User talk:Masem/Archive 19

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Signpost: 06 September 2016[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:44, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bringing the Cookie Factory to You[edit]

The Cookie Factory of Meritorious Tech Advice
For your exceptional technical advice at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Infobox_display_option ; providing the technical problems has helped understand the challenges (or implementation impossibility) greatly! Seriously, Thank You! LaughingVulcan Grok Page! 02:53, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sentinels of the Multiverse, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marvel. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:52, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BASIC splash screen threshold[edit]

File:Simons Basic Splash Screen.gif

What do you think of this with respect to threshold of originality? czar 17:39, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Falls below it. Text is not sufficiently creative for protection either. --MASEM (t) 19:44, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edits of No Man's Sky[edit]

Thanks for your latest edits to the Gameplay section. I realize that NMS is a work in progress, but without your latest qualifiers, a reader would think there's a functioning multiplayer aspect to the game, when we both know there isn't! Ideally, new features will begin to appear! - JeffJonez (talk) 20:02, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
For being a light in an otherwise dark corner of the wiki: controversial gaming topics czar 21:33, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Question about your revision[edit]

Revision.

Is that a rule on Wikipedia? If so, can you give me a link to it?

If it is a rule, I’ve no idea why. Why shouldn’t articles show covers as they appear in other countries? They look completely different. I thought that Wikipedia articles should provide as much information as possible.

Currently, without the image I added, the article has only one image.
―PapíDimmi (talk | contribs) 00:08, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You'll want to read WP:NFC and WP:NFCC - basically, WP's goal is to minimize non-free use. Cover art is generally only added to implicitly demonstrate marketing and promotion, and is otherwise non-essential to be displayed, so we restrict the box art to only the first country of release, unless there is something unique about the additional cover art (for example, Ico shows both covers because the second cover was noted to have led to the game's poor sales in NA). Additionally you probably want to review the video game project guidelines that recommend this practice. --MASEM (t) 00:12, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Thanks.
―PapíDimmi (talk | contribs) 02:37, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 15 September[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki loves women montly contest- September[edit]

Wiki Loves Women- Monthly Contest (September)!
Hello, this is to notify you about a monthly article writing contest organized by Wikimedia User Group Nigeria in collaboration with Wiki Loves Women to increase the coverage of Nigerian women on Wikipedia! The theme for the month of September is Women in Entertainment. See the contest page here. Thank you. Delivered: 12:52, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of List of Sly Cooper characters for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Sly Cooper characters 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/List of Sly Cooper characters (2nd nomination) 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. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 18:09, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Civilization (series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brian Reynolds. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:11, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

P5 edit war (in progress)[edit]

Hi. You know [171.37.45.96], who you reverted on the P5 page? Well, they're not stopping, and their retorts are getting increasingly... pointed. Can you do something? I've tried semi-protecting, but the IP hasn't been editing long enough. --ProtoDrake (talk) 08:02, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Extended confirmed protection[edit]

Hello, Masem. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

I apologise if you've grown tired of this debate—which would be very understandable—but I thought I'd notify you that there's another discussion at Jared Taylor about the contentious label/BLPvio in the lede. Zaostao (talk) 16:02, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 28[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Walking Dead (TV series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mad Man. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:54, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 September 2016[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:21, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man arbitration proposed decision posted[edit]

A proposed decision has been posted in the open The Rambling Man arbitration page. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. If you are not a party, you may opt out of further notifications regarding this case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/The Rambling Man/Mass Message List. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:36, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Clustertruck, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Double jump. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Witness[edit]

Cold you please explain how are my changes unjustified? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hortonhearsawho (talk • contribs) 12:38, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You gave no edit summary in changing a term to a negative phrase and removing an image that otherwise meets NFC. That's unjustified. --MASEM (t) 14:11, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Ben Feringa, Jean-Pierre Sauvage and Fraser Stoddart[edit]

On 8 October 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Ben Feringa, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. SpencerT♦C 13:54, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On 8 October 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Jean-Pierre Sauvage, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. SpencerT♦C 13:54, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On 8 October 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Fraser Stoddart, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. SpencerT♦C 13:54, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Only 31 hours?[edit]

May I ask you why this vandalism-only account was only blocked for 31 hours? — Gestrid (talk) 02:36, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would have no problem if it needs to be extended. I was looking to stop clearly disruptive behavior at the immediate time. --MASEM (t) 02:57, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I would say to indef them because of what their vandalism was: They moved a user's main (and talk) page, moved an article, created a now-G3ed (G3=pure vandalism) page in their sandbox, vandalized another userpage (this time by editing it, not by moving it), and left inappropriate messages on others' user talk pages. Not to mention that their username may or may not be a sexual reference. I'm not the admin here, though, so I'll leave the decision up to you. — Gestrid (talk) 03:12, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Good points, I've gone ahead and set it to indef --MASEM (t) 03:15, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FYI[edit]

User:The Rambling Man/sandbox. More on User talk:The Rambling Man#What exactly is this?. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:09, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've already made it clear to both you and Masem that this exists as a record of the issues I am facing in light of the Arbcom case findings. Why you are forum shopping, I know not. As I said before, you are welcome to edit the page if you deem it an inappropriate record of the things you have said. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:12, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Genuine apologies—if you informed Masem about your reasoning for creating the page, I didn't see it. (it wasn't linked in your reply to him at ITN/C that I saw) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:14, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
For the avoidance of doubt, this record will exist and be maintained for as long as bad faith or dubious accusations are levelled at me in light of the recent Arbcom case where any admin can pull the trigger on me for interpreting an edit as "belittling" (and "condescending" certainly counts as the same thing as far as I'm concerned). Claiming that my oppose votes are "very curt and may be demoralizing" is bad faith too. If either of you object to this, please contact Arbcom. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:22, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I was not referring to your specific "oppose", just the general use of that for nominations. I have seen when editors make clear bad faith accusations directed at TRM, and my comment was definitely not one of those. --MASEM (t) 02:56, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 October 2016[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:29, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV Hamas Discussion[edit]

Would you consider rejoining the current discussion at NPOV Hamas? The discussion has basically gone off the rails and lost focus, perhaps due to its length, with people coming in and discussing earlier parts of the conversation that no longer seem relevant. The only remaining point of disagreement between Nishidani and myself is on whether to use "Analysts have disputed the designation" or "It is a point of debate in political and academic circles over whether or not to classify Hamas as a terrorist group." Drsmoo (talk) 17:01, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Myst (reverts)[edit]

Hi, you reverted my edit to the Myst article[1], citing "key updates should be noted through secondary/third-party sources". Please don't do that. A revert is a big thing to do to content that has no citation, let alone one that has a perfectly good citation, albeit a primary source. WP:Primary states that "primary sources that have been reputably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care" ... "A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge." Since my paragraph is a simple summary of the patch notes to the game, carrying no opinion, a primary source is fine. To be sure, I have added it back with an additional secondary reference (a Reddit thread with many users describing the changes). --MattGiuca (talk) 10:35, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

First, forum posts are not secondary sources, as they are not reliable sources (see WP:SPS). Second, as patching is a routine part of any digital game release today, it's not just sufficient to say that the patch was released from a primary source (as we are not a WP:NOT#CHANGELOG), but that reliable, secondary sources have made note of the patch and its features to show relevance. For video games, we have a list of reliable sources here WP:VG/S that we can look through but I've not seen any so far talk about this patch. As such, while true information, its not encyclopedic information. --MASEM (t) 13:50, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nintendo Switch[edit]

I don't think I've ever seen anyone attempt to reject a non-free image based on the future possibility of a free equivalent, rather than present possibility. Does your interpretation of NFCC 1 make the wording "could be created" mean that if a free image can be created in the future, it violates NFCC 1, even if it cannot be created at this specific moment in time? ViperSnake151  Talk  21:59, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is a matter of timing. If the Switch wasn't going to be out until 2018, I could see that a non-free would be reasonable for the year+ period that we'd not be able to acquire an image. But we're talking about a unit that will be on consumer shelves by March 2017 (5 months), and a number of potential trade shows and demo units that will come out before that point. A free image will likely be possible before that 5 months, but even 5 months in the future is not that long a wait. This is a rough metric that comes from issues of non-frees for yet-completed buildings of note (where we would allow use of an artist's copyrighted rendition far out from completion, but reject that if the building is close to being done). --MASEM (t) 22:09, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request for enforcement[edit]

Regarding this edit: did you really mean to say that the behaviour should be condoned? Or did you mean to change the verb to something like "condemned"? isaacl (talk) 19:23, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Odd ping[edit]

For some reason, I got a notification saying you mentioned me in this edit. Weird. Could it be that I was pinged by my own signature? I don't recall that ever happening before though. Lizard (talk) 15:00, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know I had just reverted someone that overwrote that section completely, that might have triggered it. Was not intentional on my part. --MASEM (t) 15:16, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for 2016 World Series[edit]

On 3 November 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2016 World Series, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 05:05, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 November 2016[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:51, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins[edit]

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FFD backlog[edit]

Shall I invite you to older but active FFD discussions? Posting your comments to improve consensus would be nice. You posted your views about images of victims whose deaths are the sole article topics, not the victims themselves. I want to invite you one discussion, but I'd like your reply first. --George Ho (talk) 02:00, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A new user right for New Page Patrollers[edit]

Hi Masem.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Video game screenshots[edit]

Hi Masem. Would you mind taking a look at File:Unreal Engine 3 Samaritan Demo Screenshot.jpg, File:Crysis Engine.png, and File:Crysis lighting.jpg when you get the chance and see if their current use is non-free compliant? The two Crysis file are technically {{di-missing article links}}, which sometimes is a simple fix and sometimes is not. Maybe there was a merge, split, or something else and nobody updated the nfurs. The "Crysis lighting" file has also been tagged with {{di-missing some article links}} for First-person shooter engine since February 2011, but nobody has added a nfur. I remember the discussion about type of things and that there is some kind of unwritten exception for allowing one non-free screenshot in addition to the cover art file in the main infobox. The "problem" is that "First person shooter engine" is not really about one specific game, but rather a more general article about these types of games. Anyway, I removed the "Crysis lighting" file from the shooter image article, but decided to see revert to ask you about it. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:52, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot about this since I posted it quite awhile ago. Any opinions on the above? -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:20, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Masem. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 November 2016[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:06, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Images of ‎Tales of Eternia[edit]

I invite you to the FFD discussion. --George Ho (talk) 18:00, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

‎File:Bowie HeroesSingle.jpg[edit]

I nominated this image for deletion at FFD. I invite you to improve consensus. --George Ho (talk) 09:20, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

More images at FFD[edit]

Those FFD nominations have been ongoing for months. I invite you to improve consensus:

I would have invited you to Wikipedia:Files_for_discussion/2016_October_21#File:Alan_kurdi_smiling_playground.jpg earlier before the closure. --George Ho (talk) 18:45, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Nihonium[edit]

On 6 December 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Nihonium, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:19, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Amiga ball TOO[edit]

Thoughts on whether File:Boingball.png passes the threshold of originality? Also doubtful the author made the image, given the number of high res images exactly the same: http://mlkshk.com/p/F24L czar 03:56, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also on the images in bit Generations? All but the Earth image are likely PD-simple but not sure how they work together as a composition czar 04:24, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Unwatching the page, but if you have a reply please ping me I am no longer watching this pageping if you'd like a response czar 16:19, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Czar: The Amiga ball has originality in the choice of how it was lit for rendering. The bitgeneration images are fine as and particular image appears used in de minimus use. --MASEM (t) 17:10, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Portal-2-ARG-SSTV-Images.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Portal-2-ARG-SSTV-Images.png. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:21, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Portal map editor.jpg[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Portal map editor.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:22, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Civilization VI[edit]

I started a discussion on the talk page, please reply there. --occono (talk) 00:40, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eric Garner facebook.jpg[edit]

I invite you to discuss this image at FFD. --George Ho (talk) 12:35, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request concerning the article Five Nights at Freddy's[edit]

Hello. I managed -thx to hard work and splendid support by co-authors- to win a "worth-to-read"-award for the German version of "Five Nights at Freddy's (FNaF-1)". Unfortunately, I was not able to change the language list so that a lil' star would appear at the German entry. Would you help me with that? Regards;--Dr.Lantis (talk) 21:18, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 12 December[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:17, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Murders of Alison Parker and Adam Ward[edit]

May I commit blatant meatpuppetry and ask what you think about the new image at Talk:Murders of Alison Parker and Adam Ward? The actual shooting has been removed from the current version.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:13, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Premiere Elements (screenshot).png[edit]

Hi.

I think I need an admin's help with File:Premiere Elements (screenshot).png. The current revision is so huge that does a very poor job of complying with WP:NFCC but it is also poorly cropped. However, this file has a past revision that of good size and good crop. This revision is currently hidden.

Can you please unhide this revision, so that I revert to it?

Thanks.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 15:00, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Codename Lisa: Done --MASEM (t) 15:06, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a bunch! —Codename Lisa (talk) 15:08, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 17 December[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Thicke[edit]

Not of huge importance, and no need to reply, but you mentioned that obits mention his loveboat appearances. The problem with using obits as sources for events preceding a decedent's death is that the source is just as liable to be a lazy journalist cadging from wikipedia. If the Obit names or dates the episodes, that is good. But if it just mentions that he appeared, I don't think it's reliable enough. My reticence in adding such "refs" is not laziness on my part. μηδείς (talk) 04:20, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point about cyclic sourcing, though I would argue that the type of sources that were reporting on his death (WashPost in this case) we generally can assume that that's not going to be the case. But there's also always a source like TV Guide too [2] --MASEM (t) 04:26, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think he's stale at this point, but it is a shame Thicke didn't have more of a constituency here. I only ever heard of him on ads for debt relief on talk radio. Interesting to know that TV Guide does still have that info archivable. Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 04:50, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nintendo Switch SoC[edit]

Hello Masem,

I see that you in good faith reverted my inclusion of the Nintendo Switch SoC specs. I have begun a section on the talk page as I disagree with the exclusion of this information. A similar discussion has occurred previously, in an RfC here, and I believe it to be a reasonable compromise to include specs unreleased by the manufacturer but confirmed by secondary sources.

Dbsseven (talk) 18:13, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 December 2016[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:04, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Extended confirmed protection policy RfC[edit]

You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a discussion ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ Rob13Talk (sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:31, 22 December 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Characters of Overwatch[edit]

Hello! I want to ask you to please be more discrete with rolling back large edits, if possible. The edit you last rolled back contained not only the content in question, but several other small changes as well, including more precise wording all around the page, some slight disambiguations, Sombra's real name, etc. In addition to that I would want to ask you on what criteria are sources separated into reliable and unreliable. In our current example, guides written by members of the competitive community and verified by a professional player were considered unreliable, while a Polygon guide, which is both superficial and outdated at the moment, is considered reliable. I would like to stress that those websites (icy-veins.com, metabomb.net) are not "wiki-style", as user cannot interact with the guides or edit them, they are published as-is. Another question I would like to pose is why only the Tracer gameplay part was removed from the article, while the strategies for another offense characters were left intact. Initially, Genji was the only character whose part had gameplay tips, and this is what initially drove me to try and add similar entries for the remaining characters. Please understand that I bear no hostility and neither am I trying to start an edit war, I am only trying to get a better understanding of the wiki rules and guidelines, which may often appear contradictory. English is also not my primary language. Thanks in advance! Zhnigo (talk) 19:00, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Zhnigo, for reliable sources, see the video game reliable sources custom Google search. (The first link gives much more information on what constitutes a reliable source.) Feel free to expand the other sections to be similar to the Genji section—reduce the in-fictional universe plot, add more real-world information, such as how the character plays in the game or is important in the game's strategy, but use reliable sources to do so. The Genji sources apply to the other characters too. Icy Veins doesn't have a reputation for editorial oversight or fact-checking, as a newspaper, magazine, or professional blog would. That's why we wouldn't use it as a reliable source. czar 19:34, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to what Czar said, the only reason I had removed that on Tracer was that in adding about the LGBT reveal (which has been discussed in a LOT of sources and still is a point of discussion), the strategy was completely unsourced. The Genji example needs to be "populated" to the rest of the article, that will just take time, but in general as noted it needs to focus less on the fiction and more on sourced content. --MASEM (t) 21:00, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FYI[edit]

As an FYI and follow up to your most recent comments at the Sharon Tate talk page, thought you would be interested in knowing what's currently happening at Commons regarding the same issue: [3]. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 14:42, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

YGM[edit]

Hello, Masem. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

-- WV ● ✉ ✓ 20:57, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Question about talk page refactoring[edit]

Hello, Masem. I believe that I know the answer, but I would like a second opinion: on wp:Village pump (policy)#On WP:ACCURACY, WP:NPOV, & Photographs vs Paintings & Drawings, I have obviously upset the original poster with refactoring his images. I believe that I am within the bounds of WP:RTP and chose the least-disruptive option. I'd like your thoughts on whether that was correct or not. Thanks in advance. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:18, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree you are correct at least in collapsing the images. You're not refactoring their words, simply fixing up the page format that is more appropriate for all. --MASEM (t) 18:20, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your opinion. I don't think I should go back and change it again just for the sake of civility, but I appreciate the endorsement. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:32, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I cited your NORN response[edit]

Hi, thanks for responding to my question at NORN. Just so you know, I have cited your response here in a debate at Talk:Jacob Barnett#Source support for lack of publishing/vetting. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 01:34, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, Masem![edit]

Happy New Year!

Masem,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Codename Lisa (talk) 07:13, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

New mail![edit]

Hello, Masem. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 19:16, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Combative user[edit]

Are we to just sit and take the conduct that User:Cassianto is displaying on Talk:Stanley Kubrick? I'm normally not one to tattle, but I've never seen someone so confrontational and hostile on Wikipedia. Certainly the majority of it could be considered personal attacks/harassment. His block log shows this is a recurring pattern. Is this something I would have to take to ANI? Because I'd rather not unless I really had to. Lizard (talk) 07:08, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help[edit]

Please help me, I don't want to get block on Wikipedia.--Marlo Jonesa (talk) 19:13, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Third opinion[edit]

Thank you and the other administrator adamstom97 for the brief comments you placed in the Talk section. Within a few hours, the other editor who had been deleting my revisions made some significant edits, in the direction I was hoping. (Clarifying the differences in cast and plot between Season 1 and 2).

It was not what either of you said on the Talk page. It was the visibility of two independent editors taking a fresh look, making it clear that others were involved in the dispute.

Much of the content of this article was written by the editor with whom I was having a dispute. I came to the article much later and made some revisions. Initially, he disagreed with every single change. A proprietary attitude, in my opinion.

While the dispute was troubling, Wikipedia readers benefit from the outcome: a more accurate article. This Wikipedia:3O feature should be more widely publicized to editors.

All the best! Peter K Burian (talk) 03:00, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh[edit]

At some point the Jewish issue really needs to have some people removed from it. The archives at WP:BLPN are full of this crap. Dropping out of AN now as its beating a dead horse. Only in death does duty end (talk) 18:27, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

IP 75.66.218.186[edit]

Hi Masem. Happy New Year to you and yours!

I saw that you undid this edit made by IP 75.66.218.186. The same IP appears to have added their email address to User talk:75.66.218.186 and I am wondering is that is something which needs to be removed or revdel. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:51, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Attempted Category Removal[edit]

There is a dispute as to whether or not "Steam Machine" is a console for the purposes of exclusivity listing on Xbox games. The prior consensus, including on the Eighth_generation_of_video_game_consoles is that it is. The user in question is attempting to remove the category/console reference calling it "unsourced" to hamper my attempts to correct the exclusivity of games that are available on the Steam Machine console/Xbox One 75.119.245.130 (talk) 17:39, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Graham Taylor[edit]

Was wondering if you could take another look at the article? It's not a GA, but after going through it I think it's now at the necessary standard for ITN. StillWaitingForConnection (talk) 17:07, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Images in 1984 (Van Halen album)[edit]

Masem, I asked the GA nominator for this album article to find more images, and they've supplied a scan of the back cover. I don't think that 1) that's an appropriate fair use, or that 2) there's really any way to fix it absent specific critical commentary on that portion of the cover itself, which I have not seen. Can you double check me on this? I want to be sure before rejecting what another editor has tried to do. Jclemens (talk) 18:16, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

yes, that appears to fail NFCC with additional sourced commentary. --MASEM (t) 19:31, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 January 2017[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:39, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stupid question[edit]

That has been bugging me for awhile, is there a guideline somewhere about why games listed in 'Year XXXX in video gaming' articles are listed by their JPN release date? As a purely informative issue, surely the NA/EU dates are more appropriate for ENWP? Only in death does duty end (talk) 15:08, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) I imagine the convention would be to list the first release date, wherever it is in the world. And for most of video gaming history, games were released first in Japan. The WordsmithTalk to me 15:11, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That's my understanding too. It's consistency with past articles. --MASEM (t) 15:15, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think I notice this inconsistancy more than some, as I treat the 201X articles as a shopping list for the upcoming year. To lead on from the above example: Digimon World: Next Order was out in Japan in March 2016, the EU on the 27th Jan (I know I bought it - disappointing compared to the last offering) but the release date is 31st Jan from NA. So for consistency, this should be in the 2016 in Video Gaming article, not 2017. (The previous game, Cyber Sleuth, was out in Feb 2016 but released in JP a year earlier again in 2015) Only in death does duty end (talk) 10:48, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q3 2016[edit]

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 9, No. 3 — 3rd Quarter, 2016
Previous issue | Index | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q3 2016, the project has:

Content

Project Navigation
To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:32, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q4 2016[edit]

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 9, No. 4 — 4th Quarter, 2016
Previous issue | Index | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q4 2016, the project has:

Content

Project Navigation
To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:52, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 24 January[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:28, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Which board[edit]

Did you mean FT/N or BLP/N? RivertorchFIREWATER 22:07, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

BLP/N. --MASEM (t) 22:11, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see. I hadn't refreshed the page. Ideally, the user who posted to BLP/N would have mentioned doing so at Talk:Mehmet Oz. RivertorchFIREWATER 06:07, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OKOR[edit]

Hi, just letting you know that I've started the above essay ("When OR is OK") adopting the language that you suggested in this discussion on evaluation of sources (permalink) at the WP:NOR Talk page. Please feel free to review or edit as desired. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:39, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 29 January[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:32, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 30 January[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quebec shouting[edit]

Hi,

I don't understand what is the problem exactly, please.

--Ghabila (talk) 06:59, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please look at the talk page discussion: lists of victims of mass shootings/etc. are not appropriate encyclopedic content. --MASEM (t) 07:00, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quebec City mosque shooting[edit]

I'm looking for direction on this issue... I have previously fought for the inclusion of suspects names as can be seen here and have taken knowledge from this discussion. I feel like the names in these cases should be included, as they are widely disceminated by the media, yet the policy doesn't seem to align with that. I am trying to edit within policy and do my best to "enforce" it as an editor, but I don't know how to proceed in this matter. There seems to be a blanket disregard for this policy in general, as can be seen on 2017 Fort Lauderdale airport shooting, Shooting of Benjamin Marconi, 2016 New York and New Jersey bombings, 2016 Russell Square stabbing, and Franklin Regional High School stabbing. As well as was the case previously on other pages such as Dylann Roof, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and others. I just don't know what to do, and I'm looking for guidance.  {MordeKyle}  ☢ 22:56, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67
Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
  • Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
  • The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

Obituaries

  • JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.
Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Closure request[edit]

I'm not sure if this counts as canvassing and involved administrator or not, but you were the only mop-holder brave or patient enough to wade into this mess. It aged off the main AN without any closure, and there is now a closure request open for 30 days. Can I ask you to kindly put this zombie of a thread out of its misery? Thanks in advance. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:53, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 1 February[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion[edit]

Maybe a third one? There is a disagreement concerning keeping/removing sources here. I hold the view that when adequate sources say that the Open Society Foundations has donated money to Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, there is no reason to remove them. Even if it's just in the name of transparency. It should even be less of a problem when one of the sources is Open Society Foundations webpage documenting it's donation. I humbly await your reply, but no hurry IBestEditor (talk) 02:26, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@IBestEditor: I don't know the situation 100%, but this seems like it might be better to add text saying "According to X, the organization has received donations...." particularly if the donation information is not publicly available (I don't know if that's the case). But given the use of the same publications you have used to source that are used through the rest of the article, I can't see any issue with retaining that information. (it also seems odd when that leaves behind that critical statement that is based on the donation aspects). --MASEM (t) 23:14, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FAC mentor? for Tracer[edit]

Hey! So, I've been wanting to promote Tracer (Overwatch) to a featured article status for a while now. It's just a feeling I have with this particular article, and it'd be my first time going through this process. So, I went reading through the FAC process and it encourages first-timers to seek a mentor. Seeing how you're listed as one, and seeing how you've been super active on the main Overwatch article (which by the way I think we should nominate for GA-status soon), as well as other articles related to the game, I was wondering if you'd help me out with this FAC process? I'd be happy to listen to any feedback. Thanks for your help! :) Soulbust (talk) 08:07, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Soulbust: I can definitely with the guidance for that. The first thing that's probably more useful at this point is to get a copyedit on the article (which is always taken as a plus at FAC) which you can request from WP:LOCE. Three other quick points that I see on a 5-minute look:
  • Make sure the references are consistent. For example, some link to the publication, some don't. Whether you do or don't is a matter of taste but it needs to be consistent. Also make sure that publications are consistently formatted (italics).
  • The 3rd image (from the short) might be dinged as an unnecessary NFC image. Her infobox is fine, the posing controversy shot is clearly okay because that was a subject of discussion, but that last image seems unnecessary. IF you can support it better (articles discussing her look in the short) that would help.
  • I know I added about the LGBT stuff when it was revealed, but I didn't really follow up on that to see how if Blizzard was praised for adding that (knowing how this industry works). You might want to look around for that.
Finally, just double check that you have similar formats to other FA character articles from the VG project. I think you do, but it's been a while since I worked on a character FA so I don't know 100%. --MASEM (t) 15:03, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for the tips & help. I'll be copy+pasting this discussion onto the Tracer talk page for reference. Soulbust (talk) 06:26, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The EERE Article![edit]

Hey there! I just saw that you brought the EERE draft more up to Wikipedia's standards and added the updated information to the page. I just wanted to thank you for doing so much work on that. I really appreciate it! (Also, it's nice that the budget information isn't 9 years out of date anymore!) Thanks so much! Es2017 (talk) 20:55, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

EDP[edit]

Thanks for your research. The big problem is that before my edit, both pages claimed to be the EDP, which obviously isn't right. Would you mind removing this claim from NFC? It might also help if you added a short footnote in the NFC intro explaining the situation, lest someone else see the link at the WMF page and repeat my mistake. Nyttend (talk) 01:22, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Nyttend: I have just reworded the lede on WP:NFC to make the distinction, adding the key work "currently" as that way, the incoming link from WMF isn't "wrong" just outdated. --MASEM (t) 01:33, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I got no notification, but when I saw that I didn't have a rollback link in my contributions, I figured you'd responded. What do you think of this note? I'm not un-hiding it without hearing someone else's opinion. Nyttend (talk) 01:37, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
PS, my note could really use a link to Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/Archive_18#This_page_needs_to_be_renamed. (thanks for providing it), and also, a ping doesn't work unless you add a link to your userpage or user talk page in the same edit. Nyttend (talk) 01:40, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm thinking this addendum should go on WP:NFCC itself so that it appears (effectively) in both places. It's not super critical information but good to document on the policy/guideline page on the history, so even a footnote would be sufficient. --MASEM (t) 01:43, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't clear: my idea was to add a footnote. Sorry that I didn't make this obvious the first time. And I agree that appearing in both places would help. Nyttend (talk) 02:59, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Nyttend: okay, I did edit that in a while ago in NFCC (so that it transcludes into NFC). --MASEM (t) 03:00, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Follow up on Tracer's images[edit]

Okay so I added the reference consistency in regards to linking, as well as the follow-ups on her queer reveal. I'm looking around for a source that talks about her physical features in that Alive short and can't find one right now.

Do you think it would be better if we get a picture of her in the comic? Specifically of the panel where she kisses Emily, as I've added a sourced line about the panel. Thanks for the help. Soulbust (talk) 05:00, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Side note: I'll be requesting the copyedit of the article from LOCE within a couple to a few days. Soulbust (talk) 05:01, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 February 2017[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:46, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Super Bowl LI[edit]

On 6 February 2017, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Super Bowl LI, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 12:50, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Gh3 bret.jpg[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Gh3 bret.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:37, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free SVG uploads[edit]

Hi. I have a question about uploading non-free SVG files. My understanding is that in order to upload an SVG version of a copyrighted image, the SVG file must come directly from the copyright holder. For example, if a company posts an SVG version of its copyrighted logo on its official website, I could upload a copy of that SVG file (assuming all other non-free criteria are met). However, if a company posts a PNG version of its logo instead, I could not convert the PNG version to SVG, and then upload the new SVG version. Do I have this right? Thanks. Levdr1lp / talk 09:22, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Levdr1lp: That's correct, you can't attempt to recreate a PNG logo as an SVG excluding the cases of simple wordmark logos which fall under the PD-ineligible clause due to being too simple. --MASEM (t) 14:28, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Original Barnstar
For your recent work expanding Stranger Things. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:01, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for German presidential election, 2017[edit]

On 13 February 2017, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article German presidential election, 2017, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 23:27, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free SVG files[edit]

Some time ago we discussed conversion of non-free images to SVG format and you said this was inappropriate. File:Ensign of the Australian Defence Force.svg has now been created, but I'm not sure of the best way to nominate it for deletion. --AussieLegend (✉) 09:19, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just list it at FFD noting it is a self-created derivative work of the non-free logo and thus not acceptable on en-wiki under NFCC. --MASEM (t) 14:23, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, done. --AussieLegend (✉) 07:56, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MOSFICT[edit]

WP:MOSFICT has become insanely bloated (though it was probably a little overwrought back then because we had way more conflicting opinions). I started work on it. Lots of those article examples aren't even featured anymore due to the change in standards, and people kept adding their favorite wikis to the external links. Needs more lovin'. —Deckiller (t-c-l) 01:21, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Professor layton ace attorney-art.jpg[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Professor layton ace attorney-art.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:24, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 February 2017[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:20, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Irrational Games / Ghost Stories[edit]

FYI, the talk page did not move back. Was unsure if it was deliberate or part of on going efforts, so just dropping a line. -- ferret (talk) 16:20, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I recognized it didn't but I think that actually works out, since it makes it easy to address any issue may affect either page. --MASEM (t) 16:22, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

SXSW Gaming Awards
added a link pointing to Tearaway
The Shawshank Redemption
added a link pointing to Vanity Fair

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:41, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Reg Grundy 20 September 2010.jpg[edit]

Stephen removed File:Reg Grundy 20 September 2010.jpg from Reg Grundy, though the result of the FFD discussion was "no consensus". I did my best to ask photographers to release an image of Grundy to Commons. However, I was told that the process takes a while, like one month or something. I thought about taking this to ANI, but I would rather discuss this with you first. --George Ho (talk) 02:15, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, enough time has passed from his death that we would now reasonably allow for non-free use. (Contrast that to when the FFD was held in Sept 2016, following his May 2016 death). --MASEM (t) 04:06, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Can you tell Stephen that, and/or can you revert his removal of the image? George Ho (talk) 04:09, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Here you go, just in case. George Ho (talk) 04:09, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) I agree with Masem here, but this edit sum claims a free image is in the process of being sourced. If that's the case, then a non-free should not be used. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:13, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The progress to make an image free to share is time-consuming. Also, the OTRS has a backlogging issue raised at m:Wikimedia Forum. Meanwhile, applying PROD to files is proposed at WT:PROD. George Ho (talk) 04:17, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If a free image is sourced, then a non-free should not be used. As you say, the FFD resulted in a "no consensus" for the file. Since the nomination was to delete the file, the "no consensus" is, IMHO, a de-facto "keep" which I take to mean that the file should be allowed to be used until a new consensus not to allow non-free use is established. Why don't you ask Explicit to clarify this? -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:24, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
George, why didn't you notify me of this conversation, especially given your threat to take this to ANI (although there's nothing administrative about my actions)? Stephen 04:37, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note also, that as a screenshot of an Australian television program, it falls under the purview of fair dealing which lacks the provisions of fair use. Stephen 04:43, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for not notifying you about this conversation. I'll do that next time. As for the ANI, orphaning the image that was previously discussed at FFD is... contentious to me. Also, you reverted Aspects's reinsertion, which was justified per FFD results. Then I had to obtain a free image, which was very long and suddenly becoming less convenient anymore. There's not enough patience to wait for a free image when the image that you orphaned is going to be deleted soon. George Ho (talk) 04:45, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want any more tensions between us. Just reinsert the image and then re-nominate it for discussion. Therefore, the ANI would be unnecessary. Why the reluctance? --George Ho (talk) 05:09, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Discuss at my talk page. I'm not repeating myself. Stephen 05:28, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to DRN re UNDUE Ali Watkins article on Russian interference[edit]

You are invited to discuss UNDUE issues relevant to SPECIFICO's revert of my inclusion of the Ali Watkins article at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. Humanengr (talk) 03:22, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 18[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Squeeze Box: The Complete Works of "Weird Al" Yankovic, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Since You've Been Gone. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:12, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Compulsion loop[edit]

Just letting you know that the article you requested on the request board was made. GamerPro64 15:10, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Five nights at freddys cover art.jpg[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Five nights at freddys cover art.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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:25, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 25[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Everything (video game)
added a link pointing to Fast Company
Sick (The Walking Dead)
added a link pointing to Scott Wilson

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:21, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Formal mediation has been requested[edit]

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Gaslighting". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 3 April 2017.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 05:25, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation rejected[edit]

The request for formal mediation concerning Gaslighting, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 18:01, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

Ghostbusters[edit]

You're right. I was looking only at that sentence and not the whole paragraph. Good catch. --Tenebrae (talk) 21:42, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 1[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Five Doctors, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kevin Murphy. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:IPad games has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:IPad games, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides 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. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 17:16, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Everything-cover.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Everything-cover.png. 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) 17:16, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Question about new Mystery Science Theater 3000[edit]

Mary Jo Pehl does return as Pearl Forrester (episode 2) in the Netflix series (season 11), but as the character explains in her guest appearance, she's sent down her clone, "Cynthia", who appears in many of the episodes, including the opening the title sequence. Shouldn't Pehl then be updated with a "2017" in the Starring section infobox on the main page? "Cynthia" is a regular. She's even there as part of the sketches not speaking in the background. Pehl is also a writer on the new season as well. Partyclams (talk) 03:19, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Synthia is played by Rebecca Hanson, not Pehl. --MASEM (t) 03:46, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, sorry about this. Man, she looks so much like her. Haha! Partyclams (talk) 00:34, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q1 2017[edit]

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 10, No. 1 — 1st Quarter, 2017
Previous issue | Index | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q1 2017, the project has:

Content

Project Navigation
To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:39, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dante's Peak, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Columbia. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:12, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NCYC and SCHOOLOUTCOMES[edit]

Since the SO case seems relevant, perhaps you would be interesting in the discussion I started at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cycling#Tightening_up_of_WP:NCYC. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:50, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fair warning[edit]

You're yelling into the wind. EEng 07:05, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Praey for the Gods[edit]

Well done and thanks here ... this was driving me quietly nuts. Good edit. Cheers DBaK (talk) 20:38, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help on Video game walkthrough[edit]

Hi there, thanks for helping solve that awkward sentence in Video game walkthrough! I was just going to go back and take another look at it with a fresh set of eyes (aka next day) and was pleasantly surprised to see that you did it (and a good job at that! ). Thanks again! --TheSandDoctor (talk) 19:24, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of games using Steam authentication[edit]

Hi, I just wanted to ask you something regarding a comment you made on the deletion of the above article. While I agree with the reasons for its deletion, the article was previously my go-to source for finding out whether a particular Steam game also had a retail release. With it deleted, I don't know where else I can get that information from, but on the talk page you said "there are other ways to do this (categories)." What did you mean by that? Where else is this information available? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fadetonoir (talk • contribs) 02:37, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

UNDERTALE / VIDEO GAME EDITS[edit]

Hi, it's just that I recently made a edit on the page Undertale and I would like to notify you that the edits I made are quite crucial to the plot and a viewer's understanding of the game. As a veteran of Undertale, I personally believe that my edits will seriously contribute to the page. It's fine if you disagree but I ask you to please revert my edits. This isn't tactics or cheats, just what I personally believe ( I've done the routes many times) is what you should know about the game. Thanks. AsrielDreemurr713 (talk) 04:47, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The plot sections on Undertale have been gone over many times to make them concise and understandable for a general reader -- not for someone that is playing the game. We know there's a lot more details that could be written but WP asks that we keep plot summaries concise. --MASEM (t) 04:53, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks anyway, I understand that it really isn't for a someone not addicted to Undertale. Thanks anyway.AsrielDreemurr713 (talk) 04:59, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Katie Hopkins[edit]

I seem to be running into a roadblock making this edit. You being an admin replying on a noticeboard, I figured that would be enough. Any suggestions? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 14:43, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Crazy Taxi: City Rush[edit]

The article Crazy Taxi: City Rush has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No credible claim to importance given

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Legacypac (talk) 06:53, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What to do[edit]

With regards to [4], I'm quite sorry you feel this is frivolous. I took great care to compile the diffs and evidence. I'm not sure how best to go about getting some action and dealing with the clearly inappropriate behavior illustrated by the diffs (ignoring consensus, disruption, WP:NPA, and violating guide.decor.)

Maybe an admin will see the report and take action to deal with the user?

Is there another admin board I could've reported it to?

Why wouldn't an issue involving the Vice President of the United States fall into both WP:ARBBLP and Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2  ?

Sagecandor (talk) 01:54, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I took your advice and brought it to ANI. Hopefully the report is clear and concise. Sagecandor (talk) 13:53, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Steam controller configuration screen.png[edit]

How is File:Steam controller configuration screen.png not replaceable? You left n.a. in the fields.--Vaypertrail (talk) 20:19, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Diceman5.jpg[edit]

Hi Masem. Would you mind taking a look at File:Diceman5.jpg? Can what's written in the "Summary" section be considered a basic non-free use rationale and if so for which use? The non-free use in the magazine's article seems OK, but I'm not to sure about the use in the cartoonist's article since cover art generally has to be the subject of sourced critical commentary when used in article other than a stand-alone article about the work in question per WP:NFC#cite_note-3 and there is no such discussion of the cover anywhere at all in the BLP. Anyway, any comments you may have would be most appreciated. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:19, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Marchjuly: It's not sufficient. There needs to be a clear separate rationale for each use and here the use needs are clearly different (one as identification of the magazine, the other as an illustration of the type of art by the cartoonist). Neither case is met as the prose doesn't explain why the image is being used per NFCC#8. --MASEM (t) 13:46, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking a look. Does this mean that the file should be tagged with {{nrd}} per WP:F6? -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:15, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it should if you don't think you yourself can fix it up. --MASEM (t) 16:03, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Scribblenauts post217.png[edit]

Hey Masem. I need a second opinion on whether or not to include an image of "Post 217" into the NeoGAF article. If it would be necessary to do so. GamerPro64 21:00, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It seems very much unnecessary to include there, IMO. --MASEM (t) 21:07, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for your advice re the proposal to revive WP: NCHAR at Wikipedia: Village Pump. Vorbee (talk) 20:48, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 June 2017[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:18, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Second Anthem page[edit]

Just wanted to let you know that there's a second article for Anthem that was already added to the category. Don't know how to handle this, but I'll leave it for you to decide.Dohvahkiin (talk) 18:27, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Dohvahkiin: Can you point me to the second page? (I can see Anthem (video game) but can't find another?) --MASEM (t) 23:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It was Anthem (Game). Redirected it earlier. -- ferret (talk) 23:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I for one look forward to playing BioDestiny(tm). *goes back to playing Baldur's Gate II enhanced and crying at the state of Bioware today* Only in death does duty end (talk) 14:54, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Last Night (video game)[edit]

WP:CRYSTALBALL. You know better than this. There may be an article around Tim Soret. ForbiddenRocky (talk) 16:53, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ForbiddenRocky: If you have a sincere believe the article violates WP:CRYSTALBALL, you should nominate the article for deletion or perform a bold merge. --Izno (talk) 16:58, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Given that there was already a playable prototype back in 2014 that received attention, even if the full game was never released, that prototype would still be notable. Ignoring the GG aspects that have come up, there's still sufficient E3 coverage to add to that notability, and the GG issue further improves its notability.--MASEM (t) 17:33, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Electronic Entertainment Expo 2017[edit]

Is There any reference about: "E3 is the video game industry's primary retail showcase for the North American market, aimed at retailers and video game journalists, with the announcements and coverage widely reported through online gaming websites and streaming media. As with previous E3 events, E3 2017 will begin with press conferences held by several major publishers in the days just prior to the event proper (June 11 and June 12), providing details on new games and products they anticipating shipping within the year." Thank you--118.167.184.29 (talk) 05:33, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Blizzard template is going to be replaced with the Activision Blizzard template[edit]

Hi there, I just wanted to let you know that I'm in the process of merging the Activision and Blizzard templates into Activision Blizzard, and as a result, I will be going through a requested deletion process of getting rid of the Activison and Blizzard templates. The primary reason for this is because a lot of links overlap with both templates, and the other games section in the Blizzard template is filler at best to justify the template's existence. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 13:16, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

While they are merged companies, most of their works and studios remain separately from each other, so it doesn't make sense to combine the two. --MASEM (t) 13:27, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, both Activision and Blizzard work autonomously, however, because they both derive from the same holdings company, it's ideal to display that through the navigation box. Let's take Sega and Atlus for example. Despite Atlus being a wholly-owned subsidiary of Sega, it publishes and develops entirely separately from Sega, Atlus had a distinct brand identity which is entirely unrelated to Sega. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 14:29, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
So does Blizzard, excluding the fact that "Activision Blizzard" is the name that appears on the box. Consider that Blizzcon is still only about the Blizzard side of products. Businesswise they may be the same entity but the gaming world treats them as two. --MASEM (t) 14:32, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Fact of the matter is, it doesn't matter if the gaming world treats them as separate entities, because both brands are owned by Activison Blizzard, and are wholly-owned subsidiaries for Activision Blizzard. Just so you are aware, Activision Blizzard is formerly Vivendi Games and not Activision the publisher, so if anything, it gives even more validation to create the Activision Blizzard template, because Vivendi Games (currently Activision Blizzard) had ownership of Blizzard far longer than they owned and adsorbed Activision. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 14:38, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Opposed to this. This is going to make a very large navbar that doesn't include any details that cross topic boundaries. I also don't understand why we're treating Activision Blizzard as a continuation of Vivendi Games. The holding company was newly created following the merger of both Vivendi and Activision. Vivendi had majority stockholder, but it was a new company, and they later SOLD their stock. -- ferret (talk) 14:50, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. I feel that the navigation box is easy enough to understand. And with all the articles I've read regarding the merger, there was no news about Vivendi Games dissolving or Activision being the succeeding company, just that Activision will be the brand to represent video game publishing (excluding Blizzard Entertainment). And correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't press reports state that Vivendi Games will be renamed to Activision Blizzard? (thus being a "new company" by name and not by legal entity?), anyway, I've already created the template and it seems easy enough to understand. Usually, with holding company templates, they're large by default so I don't think that size should be much of a consideration. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 15:05, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The point about a navbox is to help readers navigation to titles they will likely want to get to from the related topic. Yes, you're right that business-wise they're all connected, but you're missing the video game side. At a business level (such as at Blizzard Entertainment, a template that describes the busness merger elements of Activision and Blizzard (as well as Vivendi) makes sense, since I'm looking at a page about the business entity. But if I'm at, say, Overwatch, I could care less about anything on the Activision side of the picture, I'd more likely to jump to World of Warcraft or Heroes of the Storm. Similarly, if I'm at a Call of Duty game, I'm not likely going to care about the Blizzard titles. There is a valid reason to have an arching business-matters related infobox for the merged entities, but the game assets need to be distinguished. --MASEM (t) 15:19, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Activision Blizzard was a new legal entity with new stock. Vivendi gaming divisions were put under Activision, excluding Blizzard. Vivendi itself owned 52% stake in the new company at the start. Regarding the template, I agree with Masem completely. And excluding the "other games section" of Blizzard means that BIDIRECTIONAL can't be met. I think you've loss sight of what navbars are for: Connecting related topics for reader navigation. Excluding large swaths of two topics because you want it organized at a higher more generic level doesn't help the readers. -- ferret (talk) 15:20, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

{{Activision Blizzard}} Fair enough, I can't really argue against those explanations. I suppose you can delete the merged template then. I think it's a good idea to copy this discussion on the Activision Blizzard talk page so somebody else doesn't repeat the same mistake that I did. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 15:35, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • The template you made is fine, outside of the list of video games, when it is used on any elements relating to the business side of either company. It helps to organize all the studios, for example. It's just for the games, they should be handled separately by the separate templates. --MASEM (t) 15:38, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I care less about Activision, but please undo your removal of the original template on Blizzard Entertainment pages, @Iftekharahmed96. -- ferret (talk) 15:42, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Far cry 5 cover.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Far cry 5 cover.png. 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) 17:14, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just now, Doctor Who Synopsis[edit]

Strange it's the 2nd century when the Massacre of the Ninth Legion took place in mid 1st century... hmmm. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 05:09, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

They disappeared around 109 AD, 2nd century. I don't know if the Massacre is necessary relevant here given that happened 40 years prior and much farther south. --MASEM (t) 05:11, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ah my bad. Nice work with the synopsis by the way. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 05:15, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Video game screenshot question[edit]

Would you mind taking a look at WP:MCQ#File:God Wars II screenshot of dungeon with MUSHclient plugin.png and see if you can help figure out what needs to be done? Thanks. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:23, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 June 2017[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:32, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request for indefinite protection removal[edit]

Hi Masem, I tried to make a start on making a page today but it seems some stuff went down in 2010 and it's been protected ever since. Can you remove the protection so I can make a start please? Dan Ryckert

Providing some links to make note of the subject being notable enough for an article

Thanks! FLStyle (talk) 15:12, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • @FLStyle: I think it would be okay, but could I ask you to draft up a relatively quick article (doesn't have to be perfect), in your user space or draft space, just to check. The nonsense in 2010 doesn't seem connected to this person, but I would just like to make sure. Your sources are seemingly fine, so it's not so much a BLP issue than just making sure. Also, have you tried asked @Airplaneman:, who put the page on infinite protection? I see they haven't edited since April, so they may be gone, but I'd just like to check before undoing another's block. --MASEM (t) 15:29, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Masem: Message sent to Airplaneman, I'll have a draft ready in 24 hours.FLStyle (talk) 18:19, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, 2010 was seven years ago... I have no problem with unlocking this page. In fact, I will do it right now. As per Masem, I would suggest writing a draft in User:FLStyle/Dan Ryckert before moving it into the mainspace. Cheers, Airplaneman ✈ 00:29, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@FLStyle: Just let me know when you finish that draft, I'll just double check and move it in now that Airplaneman has unlocked it. I doubt it is a problem if you are using those sources. --MASEM (t) 00:45, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Masem: @Airplaneman: User:FLStyle/Dan Ryckert is ready for inspection, thanks.FLStyle (talk) 20:26, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@FLStyle: Looks fine, I've moved it into place. --MASEM (t) 20:36, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh okay[edit]

Thanks Coasterdude1 (talk) 19:00, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Coasterdude1: no worries. We're having the same issue over at the Xbox One article (more a problem that MS doesn't release console sales #s). But Nintendo is very open, and I believe their next shareholders meeting will be late July and they have regularly published sales numbers so we'll get an update then. --MASEM (t) 19:24, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Masem: thanks for not banning me for 24 hours Coasterdude1 (talk) 19:41, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to calibrate Ukraine's independence from the former Soviet Union any day, but this happened not on the day before the 2017 cyberattacks on Ukraine..... [edit]

Thanks for this edit on 2017 cyberattacks on Ukraine.... But it contained an odd error I just corrected. Independence Day of Ukraine celibates (on August 24) Ukraine's 1991's independence from the former Soviet Union; Constitution Day is for celebrating its the anniversary of the approval of a Constitution in 1996. It might have been a good idea to have checked the Wikipedia page Constitution Day (Ukraine) before you made this edit . — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 14:59, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, I was going by the context the NYTimes article seemed to give (since there's suspected ties to Russia being named by sources). --MASEM (t) 15:01, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Petya (malware)[edit]

On 29 June 2017, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Petya (malware), which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 23:51, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Masem/Archive_19&oldid=1138907454"