part unreliable. SI as a whole has gone downhill. If you want a centralized baseball discussion in the future, also consider posting at WT:BASEBALL. Regards. —Bagumba (talk) 01:51, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bagumba So it's a no on using SI as a source for MLB news about teams acquiring players from waivers? ReallyAmazingDude13 (talk) 05:55, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

The bigger concern, whether it's SI or not, is WP:RSBREAKING:

Breaking-news reports often contain serious inaccuracies ... The On the Media Breaking News Consumer's Handbook contains several suggestions to avoid spreading unreliable and false information. These include: distrust anonymous sources, unconfirmed reports, and reports attributed to other news media; seek multiple independent sources which independently verify; seek verified eyewitness reports; and be wary of potential hoaxes.

But generally, I personally look for something other than SI. If it's true, someone else will have published it, especially the team itself. Have you read WP:SPORTSTRANS? —Bagumba (talk) 06:05, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bagumba Yes. I was asking as I saw earlier today that Ben Gamel was claimed by the Houston Astros from waivers, and I saw SI as one of the news articles when I went to read up about it, and I wanted to make sure that SI is a good source for MLB news about teams acquiring players from waivers before using it. ReallyAmazingDude13 (talk) 06:09, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@ReallyAmazingDude13: If you are referring to this, the concern would have been that it's not explictly attributed to a team representative, and it's a post on X, even if from The Athletic. Ultimately, it's also on the Astros' website.—Bagumba (talk) 06:27, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bagumba I see. How do I source it considering that it's not like the NBA for example where they hyperlink a article on that so when you click on it, it takes you to the team's article on that claim. ReallyAmazingDude13 (talk) 06:41, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@ReallyAmazingDude13: In this case, I just went to the team's website. If you find it, great. If not, it's dubious if it's happened yet or not.—Bagumba (talk) 07:20, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bagumba I found it but I was asking how do I source it from the team's website to the Ben Gamel article since the transaction box isn't like how the NBA for example, has it for their transactions where there's a hyperlink to the team's news article from the team's website ReallyAmazingDude13 (talk) 08:00, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@ReallyAmazingDude13: https://www.mlb.com/astros/roster/transactions/2024/08 says "08/20/24 Houston Astros claimed RF Ben Gamel off waivers from New York Mets". Is that URL not enough for verifiability? Of course, you could wait for a larger article. There's no requirement that you have to use it. —Bagumba (talk) 08:20, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bagumba It is enough for verifiability, but for "wait for larger article", do you mean like CBS Sports making a article on it? ReallyAmazingDude13 (talk) 08:25, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@ReallyAmazingDude13: Maybe I misunderstood your earlier comment about wanting a "hyperlink to the team's news article". —Bagumba (talk) 10:47, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

I saw your addition to Nowitzki's page. FYI, public artwork images are not free from copyright per c:COM:FOP US in the US. I may (or may not) get around to tagging them. But that existing one from Germany is OK. Haha. (I've had my uploads flagged before.) —Bagumba (talk) 11:27, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bagumba: Damn, I never knew that. I always thought American copyright law allowed for photos of anything in public to be legal. I do wonder why you're now making a fuss about it though, since I merely modified the photo to a cropped version, and wasn't the one who originally uploaded it or added to the article. If all else fails, maybe there's a fair use rationale, idk. Speaking of the Germany one, there's actually photos of Nowitzki sitting next to his own statue like in this report, it gave me a little laugh haha. Left guide (talk) 11:44, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't mean for it to be a "fuss". It was more to save your time in the event you were planning to upload more, since you were looking into bios for the sculptors. Fair use could work if its aesthetics are discussed in detail and it's complementary to the prose. Anyone can take a photo of it with no backlash, unless you're trying to make money off it. Commons content is supposed to be free. —Bagumba (talk) 11:57, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bagumba: Sorry, maybe "fuss" was too strong of a word. But to be clear that wasn't my upload. I used the crop tool over at Commons on a photo someone else uploaded. I don't have any artwork/statue photos to upload, and I don't plan to. Full disclosure, I also added a copy of the statue image (along with relevant prose and sourcing) to the American Airlines Center article where there previously was none. Certainly no intention to make money off of these photos. Am I doing anything wrong? Left guide (talk) 12:06, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Not here to shame you. I guess you're collateral damage in way, but maybe the original uploader didn't know either. There's some Wooden quote about what you do after you know being more important. Anyways, happy editing. —Bagumba (talk) 12:13, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bagumba: Yeah I know you're not trying to shame me; I might just be overreacting. Maybe we have different understanding of policy too. Honestly though, if this was really a big problem, Commons probably would've nipped it in the bud a long time ago, because the John Stockton statue images have been around for several years, and most of the other articles at {{Statues of NBA figures}} have images also. Thanks, happy editing to you also. Left guide (talk) 12:24, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I think its like all the unverifiable stuff on Wikipedia. It's up until someone notices. If you want a fair-use example, see File:Michael Jordan Statue.jpg. It not free, so it's not on Commons. Needs a fair-use rationale added. That one says its for a dedicated page, which may be yet another requirement. —Bagumba (talk) 12:28, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bagumba: I see. You have a point, I just went through all the NBA statue articles and only Red Auerbach's image is on Commons, all the rest are on Wikipedia filespace. Am I allowed to copy a photo from Commons and re-upload it here on Wikipedia into filespace with a fair use rationale? Left guide (talk) 12:37, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I was going to say use the original URL, but that one was from the Commons user themselves. I'm not sure how that works, if the Commons file is not "free" and ends up being deleted. Find a different one (non-Commons)? Or ask a WP image expert. Good luck. —Bagumba (talk) 12:40, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Left guide. Thank you for your work on Statue of John Stockton. Another editor, Netherzone, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for creating this article on a public sculpture. And it's nice seeing you in a different context on WP.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Netherzone}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Netherzone (talk) 00:30, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Netherzone: hey thanks! Nice to run into you again. I personally don't know much about art and sculptures, but the article subject happens to intersect with another interest of mine. Due to this lack of familiarity, I had some trouble extracting material from this source (cited in the "design" section), since it goes into a lot of art details, but I tried my best. If you're so inclined, please feel free to expand the article from that source, thanks. Left guide (talk) 00:37, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Happy to help out anytime, and in particular on art articles. Netherzone (talk) 01:11, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Netherzone: Thanks again! :) Left guide (talk) 01:15, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Left guide. Thank you for your work on Statue of Dirk Nowitzki. Another editor, Netherzone, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work on this article, thanks for your contributions!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Netherzone}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Netherzone (talk) 00:33, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi! I had a look at the Leverett Ball AfD because it was brought up on ANI. I read that you have some sort of tool that highlights sources. Do you know how I can get that? QwertyForest (talk) 07:15, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@QwertyForest: Hello, thanks for asking. It's User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter. Good luck. Left guide (talk) 10:23, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I've put it on my watchlist ready to find and install onto my PC. It looks like it will be really useful! QwertyForest (talk) 10:35, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Installed! QwertyForest (talk) 11:29, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

A couple of tweaks you can consider:

1. ... that Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban promised that the statue of Dirk Nowitzki would be "the biggest, most bad-ass statue ever"? This seems tighter.
2. ... that although the the statue of Dirk Nowitzki appears unbalanced, a physics professor said its center of gravity keeps it upright? The prof's name is non-notable, so can be dropped. Seems like we should mention its lopsided appearance to add context to why the center of gravity is relevant. And I remember little from physics, but the source refers to "center of mass", not "center of gravity", if that makes a difference. As nobody has commented at the DYK nom yet, you could just update the hooks directly, if you think it's an improvement. I wanted to avoid the clutter of adding it myself as ALT3 and ALT4. Regards.

—Bagumba (talk) 08:27, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bagumba: hey again, thanks for stopping by with suggestions. #1 is probably a good idea, looks like some copy-editing. And for #2, good catch on the "center of mass" vs. "center of gravity", you must've inspected that source more carefully than I did, I'll switch it to "mass" at a minimum. One thing about your suggestion that's omitted is that the word "base" seems like a key part of the physics professor's concept, and should be specified in the hook. Any way to preserve the word "base" in your suggestion? Left guide (talk) 08:44, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm more leaning on WP:DYKTRIM: In general, the shorter and punchier the hook, the more impact it has. I try to aim for it to be as short as possible, while still be accurate and interesting. And then if there is still something not clear, it makes it more enticing for a reader to want to click the bold link. Ultimately, it's your nomination, so you need the hook to do what you want it to, and I'm not doing a formal review here. So no offense on my part if you think base should be there. Best of luck. —Bagumba (talk) 08:54, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bagumba: Actually, that makes a lot of sense. I have a tendency to be very thorough and complete, but I can see how for DYK it's ideal to lead the reader on and not say every detail in the hook. ;) You've definitely persuaded me, thanks again. Left guide (talk) 08:58, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Glad that it was useful. —Bagumba (talk) 09:04, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bagumba: if you haven't already, feel free to check out the John Stockton statue DYK nom too. Left guide (talk) 09:08, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not much of a DIYer, so maybe I'm missing the significance of "20 times by using a wrench to adjust ball-and-socket joints on steel rods". I'd just assume its standard. Re: COVID, I'm still suffering from burnout on the subject. But maybe a shorter "the statue of John Stockton was adorned with a mask during the COVID-19 pandemic" makes it less political and slightly more intriguing? —Bagumba (talk) 09:32, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bagumba: Tbh, I had a really hard time coming up with interesting DYK ideas for Stockton. I personally find all three of the Nowitzki prompts to be more interesting than anything I could find with Stockton. That's just how the sources are, nothing I can do about it, so just trying to make the best of what's available. I do actually find the tool thing somewhat interesting as someone who's not much of an artist and has never worked on a statue or seen what's inside of it. I guess it gives readers a peek into the inner workings of a statue. Left guide (talk) 09:40, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

It's pretty subjective how reviewers interpret WP:DYKINT's likely to be perceived as unusual or intriguing by readers with no special knowledge or interest There's some hardliners that say not every new page has something interesting, while some (most?) show more sympathy for content creators who go through the effort to submit a nom. —Bagumba (talk) 09:47, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bagumba: I see. How much percent of your attempts have been declined/rejected? Just wondering, you seem very experienced. (p.s. if the Nowitzki statue makes it onto the main page, I'd like to give you DYK credit by adding it to that page, if you don't mind, since you've been a massive help on that) Left guide (talk) 09:51, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't recall being rejected, though looking back there were some quite boring ones. But I generally don't try to force it anyways. As for credit, you can read the fine print, but I thought it's just the nominator and major page contributors. Anyways, glad I was of help. —Bagumba (talk) 10:03, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bagumba: That's interesting and somewhat surprising, since I occasionally check on ITN, and stuff gets rejected there regularly. And thank you, happy editing. Left guide (talk) 10:08, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

ITN's a whole other monster. —Bagumba (talk) 10:12, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

 Implemented (suggestion #1) Left guide (talk) 08:52, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Statue of Dirk Nowitzki at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! lullabying (talk) 02:48, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure who you think I am, but I don't proxy for anybody. Kindly keep your accusations to yourself. --GentlemanGhost (séance) 02:33, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

It's not an accusation of any wrongdoing on your part, since it seems that it was done inadvertently and in good-faith, as explained more thoroughly on your talk page by @Netherzone:. Apologies if there is any misunderstanding caused by me not being clear enough the first time. Left guide (talk) 02:42, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

I've been here since 2006, so it's hard not to take accusations of proxying as anything but an insult. Nevertheless, I appreciate your apology. Thanks for being graceful about it. --GentlemanGhost (séance) 02:56, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Thank you for all the great clean up work you are doing on a very complex case. And an especially big thank you for being such a wonderful collaborator and team player. Hats off! Netherzone (talk) 20:55, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@Netherzone: Thanks, same to you! Couldn't have done it without your ongoing encouragement, advice, and mediation/diplomacy. Left guide (talk) 21:22, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi! If you clean up an unreliable source, make sure that you also remove the ref-name code fragments if the source is used more than once in an article. A red "citation error" will be visible in the references which can help to locate the fragments. Otherwise what happens is a Bot comes along and adds back the source as can be seen in the history of [1]. This is one of the things that makes this type of clean up so labor intensive. I don't know if there is a work-around for this process. Netherzone (talk) 16:12, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Also here: [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7] Netherzone (talk) 16:17, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

@Netherzone: that's actually somewhat intentional on my part, or at least I'm aware of it and don't mind that happening. I haven't bothered to purge material cited to unreliable sources bundled with reliable or unfamiliar sources. For now, I find it much faster and more efficient to edit based on reviewing the sources in the article without actually opening them. You seem to be much better (and more efficient) at examining what's inside of the sources than I am, so feel free to continue cleaning up in that manner so we can both utilize our strengths, so to speak. You can "follow me around", I wouldn't mind. Left guide (talk) 16:26, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't get it, the AnomieBOT just adds back the TFOI source (or other unreliable source) after you remove it. Netherzone (talk) 16:56, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

@Netherzone: No, the bot doesn't actually "add it back" in the way you seem to think it does. It simply rescues a copy of the full "parent" reference that was removed, and installs it into one of the remaining "child" reference copies to preserve the data. User:AnomieBOT/docs/OrphanReferenceFixer is an explanatory bot subpage about that function. If it's still unclear to you, the folks at WP:Village pump (technical) can probably explain it better than I can. Left guide (talk) 20:26, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

@Netherzone: Ironically, the bot function you initially believed to be creating more work actually saves me a lot of extra time and work. It allows me to focus more fully on sources and content, and not waste needless time doing technical fixes. If I had to go back and retrieve the full references from article histories and restore the coding to a child citation manually, I'd be spending twice as much time on any affected article. I hope this is making sense to you, I don't want you to feel confused. Left guide (talk) 00:01, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the further information, Left guide, I appreciate it. I'll read up a bit more on the BOT, and have a look at the subpage. If I have additional questions I'll ask. Thanks also for suggesting the Village Pump which I don't think I had watchlisted so I miss discussions there. Seems like a good place to hang out now and then. Netherzone (talk) 15:18, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi there. Hope you've been well. I just thought I'd point out, in response to this edit of yours, that I actually started a discussion about that very same concern yesterday at this location. Thought I'd give you a heads up on it since no one's responded there yet, and you seem to share the same concerns. That's all. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 16:43, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@Sergecross73: hey thanks, yeah I was aware of your talk page post there but couldn't come up with a useful response. At first, I was thinking of reverting the partial restoration of disputed content, but after looking at the sources I think it's a WP:PRESERVE situation. Writing prose from sources takes more time and energy than I care to give. Feel free to do it yourself if you wish, or I might get to it at some point, but no guarantees. Left guide (talk) 16:48, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Gotcha. Personally, its the sort of article I'd normally redirect entirely, as there's almost no content about the song present, so we don't really need an article yet. But the song will almost certainly be notable soon if its not already - I expect it to shoot right up the charts - so I didn't feel like wasting time in that approach.

I totally get not wanting to fix yourself - the "fixing" requires pretty much redoing the entire article. I wasn't trying to ask you to do anything like that, I just hoped that you'd add to the consensus building efforts on the talk page, even if its short and brief. Sergecross73 msg me 16:58, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@Sergecross73: Well the sources available seem sufficient for establishing notability, they just aren't being used optimally, but that's an article-writing problem not a notability problem; remember, we have WP:NEXIST. I'm not sure what I can meaningfully add to the article talk aside from what we're talking about here, but I suppose a link to this discussion would be helpful. Left guide (talk) 17:13, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

I know, again, I'm not asking you to do anything to the article itself. I'm simply asking you to participate in the discussion because the tag you added was related to an active, ongoing discussion. Simply go to the article talk page and explain why you added the tag to the article. Sergecross73 msg me 17:23, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello! Since you reviewed my initial edit request for the Breyers article at Talk:Breyers (as a reminder, I'm submitting a series of requests on behalf of the company), I was wondering if you might be interested in taking a look at my most recent request to improve part of the History section.

Thanks for your consideration, Inkian Jason (talk) 18:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

@Inkian Jason: Hello, that request is a bit more complicated than what I am typically comfortable dealing with, so will leave it for others in the community to review. Best, Left guide (talk) 01:11, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Not a problem, and thanks for letting me know! Take care, Inkian Jason (talk) 17:19, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello Left guide, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

While your contributions are appreciated, I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, List of NBA career ejections leaders, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of NBA career ejections leaders.

Deletion discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. Our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. The most common issue in these discussions is notability, but it's not the only aspect that may be discussed; read the nomination and any other comments carefully before you contribute to the discussion. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Grahaml35}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Grahaml35 (talk) 22:00, 13 September 2024 (UTC)