User talk:Diannaa/Archive 31

Archive 25

←

Archive 29

Archive 30

Archive 31

Archive 32

Archive 33

→

Archive 35

Happy New Year

So 2013 ended with many ups and downs, starting from the release of blockbuster movies, new OSs, gadgets, cars and bikes, improve in social networking etc to meeting new friends, improving our editing skills, forming new groups.

But it also brought sad movements like the death of Paul Walker, Nelson Mandela to Cyclones like Phailin, Haiyan etc.

Finally, I'd like to conclude that several ups and downs are must in every year but we must be fearless and have faith in divine.

HAPPY NEW YEAR 2014.

By

Himanis Das (Talk, Facebook me, Tweet me) 17:42, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your thoughtful message. Best to you in the new year. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:26, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Matching heights

I see you have created a sandbox for me in regards to my question asked about matching heights on the help desk. I understand how to use this template but what is the actual reason that these are not changing anymore when say I put 200 or 100 width they are staying the same size but the examples used on the template for multiple image do actually change as I tried it in my sandbox.

P.S - I hope you have had a nice Christmas and wish you the best for the New Year.--Windows66 (talk) 20:49, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi Windows66. Seasons greetings to you also! The template is working fine for me (see new examples in my sandbox), so I don't know what you mean. Have you got an example in a sandbox somewhere that I can examine? -- Diannaa (talk) 20:55, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

I've made it in my sandbox User:Windows66/sandbox, one is supposed to be 100 width and the other 400 width yet both appear the same size using this template, do you have any idea why (it really is confusing me!), Thank you.--Windows66 (talk) 15:56, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

The formulas are invisible because | widthn1 = should be | width1 = -- Diannaa (talk) 16:34, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

But according to Template:Multiple_image#Matching_image_heights you should use widthn because the image is not a square image.--Windows66 (talk) 16:49, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

You are supposed to substitute your image number for the variable n. If you want both images to be the same height, you will need to put the formula in the width field for both images. A new example is in your sandbox. -- Diannaa (talk) 17:09, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

But why on the Template:Multiple_image#Matching_image_heights is only the first image using the #expr: and the image2 is not yet for this I have to use #expr: on both the images is it because they are not square images?

I'm a tad confused, sorry. Thanks for your help.--Windows66 (talk) 19:26, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Because even when using the widthn from say 400 to 100 the width still does not change?--Windows66 (talk) 19:27, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

On the example with the donkey and the fish, the fish image is square. We know that in order to have a height of 100 px for the fish image, we need a width of 100px. We don't need a formula to calculate the width - it's the same as the height. Using the formula would obtain an identical result, as the desired height (100) multiplied by the original width (300) divided by the original height (300) equals 100 (dh * ow / oh). For the simple examples in my sandbox that don't use the formula, I examined the images and determined that to display File:Blutschutzgesetz v.15.9.1935 - RGBl I 1146gesamt.jpg with a height of 240 px, the width has to be 157 px, and to display File:Blutschutzgesetz v.15.9.1935 - RGBl I 1147.jpg with a height of 240 px, the width has to be 159 px. This information is readily available on the file description pages. For the second example, where the height is 120 px, the widths were determined by dividing the widths used in the first example by two. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:51, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Using a parameter such as | widthn1 = will never work, because the template has no such parameter. Use | width1 = , | width2 = , etc. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:03, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay I understand now and have used them templates for the Nuremberg Laws article as it is sits the images better on the article.

So when is it advised to use the widthn formula just that said non-square images and them two images are not square?--Windows66 (talk) 12:59, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Use of the formula is recommended whenever the two images have different proportions and you want them to display at the same height. A formula is not needed for a square image, because the height and width are always the same. I don't normally use the width formula at all; I calculate manually using ordinary arithmetic and the information on the file page. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:36, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year Diannaa!

	Happy New Year!
	Hello Diannaa: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 10:30, 1 January 2014 (UTC) Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2014}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Thanks, and happy new year to you also! -- Diannaa (talk) 16:37, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Diannaa

Soham — is wishing you a Happy New Year! Welcome the 2014. Wishing you a happy and fruitful 2014 with good health and your wishes come true! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! May the 2014 goes well for you.

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:User:Pratyya Ghosh/Happy New Year}} to their talk page with a Happy New Year message.

Thanks, and happy new year to you also! -- Diannaa (talk) 16:37, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Not even a week

And the Guatemalan IP is back to disrupting Wikipedia. 190.106.222.57 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) Erick (talk) 23:44, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I am widening the range to 190.106.222.34/27 and blocking for two more weeks. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:54, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

190.106.222.24 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) EDIT: Now the IP has gone too far. On the this list, the editor keeps putting a song that on the #1 position despite Billboard saying otherwise. Erick (talk) 18:58, 2 January 2014 (UTC) Erick (talk) 18:27, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

I have widened the range yet again -- Diannaa (talk) 20:16, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

190.106.222.78 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) Is is possible to ask a bot to unlink all dates the IPs have done? It's such a pain to go back to undo all of the IP's edits over and over again. Erick (talk) 19:49, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Widening to 190.106.128.0/17. There's a mass rollback script available: User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/massRollback.js. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:16, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Traudl Junge

I have noticed that this article does not have a photo for identification of the subject for her bio article. If you have the time, might a fair use photo be found and used? I await your thoughts. Cheers, Kierzek (talk) 02:33, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

There's one on the Polish wiki that's nicely sized, -- Diannaa (talk) 20:01, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa. A belated Happy New Year.

fwiw That image used to be in the article until May 2012 and then got deleted for some reason. SlightSmile 21:31, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Diannaa for the effort. Kierzek (talk) 21:56, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

@Slightsmile: The image was deleted from the Commons; it should be okay here as fair-use. Happy new year to all, -- Diannaa (talk) 22:37, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

December 2013 wikification awards.

		The Working Wikifier's Barnstar
		For scoring #7 on the leaderboard during the December 2013 wikification backlog drive, Diannaa, you are hereby awarded the Working Wikifier's Barnstar. Congratulations!

		The Iron Wikification Barnstar
		For wikifying a total of 15 articles, you are also awarded the Iron Wikification Barnstar. Keep up the good work!!! :)

Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 01:43, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, pretty sweet -- Diannaa (talk) 01:52, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Sentence case on titles

Diannaa, thank you for adding the ISBNs (the ISBN finder on my user page was down the day I was adding the books, so I appreciate it), but why have you added caps on book titles at Simon Baron-Cohen? See Wikipedia:MOS#Titles of works; we use sentence case per MOS? Would you be able to easily change them back without losing ISBNs, or must I do them by hand? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:40, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

OH, I see now-- never mind-- it appears that MOS has changed since I was FAC delegate (and Tony was watching over it), and in fact, we no longer do that. Holy cow, Tony1 used to have a fit over sentence case, and now it's title case <sigh> ... who knew. So, it looks like all is good-- thanks again. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:42, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sandy. Sorry to alarm you! Hey, you might try WorldCat as a way to get info on books - you can get isbns, publisher info, correct titles, the full Monty. Just plug your book title in the search box. Or search by author name, etc. http://www.worldcat.org/ Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 04:48, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I added that to my user box and will try it instead of the ISBN finder (which has always been iffy). Ha, the title case at Baron-Cohen was no fright at all compared to all the other articles I have to now go fix book titles on ... halfway through, I hope, and fortunately I'm usually using journal articles where I don't have to deal with that. Sheesh, live and learn-- thanks again. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:00, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Many word processing softwares will convert to title case for you, Microsoft Office for example. If I recall correctly, you simply highlight the text you wish to convert, right-click, and a wee menu should pop up. I will watch-list the article for a while and see what happens next. -- Diannaa (talk) 05:22, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Curious-- I'm testing your worldcat link, and I see that it also returns sentence case (as the ISBN finder does). I'm not too worried about going forward-- I am almost always dealing with journal articles, and getting those titles direct from PubMed and for those we use sentence case, so it shouldn't be an ongoing problem for me. I should be able to manually convert from either WorldCat or the ISBN finder on the few books I encounter.

On the watching, it's the tiring million little things every day that need cleanup; that date wasn't in the source, that phrase wasn't in the source, that's a primary source, things like that-- it just requires constant vigilance, which got tiring. One hopes s/he would understand that we find a source, and then write from it; not write what we want to say, and then try to shoehorn a source to fit. I had left a lot of section headings for expansion, as s/he comes back every day to plop in more primary sources, so I at least wanted him/her to know where to put new content. And I had left headings for topics I knew she/he wanted more emphasis on, which you reduced and consolidated. So, we'll see.

Thanks again, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:51, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

WorldCat returns sentence case, as it's an online collection from library catalogues, which use sentence case. But bibliograpies use title case. For journal articles, we use sentence case.

The article should not need daily editing, as events are not happening daily. Adding breathless content like the stuff I took out from the New York Times is not helping, for sure. I am pretty sure it's a COI editor, the subject of the article or his publisher or his publicist. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:31, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Off-topic

Diannaa, this would be off-topic at Talk:Simon Baron-Cohen, so I'll put it here. I learned autism research via the overlap that occurs with Tourette syndrome (that is, historically many parents of children with autism thought their children had TS because autism also includes tics, and before the differential diagnosis was better established, many doctors misdiagnosed autistic children as having TS). In TS, it's well acknowledged that ... well ... Europe is not where the good research is happening ... even the European researchers themselves have said that the real action is in the US. Research on neuropsychiatric conditions in children lags for some weird reason on the other side of the pond, while in the US, really good work is happening with some stellar researchers who are deeply committed, not to making headlines, but to the welfare of the children and families they study (have a look at Donald J. Cohen). If you want to get an idea of who's who in autism happenings, google "autism centers for excellence". That's a program where the US NIH has funneled GOBS of money to the top autism researchers in North America, with annual grants (different centers may get awards every year). The same names pop up frequently-- and you'll see many of those names are researchers like Helen Tager-Flusberg who have commented in the laypress about the problems with the research coming out of Cambridge. Top autism researchers in the US don't need publicists. I don't know autism research as solidly as I know TS, but I know Europe lags in TS, because something is happening "right" in the US, where Europe hasn't kept up when it comes to childhood neuropsychiatric disorders. I don't know of any top US autism or TS researcher who has pop psychology books for sale. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:06, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, very interesting. It's an ongoing problem with some of our biographies (politicians, authors, artists, etc) – some editors come to the site not to improve the content but rather to show their own activities in the best possible light, or to sell their own books or treat the site like a free web host. I've had some success with the method used here (clean up the article, post a custom COI notice on the user's talk), so hopefully we can keep this one article clean. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:13, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

This is a huge, Huge problem in medical articles and bios, and becoming a bigger problem every day, as researchers realize that Wikipedia is now the place to push their theories. And bad medical content matters. Autism is a Featured article, and it still contains primary sources supporting SBC theories, although I'm not aware of any secondary sources that back them (there could be some, but I don't know of them). And there aren't enough of us to keep up with the daily onslaught. Thank you for the help-- this is just one of about several dozen of same I'm currently working on, and I never get to actually go add meaningful medical content or keep my "own" articles up-to-date, because where one solves one situation of bad medical content, three more crop up. Some days I work all I can to do all I can, until I (inevitably) give up for a few months. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:21, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

It's a huge and scary problem, like global warming. All we can do is do as much as we have time for, do it very well, and try to focus our efforts on the most important and / or highly viewed articles to maximise the impact of our efforts. Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 19:55, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Request for the protection of 1 (2014 film)

Hello Dianna :)

My humble request is :

If you have Free time then please give Semi protection for Two weeks to the Following Article : 1 (2014 film), because so many unregistered users are doing Test edits and Vandalizing the Article. So please do that :) &

Belated Happy New year Wishes to U & Ur family :)

Regards,

Raghusri (talk) 11:07, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Raghusri. I have protected the article for one week to start. You can also use the request board at WP:RFPP to make protection requests. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:52, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much Dianna for the Protection & Thank you So much for the Info.,. Raghusri (talk) 12:55, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Dianna, If you are not Busy, also please Protect this Article : Yevadu because, per the same Request made by me to you :)

Regards, Raghusri (talk) 13:31, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

I have protected it for two weeks to take it a little beyond the release of the film. This kind of article is one way new editors are attracted to the site, so I don't want to over-do it. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:07, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Soooo much Diannaa :) O.K. I have understood you intention. Lastly one small request. Please extend the Expiry period for upto one Week for the Article : 1 (2014 film). Because, per the same Reason you Said to me : " Protected it for two weeks to take it a little beyond the release of the film " & the film is releasing on 10 January 2014. So please, please extend the Expiry Period because So many Users will try to Vandalize this Article once the Film Releases and it will become More Harder to Revert all those edits for any User. Please Dianna :)

Regards, Raghusri (talk) 10:21, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Let's wait and see if it's needed. Please let me know. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:19, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

O.K. Dianna i will Notify you if it's necessary :) Thank you :) Raghusri (talk) 11:58, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Diannaa :) Please extend the Expiry period for upto One week for the 1 (2014 film) because Autoconfirmed new users started Test & Unconstructive edits. If, once the Protection is Expired then a lot of IP users will start Vandalism. So the Above is my Humble request :) I hope you will Extend the Period :) Please Extend it. Regards, Raghusri (talk) 16:16, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Declined; semi-protection won't help you because all the editors participating right now are autoconfirmed. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:53, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Diannaa, Please See the Contributions to 1: Nenokkadine because So many new users are using the Page for Vandalism & for the Sake of Testing. So my humble request is : Please protect the article with Semi protection as you had done previously with this article, at least for One week. So that only autoconfirmed users will edit it. Regards, Raghusri (talk) 12:09, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I am not seeing the level of vandalism needed to protect the page, just good-faith attempts to improve the article. If you disagree, please post your request at WP:RFPP, and another administrator will give an opinion. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:22, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

O.K. Raghusri (talk) 10:49, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Toddst1_and_70.53.97.28. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 01:03, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for replying to my ANI complaint

So is there anyway to block all these IP addresses? I mean there has to be a way to stop him from editing anywhere, not on talk pages even. He is valueless on Wikipedia. --DendroNaja (talk) 05:29, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to not get back to you sooner on this. I had to go out to a party. I just checked the IPs and they're from several different ranges in Israel; to block them all would block over a half a million IPs and we can't do that; there would be too much collateral damage. The IPs are associated with a cell phone service (Bezeq International), which explains why he's getting a new IP each time he logs on. Please list some of his favourite target articles here (five or six articles maximum) and I will semi-protect them in the morning. Logging off now, see you later. -- Diannaa (talk) 05:44, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Noting IPs for future reference:

• 79.177.163.151
• 79.182.111.44
• 79.182.49.102
• 79.180.177.93
• 79.179.166.212

It's okay, no problem. While I was waiting for an admin, I began to expand the Many-banded krait page. It's all good. I would like him to not be allowed to either edit on the article or the articl's talk page. Here is the list:

• Snakebite
• Inland taipan
• Venomous snake
• Black mamba (talk page only, as it is already semi-protected)

That's it for now, if he continues to follow me and harass me (eg, now he may target the many-banded krait article), I will tell which article. Thanks a lot! --DendroNaja (talk) 05:53, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

I also asked for permission for "rollback", because I will probably need it in the future with this guy. --DendroNaja (talk) 06:19, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

These 5 articles are now semi-protected, but not the talk pages. We don't normally do that except in the most extreme cases. I have also watch-listed these five articles. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:08, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

NYT and librarians

Read one paragraph of this and thought of you, gas attendant of the mind!

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/05/opinion/sunday/the-loneliness-of-the-long-distance-reader.html

All my best wishes! 86.179.38.188 (talk) 12:39, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, Iloveandrea, I guess it's better to edit with IPs than with accounts that are more easily discovered, eh?2602:30A:2ECA:C150:7CA0:A14D:52B1:8BB2 (talk) 14:09, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

CCI update

Another one down! --MER-C 07:38, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Yay! -- Diannaa (talk) 15:18, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

That was over fast. MER-C 09:25, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

-- Diannaa (talk) 16:35, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Rollback

Hey, first off thanks for protecting the Many-banded krait page. Second, do you think you can issue me rollback permissions? I already put in the request. If you don't think I need rollback than I won't argue that. It is entirely your decision. Thanks. --DendroNaja (talk) 17:42, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

I've commented at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback about this. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:50, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi DendroNaja. I think your request for rollback is best left for the people who routinely handle that. It may take a while, so please be patient. My main concern was to deal with the copyright violations, and that part has been taken care of. I also agree with the removal of content about the homeopathic uses of snake venom. The inclusion of such stuff in the encyclopedia is inappropriate in my opinion. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:03, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Request for the Deletion of Orphaned Non-free Revisions

Hello dianna :)

Please delete the orphaned non-free revisions of the following files : File:1 (Nenokkadine) film poster.jpg, File:Yevadu poster.jpg

Regards,

Raghusri (talk) 12:31, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Done. The image is too big, so I have tagged it for reduction -- Diannaa (talk) 15:16, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh ! Thank you :) Regards, Raghusri (talk 12:05, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

WP:VG newsletter

Hi Dianna. Hope you're having a great 2014 so far. It's a new quarter, so once again I come hat in hand to ask a favor. Can you send Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Newsletter/Issue to the list of users at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Newsletter#Readership for me? Thanks! —Torchiest ^talk_edits 17:47, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

I have gone ahead with the delivery. Did you know there's a new message delivery system, and a new user right of "mass message sender"? I can add this user right to your permissions if you like, and then you could send your own messages! Wikipedia:Mass message senders. Please let me know if you would like to do this, and I will add the permission to your user rights and provide instructions as to how to use the new message sending system. Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 20:18, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

I did not know that, and I would love to have that permission, thank you. It will be quite handy, since I'm going to continue helping with the VG newsletter indefinitely. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 23:14, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Permission assigned. Here's the information at meta: mw:Help:Extension:MassMessage. Messages are sent out by User:MediaWiki message delivery. Bookmark this page: Special:MassMessage.

1. The page where the list lives must be formatted properly; I have done your list for you.
2. Go to Special:MassMessage.
3. Place the name of the page where the recipient list lives in the box marked "Page containing list of pages to leave a message on:"
4. Place the desired heading for the message in the box marked "Subject of the message (also used as the edit summary):"
5. Place the contents of the message in the box marked "Body of the message:" Add four tildes so the bot signs and the item gets a time stamp! This way for people whose talk pages have automatic archiving, the newsletter will be archived. (I forgot this step on your recent mail-out :/)
6. Press the Preview button and verify that everything is looking good
7. Press send. Message delivery starts pretty much instantaneously and your batch of 266 newsletters was sent out in two minutes flat. Let me know is you have any questions. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:30, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks again! —Torchiest ^talk_edits 05:08, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Dianna and an Happy New Year

..can you help me keep an eye on my friend here on Sikhism. He keeps sneakily deleting refernces and readding complete pigeon English jibberish from dubious sources. I am keen to ensure that that article does not become a veiled foriegn language article that no one West of Karachi can understand. I'm trying to "Anglocise" it by adding headings which students can easily pick up on. I'm also trying to make it short and punchy. My friend has a habit of creating long tortuos sentences (as then tend to in India), that make perfect sense to him but no one else. He lacks basic WP:Competence in English. Thanks and a Happy New Year again. SH 19:55, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I still have it watch-listed from the previous round of events. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:21, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem and reuploading file

Hi there, I recently uploaded File:Portrait of Thomas Phifer.jpg and did not provide adequate permissions within 7 days, so the file was deleted (F11: No evidence of permission for more than 7 days). I have since compiled all permission and licensing data, but can't re-upload the file since it was deleted. How can I reupload the file with the correct permissions? Thanks for your help in advance. Rosecarter915 (talk) 23:50, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Please have the copyright holder email the proof of permission to our volunteer response team ("OTRS") at permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Please ensure the email includes the file name or url so they can easily match the email with the image. Once an OTRS team member has reviewed the permission email, the file can be restored. I am not a member of the OTRS team. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:03, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Request

When you have a sec, can you add me to the AWB checkpage? INeverCry 21:13, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

 Done Happy (semi-automated) editing, -- Diannaa (talk) 21:19, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I hate to do it, but I have another favor to ask of you. Can you look at the last complete deleted revision of my userpage (before I blanked it or put up a retired tag or whatever)? My little barnstar collection should be at the bottom of the page. Could you copy & paste it to User:INeverCry/Barnstars? I had thought I had the text saved somewhere in a notepad entry, but no. I'll owe you one. INeverCry 21:58, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Done; you may wish to tweek the layout. Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 22:06, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks again! That's definitely "bling" with a lower-case b. INeverCry 22:13, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

File:The Jaipur infantry 1936.jpg

Could you check the deleted information about this file? It was deleted for lack of source, but now there is a source statement on the file information page, although nothing else is present. Is this source statement enough? Any reason not to assume own work by the uploader's father? --Stefan2 (talk) 02:26, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

The 2009 image looks like the version found at this blog, including the watermark and faint yellow border, so I doubt that the uploader's father took the picture (though I do believe that he scanned it rather than found it online, as it's got plenty of pixels). It has a woven texture, like cloth, and has some rips in it that reveal tiny threads. It appears to be a scan of the back cover of a book. The version uploaded in 2007 has fewer pixels and did not have the woven texture, but it also has a watermark, which would not be present in a version from Dad's old album. The image was tagged by Sitush and deleted by Explicit (who suddenly stopped editing in February 2013). -- Diannaa (talk) 02:49, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed that Explicit had deleted the file, so I asked here since you are one of the few remaining maintainers who knows enough about the file namespace. Do you think that this deserves a PUF discussion, or should the orphaned file description page be deleted? --Stefan2 (talk) 12:11, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

I think you should tag the page for deletion. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:20, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

• Also, does the information at File:LawrenceWalters2013.jpg solve that one? --Stefan2 (talk) 02:32, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

No, because the uploader said the source was http://firstamendment.de/, and they don't present any evidence of permission. The image has a watermark and is obviously a work for hire, not a pic taken by a private individual. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:47, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I've tagged the file information page with {{db-g8}} (with a reference to this discussion) and notified the uploader. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:11, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Happy Birthday to Wikipedia! 13!

Ye olde 'pedia!

86.180.45.2 (talk) 16:47, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Request for the deletion of Orphaned non-free revisions

Hello Dianna :)

My humble request is : If you have Free time (Only), then please delete the Following file's ONFRs : 1 Nenokkadine film poster

Regards,

Raghusri (talk) 11:07, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Raghusri, the bot was correct to reduce the size of the image. 420 x 560 is nearly double the recommended size, as it's 235,200 pixels (420 times 560), and the recommended size is 100,000 pixels. The relevant guideline is WP:Image resolution. So the bot was correct to reduce the size of the image, and I have reverted to that version. Sorry, -- Diannaa (talk) 16:19, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

It's O.K. Diannaa, Thank you So much for the Info., :) Regards, Raghusri (talk) 11:46, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Wording of themselves and fiancée’s vs bride's and groom's

Can we not tweak other words to avoid such copyright just the book itself does have a preview section via Google books and the marriage order would not allow people to be bride and groom unless the marriage was approved, hence the themselves and fiancee's wording because before being approved of marriage they had to present evidence for both themselves to be of Aryan descent to 1800.

The book copyright is "SS members who wished to marry had to produce family trees for themselves and their fiancee's stretching back to 1800"

At current "Himmler introduced the "marriage order", which required SS men wishing to marry to produce family trees proving that both the bride's and groom's families were of Aryan descent to 1800."

Can it not be changed to themselves and fiancée’s?--Windows66 (talk) 07:29, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

That's not good grammar. I will fix it. Please post comments about an article on the article talk page, where other editors will also see your remarks. I have watchlisted articles that I have heavily edited, so I will know if you post something. -- Diannaa (talk) 07:38, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay feel free to delete this.--Windows66 (talk) 08:57, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Sikhism

Hi Fellow editor. Hope all is good. Sorry for adding that citation in section heading but Jujhar keeps deleting that heading and leeps addind a disingenous heading "Simran" which does not cover all aspects of what that conveys. Thanks SH 17:46, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Dianna, can you have a word with my friend who thinks it's Ok to lauch WP:Personal attacks on other editors, as in here . Thanks SH 18:08, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks SH 21:12, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

He's not stopping and misusing warning templates on my talk page now. 3 times I've had to delete them. I think he really thinks what he is doing is 100% correct. I don't know how I can explain to him references when he doesn't understand texts. The example I cited on his page is an apt example. The fact he does not understand that "restorative Justice" is exactly the same as "fighting any kind of oppresssion". Thanks SH 08:23, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

I already tried warning him and there's nothing here that justifies a block. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:12, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

On the contrary, I don't want him blocked. He maybe a useful editor, but he's got to get better at his English expressiona nd his understanding of research.In fact I've asked for WP:Mediation ThanksSH 19:13, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

That's a good I idea. I don't have much experience mediating disputes of this kind, and they do. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:43, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Duplication report help.

Hi! I was wondering if you could double check a plagiarism test I ran and see if your interpretation of it matches mine? You had a better eye for it than me, last time.

I was using Duplication Detector, and comparing Falkland Islands sovereignty dispute with this Falkland Islands newsletter, [1], because someone pointed out on the Reliable Sources noticeboard that a lot of these pages had many unsourced and disputed claims. Here's the report I received, using a cut-off of four words.

What does it look like for you? Thanks! __ E L A Q U E A T E 18:43, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

It's definitely copy vio, with lengthy passages copied directly from the source. There's also a lot of too-close paraphrasing. The source does not look like a scholarly work to me; it looks like a self-published paper. Please let me know if you need my help cleaning this copyright violation from the article. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:00, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. I spent my Wikipedia time budget for today following up some of the article's sources. I never say no to quality help, of course, if you see a way to make it better, but I will be able to do some more tomorrow. I admit that I'm not sure I know the best way to phrase the discovery for other editors, if they're somehow attached to the source. But thanks again for looking at it! __ E L A Q U E A T E 19:31, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh I think I spoke too soon, I did a quick check on this report concerning History of the Falkland Islands and this is probably more than I could handle on my own. __ E L A Q U E A T E 19:40, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Those two are done. There's five more that need checking:

• Arana–Southern Treaty
• David Jewett
• Falklands Crisis (1770)
• Capture of Port Egmont
• Timeline of the history of the Falkland Islands. I will have to finish later as I have to go out to a family dinner now. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:12, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I am so sorry I didn't check other pages before mentioning it here. I had no idea it was this extensive. And I found another one. Report for Reassertion of British sovereignty over the Falkland Islands (1833). Looking at the source that was plagiarized, I don't even think it would be considered a reliable source in the first place, which is what I was originally investigating. All of the footnotes in it are to primary sources, and I don't think it has even a tangential relation to academia. Is it more important to get rid of the copy vios first, or is there a best practice way of finding if others agree that it's a less-than-reliable source first? I've never dealt with an issue spread across so many pages before and I don't know what needs to be dealt with first. __ E L A Q U E A T E 03:16, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

I will help with the copy vio part; the rest can be sorted afterwards. -- Diannaa (talk) 04:35, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! __ E L A Q U E A T E 04:55, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

I will work on it tomorrow - I am too sleepy to do anything complex right now. --- Diannaa (talk) 05:00, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Just a heads up, I checked the Falklands one myself of curiosity, and the source noted said it was written in 2008 in response to a December 207 seminar. The removed text added? October 2007 (one example). So while there's clearly issues here, double-check on these when the text was added if the articles are ones that have been around a long time. There are copyright issues no doubt, but they could be on the other side rather than us. Wizardman 03:25, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Wizardman. I will check that out tomorrow and verify what I have done so far. -- Diannaa (talk) 04:16, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

User:Wizardman, I'm taking a look at that diff and I'm having trouble seeing what matching text there is between that diff from 2007 and the PDF we were checking against. Could you point out the specific sentence of "The removed text added" that you are talking about? __ E L A Q U E A T E 04:25, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

The paper at falklandshistory.org is dated May 2008. The content in question did not appear in our versions of Falkland Islands sovereignty dispute or History of the Falkland Islands dated May 2008 so it looks like the material was copied from the paper rather than the other way around. That is, it was added to Wikipedia after the publication of that paper in 2008. -- Diannaa (talk) 04:30, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

The only blurb I put in the revision history search that was in your removed edits was "Weddell did not believe that Jewett was acting with the interests of..." Which brought me the example above. Not sure about if anything else was the case. Wizardman 04:36, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

The Weddell was a completely separate issue. That text wasn't part of the PDF, or Dianaa's reverts, or anything to do with the copyvio issues. I'm glad you found where it came from, but I deleted that earlier, because of an issue unrelated to this. If you look at the timestamp of my change, you'll see it was about twelve hours before Dianaa's work. __ E L A Q U E A T E 04:39, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Ah, well in that case the mystery becomes very clear. I put in two quotes from Dianna's removal and came up with these two diffs: [2][3]. User:Nigelpwsmith has also worked on the Arana-Southern Treaty and Jewett articles, among others, so there's our culprit. Edits were in 2011 so this was definitely a copyvio by the user. Perhaps a CCI is needed? Wizardman 04:57, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

You're the boss, W. -- Diannaa (talk) 05:00, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Let me know if anything is found in the other articles noted above. If so I'll open a CCI. FWIW I did a survey on the user and he only edited about 35 articles so a CCI would be relatively quick at least. Wizardman 01:48, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

I haven't finished yet, but so far copy vio has been found in Falkland Islands sovereignty dispute, History of the Falkland Islands; Arana–Southern Treaty. A quick look at article history shows copy vio is present in Reassertion of British sovereignty over the Falkland Islands (1833) and Falklands Crisis (1770), added by the same person. So yeah, I think you should go ahead and open it. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:58, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

A look at the user's talk page reveals the topics are almost completely about copyvio concerns. They were warned about the Arana–Southern Treaty copyvio specifically. It looks like it was removed on that page then but someone restored some of the problem, possibly unintentionally, here.__ E L A Q U E A T E 10:55, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

User blocked and CCI opened here. Wizardman 14:14, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks -- Diannaa (talk) 19:58, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Don't know where to post this there, so putting it here as food for thought: I'm pretty sure that IP 86.147.227.161 needs to be added to that CCI. Here's where he tidies up one of Nigel's copyvios, right before he adds one of his own (both appear to be from here). There's quite a bit of overlap between the two. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:23, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Pretty much everything has been dealt with wrt the IP's additions, except for Louis Antoine de Bougainville -- Diannaa (talk) 00:06, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

I have checked all the IP's edits now and cleaned up. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:52, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

You are fast and good. I pulled one more paragraph from David Jewett (as it was a solid block of word-for-word sentences from the pdf) but I couldn't have done all of that as fast as you. __ E L A Q U E A T E 01:04, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

I saw that, Elaqueate. Thanks for helping out and thanks for your kind words. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:06, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Pinto's birthday

Hi Diannnaaaaaa, hope you're well. I've been left a bit confused by the various back and forth about Pinto's birthday. Can you read Hebrew? If so, does this source say that his birthdate is 1973-9-27? Alternatively, does it say he was born on the first day of the Hebrew New Year, and would that correspond with 27th September? Thanks! --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:34, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Demmmmmiii ~! I missed that. I will self revert -- Diannaa (talk) 22:12, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

"You selected: Thursday, September 27, 1973. The corresponding Jewish date is: Tishrei 1, 5734." So yup, tis correct., -- Diannaa (talk) 05:48, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! He has an awesome beard for his relatively tender years. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:58, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Schindler's List

Why don't you nominate the article for FA?--MJ for U (talk) 21:10, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Good Article is Good Enough, in my opinion. If I can't tell the difference between FA prose and GA prose, I doubt our readers can either. Better to work on getting sucky articles up to a minimum standard. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:10, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

RevDel request

Hello! Would it be possible to delete all 60-ish past revisions of User:Ekevu? The reason is written in current revision, which I used the actual "Ekevu" account to edit. Thank you very much! Ekevoo (talk) 22:40, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Quicker: I deleted the page and re-created with the desired version. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:10, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Nazi Germany

see the recent improvment as proposed in the talkpage a section about nazi german mottos Kalix94 (talk) 17:16, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Guatemalan IP again

190.106.222.29 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) That rollback all edits function has been very useful. Erick (talk) 23:29, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

This is the same range as before; the block expired. I am re-blocking the same range as he is the only person using that range. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:10, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Protection Request

Hey Diannaa, hope all is well with you. Could you please indef semi-protect this page, please? It's part of my userspace and due to previous vandalism in my userspace (which got out of control), I have all my userspace pages and subpages indef semi-protected. Thanks in advance. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:24, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Neutralhomer. I am well and hope you are also. I have completed the request. Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 00:27, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Ma'am. Much appreciated. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:39, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Restore indef semi?

Hi Diannaa, some time ago you applied indef-semi to Circumcision with the rationale "Persistent vandalism: Addition of poorly sourced material; important medical article", see protection log. In the past 2 weeks, the article got full-protected twice due to edit-warring. The second of those expired Sunday afternoon, and as you might be aware (I wasn't until this happened!), even if an article has an indef prot setting, if it gets a time-limited ad hoc protection setting, when that expires, it doesn't return to the previous setting, and instead it returns back to full unprot. Since then the article has drawn the kind of unsourced IP edit that prompted the original indef-semi, could you restore it please (both edits and move)? Thanks... Zad68 00:04, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Done. Thanks Zad68 for noticing this needed to be done, -- Diannaa (talk) 00:11, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Copy Edit Project

Hi. Gareth Griffith-Jones suggested I join this group and begin working on the backlog, since I wish to get more involved. I chose one of the oldest articles (from November 2012): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kentucky_Wesleyan_Panthers_football. It did suggest to give you a buzz with any questions. Since this was my first attempt, I'd like someone to review it and see if it's okay. Also, if it is okay, I don't know how to (or if I should) remove it from the copy edit list. Thanks for any assistance you can give me.

Onel5969 (talk) 06:43, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Onel5969. The copy edits and structural changes you did were very good. Here's some points for further improvement:

• Use a {{Unreferenced section}} template to mark sections that have no sources
• Section headers use sentence case
• Magazine titles need italics
• Job positions and football positions do not get capital letters
• Please see this diff for other small amendments. Thank you for your interest in helping out with copy edits. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:19, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Islam and Sikhism

Hi Dianna, can you give me hand there Islam and Sikhism. I have serial deleter of references there. I did have issues with and edit war between Muslimas and Sikhs. I've been trying to edit the existing version but there's a chap there who's just doing mass deletion of references. I have reported him as well. Thanks SH 08:17, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

David Beurle

Hi Diannaa, I just received the permission from David Beurle's picture, which was deleted in september by you. See ticket 2014012110012802 for info. Can you restore the image? Thanks. Best, Grashoofd (talk) 17:02, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Aaaaand it's already been restored. Sorry! Grashoofd (talk) 17:06, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Rangeblock Request

Hello again, Diannaa! I was hoping to get a rangeblock (163.32.124.0/24) on yet another pest that I've been tracking for quite awhile. I'm not sure if I've asked you to deal with this one before, so I'll fill you in. Sven70 (talk · contribs) is a disruptive IP-hopper from Taiwan who has been falsely claiming "disabled abuse" here for years, and he regularly trolls the project with the same old disproven claims on some of our most trafficked pages (e.g.[4], [5]). Sven70 claims to, or actually does, suffer from repetitive stress injury, which explains the bizarre "shorthand" that many understandably dismiss as gibberish vandalism. But in fact, the shorthand always translates to things like "Fuck you disabled-hating fascists!" and "Disabled-hating assholes!" when he pops up out of nowhere with a new thread on AN/I or Jimbo's page. He is very likely my next LTA report. In the meantime, since he to get the message (first part roughly translating to "You people will be exposed as disabled-hating assholes..."), could we get a rangeblock? I've checked the range contributions and 99% of the IPs are all him. I appreciate any help you can give here as always! Cheers :) Doc talk 06:58, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

I have done a two-week range block to start. The chances are high that he will return after the block expires. Please help me monitor and we will look at re-blocking when the block expires. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:12, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Will do! TYVM :) Doc talk 02:18, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

May need to adjust it. Typical Sven70 response.[6] Doc talk 11:13, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

That IP is already within the blocked range (nb. It's just a talk page edit on his own talk pg). -- Diannaa (talk) 19:46, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Eep - didn't think about that. Thanks :) Doc talk 05:40, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Request for the Deletion of Orphaned non-free revisions

Hello Diannaa.

My humble request to you is :

Please delete the ONFR's for the Following files : 1 Nenokkadine film poster, Yevadu poster

Regards,

Raghusri (talk) 11:30, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Done now; sorry to be so slow. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:31, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much Diannaa & No problem :) Raghusri (talk) 11:20, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles December 2013 Backlog Drive

Hi everyone, I've noticed that a few of you haven't updated your totals as several reviews have passed but on the backlog page, it still says that the article is under review or on hold.

Please update your totals and continue to do so until February 1. If the status of a review is under review or on hold according to the backlog page, even though the article may have passed/failed, it will not count towards your final total.

For those that made pledges during the drive, the final donation amount will be determined sometime in February.

Thank-you.Sent by Dom497 using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:17, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "HITLER's ROLE IN THE "FINAL SOLUTION"". 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 31 January 2014.

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. 17:02, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

As you well know, Diannaa, we went through all this before: dispute resolution. As well as on the talk page for Hitler. I really don't know why we must spent our time yet again on it because the lone guy will not WP:DROPTHESTICK. As you know, a determination, well cited was already been reached. Kierzek (talk) 16:37, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Consensus has already been reached, and the person who filed the dispute resolution was the only dissenting voice. Personally I don't find spending a month or more arguing over the wording of one or two sentences of the Hitler article to be a very productive use of editor time. Like Nick-D, I have said so on the DR page. -- Diannaa (talk) 17:11, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

I agree and have stated as much therein. Kierzek (talk) 17:46, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Crestwood Secondary School

True it has been vandalized in the past. On the year where protection was enabled, there were only two vandals and some edits that weren't frequent. I think that PC1 is appropriate for infrequently-edited pages like this. --George Ho (talk) 18:10, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

I have changed it to pending-changes-protection. The students who were vandalising the page back in 2010-11 are likely long gone. I will continue to watch-list -- Diannaa (talk) 18:17, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Fuck peer review, again

1. Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties
2. Wikipedia:Peer review/Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties/archive1

I've listed the article Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties for peer review.

Help with furthering along the quality improvement process would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Peer review/Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties/archive1.

Thank you for your time,

— Cirt (talk) 01:08, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of Alexandre Lippmann

Hi Diannaa. I was browsing the Olympic results for 1908 and noticed a red link for the Alexandre Lippmann article. On further investigation, it shows that you deleted it a few days ago due to copyright issues. Are you able to provide me with a copy of the page in my userspace? Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 10:06, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Lugnuts! I will have to email it you instead, as it is all copy vio. Since you don't have the email feature activated, please send me an email and I will send it to you in my reply. Please be sure to thoroughly re-work the content before re-creating the article. Thanks, -- Diannaa (talk) 15:20, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

No worries, I'll recreate it, copyvio free. Otherwise there's a gap in the list! Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 08:34, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Revision deletion

I was wondering if you could possibly delete the revisions on my user page. Please? Informant16 —Preceding undated comment added 14:13, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Instead of revision deletion of each diff, I have deleted the whole page as a U1 deletion. You can re-create the page as a blank page (or any content you desire) if you wish to get rid of the red link. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:15, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Otto Wächter

I just happened to see this "piece of work". If you are interested, check it out. It needs a lot of re-write and ce. Cheers, Kierzek (talk) 00:56, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:35, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome. BTW, somewhere along the road it was rated a "B class" article which it clearly is not. Kierzek (talk) 01:38, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

That was for a version in 2007. Obviously standards have changed a lot since then -- Diannaa (talk) 01:54, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

It's a good thing "standards" are higher now. I did some ce work on it. It's in better shape, but could use some more work. Kierzek (talk) 01:27, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks and link to [[[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Pediatric Bipolar Disorder Portfolio]]

Thanks so much for helping to make the edits to my page. Would be very glad if you (or anyone you know who might be knowledgable in this field) help to make edits for my article in creation! You're the best :) Thanks again!!! Ongmianli (talk) 09:31, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks,

Ongmianli

I am not seeing why relevant material can't just be included in the Bipolar disorder in children article. Remember we need to stick to Review articles too. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:00, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Chinese New Year

The article Chinese New Year indeed look protected to me (I see a "View source" tab, and not the "Edit" one).

Maybe it's protected only regarding not logged and newly registered users? --109.53.247.194 (talk) 18:35, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

The article was not protected at that time. The protection was re-added by an admin at 18:09, January 30, 2014‎. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:44, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

CCI update

MER-C 05:03, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Like -- Diannaa (talk) 15:57, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the deletion

Thanks for deleting the edits on my page. There is another one by the same user speculating on my real-world employment - would you be able to remove that one as well? StAnselm (talk) 03:53, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Found it. I have already emailed the oversight people, and someone should respond shortly. -- Diannaa (talk) 03:59, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Followup: User you blocked continues BLP violations in unblock request -- I've emailed oversight but if you're awake pls revoke talk privs. EEng (talk) 11:23, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for helping resolve this, I had already logged off. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:08, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Early Himmler photo

Diannaa: could you look at the suggested early photo of Himmler which Hoops recommended for use in Himmler's article to see if it can be used therein. You know free use/fair use issues MUCH better than myself. Thank you in advance for input, Kierzek (talk) 16:44, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Replied on your Talk. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:58, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Falkland Islands, small return

I mentioned that batch of Falkland Islands copy vios here, as an editor peripherally involved by restoring some of the bad copy has stated they wanting to get more involved in the pages again. As he was topic-banned for other reasons for the time we removed it, I thought I'd point it out so it's clear. I don't see that you'd have a strong opinion about this, but then I thought I should tell you on the chance you thought I framed it incorrectly there. __ E L A Q U E A T E 22:28, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I think your comment was fairly and accurately worded, and I will keep an eye on the discussion for further developments. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:25, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

GAN Backlog Drive Award

		The Good Article Reviewer's Medal of Merit
		For reviewing 3 Good article nominations during the December 2013 GAN Backlog Drive!--Dom497 (talk) 04:10, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Diannaa (talk) 19:39, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

GOCE January drive

		The Modest Barnstar
		Thanks for copyediting a total of 5,040 words during the January 2014 backlog drive (and for your help with the barnstars)! All the best, Miniapolis 17:58, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Diannaa (talk) 19:39, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Complex regional pain syndrome

I have NO clue as to how to PM people on this stupid Wikipedia thing. Diana, please email me at exoskeleton aaaaaaaat gmx doooooot de. I would like to discuss the changes on the CRPS page with you. Parts of it are now a real mess for the sake of brevity.----rolander0001

Changes to the article should be discussed on the article talk page. Click on this link to go there: Talk:Complex regional pain syndrome. The reason your addition was trimmed for size is because it was too large, giving undue weight to one treatment, which would give the reader the impression that this one treatment is more important than the others. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:40, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For stopping a vandal within minutes of being reported. Thanks a lot! ミーラー強斗武 (talk) 02:54, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! -- Diannaa (talk) 02:57, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

User:Yatzhek

Diannaa I was wondering if you can help me please, the user Yatzhek is continuing to revert an edit by themselves which is not correct and I have tried to create a talk section on the article and the users talk page but I am just getting personally attacked and the edit reverted back.

The two discussions can be found here Talk:Black people in Nazi Germany#Ethnic Poles and User talk:Yatzhek#Ethnic Poles were Aryans.

I have given evidence that Poles were 'Aryan' but the user is continuing to reply without any genuine text or any sources and is reverting back to the article that is incorrect.

The reasons for the reverts can be found https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Black_people_in_Nazi_Germany&action=history and the user is not actually debating but rather just reverting back without any sources given, the source given does not state what the user is trying to keep into the article.

When providing evidence I am getting replies like "Please stop littering my wall with tons of information which you don't understand."here

Could you be willing to help please?--Windows66 (talk) 14:32, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Both of you need to be careful to not engage in WP:edit warring. It's better if the discussion takes place on the talk page of the article (not on a user talk page) as other interested editors are more likely to see the discussion. I am going to place an edit warring notice on both of your talk pages and I suggest you continue to try to talk to him about the edits, and if he persists, he will have to be reported for edit warring. The best thing you can do to further the discussion is to present multiple sources that back up your point. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:46, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I've reported the user to the noticeboard here for lack of cooperation and simply reverting the article and personal attacks such as:

"I have an irresistable feeling that you are trying to "steer" the historical truth. You are from England, so you are either anti-Polish racist and hate the fact that Poles suffered racial persecution in their own country, or you are Polish and strongly want to be a full-fledged member of the Stormfront forum. That's all. Thank you." [7]

" How dare you discredit the Polish suffering during the Shoa by saying that Poles were treated as Aryans? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_victims - Hope you read the whole of my message and educate yourself. Thank you." [8]

It might be nothing but I have noticed User:Tobby72 is doing exactly what User:Yatzhek is doing and copying and pasting material from one articles talk page to another, could you check these are not the same person please? I have a funny feeling it is.--Windows66 (talk) 16:05, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I have no way to check that for you, as I do not have WP:Checkuser rights. My feeling is that they are not the same person. If multiple people are telling you that you are wrong, it's best if you accept that you might be wrong, or at least that consensus is not with you. WP:Consensus. If you feel really strongly about an issue, there's WP:dispute resolution venues where you can try to get help. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:13, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Could just be a coincidence that both of them copied and pasted the same thing twice into different articles. Multiple people are not telling me that I am wrong about Poles being Aryan, the user Tobby72 does not seem to be agreeing with the user Yatzhek that Poles were "racially non-Aryan" in the slightest, nor that "only Germans were Aryans according to Nazi ideology" (words of Yatzhek), in fact Tobby72 does not dispute Poles were Aryan (not that I am aware of), they were put into the 'Aryan side' of ghettos, the ancestors passport mentioned Poles and no "racial theory" could be found against Poles to satisfy the Nazis racial theories. There doesn't seem to be any issue with other Wikipedia editors that Poles were Aryan but the user Yatzhek refuses to admit this and when evidence is given his/her way the user resorts to personal attacks and insults.--Windows66 (talk) 16:20, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

My opinion is that the level of personal attacks you are experiencing is not enough to warrant a block. We will see what other opinions are posted in your new thread at ANI. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:24, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

The personal attacks are continuing, I've placed it in the ANI complaint.--Windows66 (talk) 16:36, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

The user User talk:Windows66 is a person who is racist and antipolish. He deletes all the information about the sufferings of the Polish nation during the war. He is deleting the SOURCED information and replaces them with other subjective data, mostly from his own personal point of view. He is trying to deny the Polish struggle during the World War II. He is dangerous for Wikipedia, while he is trying to push his own personal views. The whole problem started when he deleted the information about Black people in Nazi Germany facing the similar struggles to Gypsies and Poles. What is interesting, it was me who places the information about Jews Gypsies and Poles there. What he did, is not reverting my edit, but simply deleted the "ethnic Poles" and littered by talk page with tons of white-supremacist data. I am not from an English-speaking country, but I try to talk here. Dear Diannaa, I'd like you to observe what is he deleting from the articles, because most of his time on Wikipedia de DELETES and does not add nothing except his unsourced self-based data. Now i see he was trying to slander me and my reputation and create your point of view on me. Please, do not judge me before you know my knowledge and my hope, that Wikipedia will stay a reliable source of information. User talk:Windows66 should be banned for what he does. Take care. Yatzhek (talk) 16:42, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't take kindly to being called a "racist" and I am NOT anti-Polish so stop saying both of these things. I only delete information that is not verified by academic genuine sources. I have showed you information on why the removal was necessary; on the basis of "race" no Nazi racial theory could be used for the discrimination against the ethnic Poles and they were racially regarded the same as Germans. The whole problem started with stuff like "non-Aryans along with Jews, Poles" being added into articles when firstly it is incorrect and secondly the source given does not even mention Poles. I deleted the "ethnic Poles" from the beginning because the racism against Poles was not 'race based' as they were essentially the same race as the Germans and the Nuremberg Laws classified Gypsies as race enemies which is why I left the text "Gypsies" still there.

Please show me where I have put any white-supremacist data into any article, talk page or anywhere on Wikipedia? This sort of stuff should not be taken lightly to say to another, please provide evidence of this. I AM DYING FOR YOU TO SHOW ME THIS.

If you actually went ahead and looked at my contributions, I have actually contributed to crimes against Poles by the Nazis.--Windows66 (talk) 16:52, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Yatzhek, calling people a racist is unacceptable; it's a personal attack, and treating your fellow editors that way could lead to you being blocked from editing. Please focus your work on the content and do not speculate on other editor's motivations. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:56, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

@ Diannaa - and is that OK that he is using you to gove me a warning? Why can he lie about me while i have some proves that he is ignorant. If he is not, than why is he deleting all the data about Poles only, not Serbs, not Russians, but only about Poles - the second largest group of WWII victims right after the Jews? @ Windows66 - i called your data "white-supremacist" because it reminds me of Stormfront forum, where Americans try to make "Aryans" our of Slavic people, and deny the fact that Germans killed 2 million Poles and persecuted the whole nation. It was all race-based. Not politically-based. Race-based hate is called racism and Poles were one of the victims. I dont want to argue no more. I am tired. Do what you want, change it as you wish, you won. I am not strong enough to keep the truth and historical facts on Wikipedia. Go and write your own history. Bye. Yatzhek (talk) 17:05, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

You can't expect me to sit here and allow you to call me every name under the sun, personally attack me time after time after I warned you and of course I have reported you and rightly so, you have no right to call me this.

I have told you, I did remove the Poles and the Serbs from it because the source given does not say that and it is incorrect. You called me a white supremacist because why? You said I put data that was full of white supremacy which is nothing but plain out lies. "Aryans" are Slavic people too, you cannot deny this. The Nazis themselves acknowledged this and regarded Slavs as Aryan. Racism was used against Slavs and I have never denied that but it was not an official policy of Nazi Germany, some Nazis were not anti-Slavic, some of the countries allied were Slavic, etc. I have shown you truth and historical facts regarding the ethnic Poles. It is nothing to do with writing my own history, it is about you realizing that the source given did not cover what you say and evidence refutes it. I did not once personally attack you and you have called me all sorts, this would obviously not go down nicely.

As you can see Diannaa the user is not interested in debating with me or on any of the talk pages but rather personally attacking me and using the sympathy card, pathetic.--Windows66 (talk) 17:12, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Diannaa I want to ask you whether or not you will semi-protect the article Black people in Nazi Germany, the tedious and ridiculous reverts still are happening, I have my suspicions that Yatzhek is using sock puppets, I have had more personal attacks and random IP addresses on my talk page and editing on the article, see... [9], [10], [11]. It seems a coincidence that two IP addresses are behaving like this.--Windows66 (talk) 17:59, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Articles are not protected for this reason. If you would like another admin to take a look, please list your request for protection at WP:RFPP. If you suspect sockpuppetry, you can report the IPs at WP:SPI.-- Diannaa (talk) 19:39, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

a significant change about Nanking Massacre

There is a significant change about Nanking Massacre. Hence I create a new discussion topic about it and hope more editor can join it. I want a consensus about it. Please see the Talk:Nanking Massacre.Miracle dream (talk)00:05, 10 February 2014

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning HITLER's ROLE IN THE "FINAL SOLUTION", 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, User:Sunray (talk) 02:13, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

Just spreading the word.

I got the wikification drive for the month started, the other day. Would have had it up sooner if I'd realized it hadn't been started, but at least it's up now. :) Okay folks, say it with me: 1 for the money, 2 for the - the - okay, just let me read the script again first... (talk) 04:03, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I will pop over and do a few articles. -- Diannaa (talk) 04:07, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Advice on how to have useful scholarly resource, the Homeless Hub, removed from spam or blacklist

Thank you again for helping me in the past with a serious reference template problem.

Recently I have been editing articles related to homelessness in Canada and I noticed that the Homeless Hub is automatically rejected because of allegations of spam or blacklisting several years ago. York University professor, Stephen Gaetz is the Principal Investigator and Director of the Homeless Hub. It is partially funded through a Gaetz' 2008 multi-year grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) to establish the Canadian Homelessness Research Network. The Homeless Hub is an online research library and information centre containing more than 25,000 homelessness related items. It is unclear why it was blacklisted. It is very unfortunate that this site has not been cleared since then. Repeatedly when I find pivotal articles related to homelessness in wikipedia articles that are referenced but without any url, it is because the full-text digital form of the article is only found on this blacklisted site. The site itself is very well organized and is a very complete reference tool. Gaetz is also the secretary of the Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness with Alex Himelfarb as Chair and Tim Richter as Vice-Chair.

How can this be moved along and the blacklisting removed? I did leave a request on one of the recommended pages but it all seems a bit of a maze to me. Thank you for any help you can give me. oceanflynn 03:12, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

The link was added to the blacklist in December 2009. Reason: spamming by multiple editors. Please review the report at Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/homelesshub.ca. The place to file a request to get the link removed from the blacklist is MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#Proposed removals. I cannot file the request for you as to do so might be seen as my endorsement of its removal from the list. -- Diannaa (talk) 03:24, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

User:English Patriot Man

Hi Dianaa. I'm convinced that User:Windows66 and User:English Patriot Man are the same person. I reported Windows66 at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/English Patriot Man. -- Tobby72 (talk) 19:54, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

And there you go again, going on to various Wiki's users trying to ruin me and get me banned for no reason at all. My IP can be checked I have nothing to hide. I've also reported you because you have an incredible amount of parallel edits with the user Yatzhek. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tobby72.--Windows66 (talk) 19:56, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

It's pretty obvious Windows66 is EPM.Volunteer Marek (talk) 14:19, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Simply because I have removed some unsourced text and contributed towards Wikipedia and added text with reliable sources that some other users do not like, hardly.--Windows66 (talk) 11:25, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Finally done

That was a tough one, but at least 2009 is done. Hopefully the next few oldest won't be as tough. Wizardman 03:00, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

It was very time consuming. Happy to be done now, -- Diannaa (talk) 03:16, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Problem with Hunger (2008 film) poster

Hi Diannaa, maybe you can help me with something that (otherwise) I really don't see being resolved any time soon. It's about what type of poster should be used in Hunger film article.

Now, since the film is a British production, I think that, per Film poster#Film poster sizes, it should use a British version of the poster, like any other film produced by UK studio, but Bartallen2 constantly replaces my poster without even discussing it first because he thinks that his version of the poster (which is American) should be used instead. I know that every film that is produced by UK studio should use UK release poster, but it seem that the guy won't even listen to what I'm trying to tell him, since he's not yet responded to any of my posts. Can you please take a look at all of this and help, so I can leave all of this behind, because it's getting really annoying. Thanks in advance and sorry for my bad English.  InfamousPrince  09:00, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi InfamousPrince. Your English is fine. Sorry, but I am not really working with images any more so I will not be getting involved in this matter. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:51, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Malta

Hi,

I'm not sure whether you can do anything to help - I'm asking for your opinion because you were the user who locked Malta from editing by IPs/non-registered users. The vandalism stopped when the article was protected, but now the protection has expired, and well, it's started again. What do you think should be done about this? Thanks a lot, reuv ^T 11:10, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't think it's risen to the level yet where protection is warranted. If you would like another admin to take a look, please feel free to list the page at WP:RFPP. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:35, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Nazi Germany, Hitler, etc.

Hi Diannaa - Your judicious editing has not gone unnoticed. Sometimes I am given to pedantry and my sentences will be a tad convoluted. This is a consequence I think of growing up speaking German and English. You've done a great job brushing up imprecise grammar and sentence structure. I appreciate it. Even if I don't always concur over the content adjustments, I am not blind to those who possess a stronger command of the English language than I. vielen Dank :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Obenritter (talk • contribs) 03:21, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I on the other hand often get in trouble in real life for being too blunt and direct. But it's the perfect voice for writing Wikipedia content. It's best if you watch and make sure I don't alter your intended meaning, as I will not always have access to the sources. Thanks for the feedback. Regards, -- Diannaa (talk) 03:28, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Josef Mengele

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Josef Mengele you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Secret -- Secret (talk) 00:32, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Revision deletions?

I'd like to ask you to reconsider this change you made earlier this month. The copyvio guidelines don't seem to call for irreversible actions like that. Ellen Osiier was (and is) a brief stub, and any plagiarism would have been a minor affair. I wonder why you did not simply delete or change the offending text? I would have been happy to do so myself if I had seen a template or talkpage notice. It discourages a volunteer to see contributions needlessly expunged from project history. SteveStrummer (talk) 04:42, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

It looks like you are correct, according to Wikipedia:Copyright problems#Suspected or complicated infringement the revisions do not have to be rev-deleted for this type of case, unless the copyright holder requests it. So I have reversed that action. Note I did indeed change/re-write the text to remove the copyright violation, as an alternative to deleting the article, which was a foundational copy vio. -- Diannaa (talk) 04:57, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, that was such a fast and pleasant response, I don't even know what to say-! Except: Thank you!! SteveStrummer (talk) 05:32, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Genesys

Hi,

I was simply trying to add additional information about Genesys and it's non promotional. Many companies have a list of their products, list of their executives etc. without promoting anything. What do you recommend I do? Look at Novell and other companies. Simply trying to get out of the stub. I'm not promoting anything. Just enhancing the Genesys encyclopedia. I appreciate your comments. Let me know how we can add more factual content. Thanks again. Paris1984 (Gil) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.238.170 (talk) 17:30, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not intended to serve as a webhost, and is not the place to advertise, or to go into extreme detail about an organization or its mission. That is not the kind of information you would see in a book-based encyclopedia, and it's not the kind of encyclopedia we are trying to build. There's more information on this topic at Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. The fact that other articles may have inappropriate content is not a valid reason to add it to the Genesys article. If you are employed by the company, you should not be editing the article at all, as you have a conflict of interest. -- Diannaa (talk) 17:36, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

That IP vandal you blocked earlier...

...might be evading as user Querynoob (not linking to avoid the ping). I'm off to class for a bit, but could you keep an eye on them? Also pinging User:GiantSnowman and User:Mark Arsten, who undid vandalism on my userpage. Thanks a lot, ₆an⁶sh₆ 20:42, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi

Hello, Diannaa. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Guatemala vandal

190.106.222.22 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) Erick (talk) 17:56, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

190.106.128.0/17 (and 190.106.222.22) blocked for 3 months. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:10, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

EPM is gone for the moment

Now the hard work of cleaning up of the articles he distorted begins...This time I will put them all on watchlist, so that this situation doesn't happen again, and reaction can be made quickly once he reappears. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 20:07, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

I will send you my list of articles by email per WP: Beans. And this time let's not get fooled by several months of productive editing before he shows his true self. Thanks for your help. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:16, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Need a favor

Hi there. I recently created two articles, which I now see don't deserve the status of independent articles and would like them deleted, since they're just filling space.

1. Directive No. 21 2. Shosanna Dreyfus

I was told by a friend you could delete articles and since I created them, I'd like if you could delete them. They are nominated for deletion anyway.

Best regards

- Jonas Vinther

I can delete the Directive No. 21 but it looks like people want to keep the other one as a redirect. In the future if you wish to delete an article you have created and no one else has done any substantial work on it, you can tag it for deletion by adding the template {{db-u1}} to the top of the page. Or you can post here if you like, I don't mind -- Diannaa (talk) 21:53, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for fast reply. I wonder though, since I created the 2nd article, don't I have the right to decide if it should be deleted? As I said before, its already being considered for deletion. I'm a little confused. Thanks again.

- Jonas Vinther

You could certainly insist on it if you like, but people think it would make a valuable redirect, so why not keep it? -- Diannaa (talk) 22:36, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

I hear what you're saying, but at the end of the day, we can't create articles for EVERY fictional characters. This specific character has not won any awards or anything. I have to say I insist, if it's not too much to ask.

- Jonas Vinther

I already said I don't want to do it, as other people have found it useful. Instead, please tag it {{db-u1}} and let another administrator have a look. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:38, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Jonas Vinther: Please note the message in small print near the bottom of every edit window on this site. You do not have the right to decide what is done with your contributions, once they’re released under the licences mentioned, or to insist on anything but being duly credited for them—however they may be used by others. If you don’t feel comfortable giving up control of your writing in this way, you should think twice before hitting the “Save page” button. Please don’t take this as a criticism, but it‘s important that you understand the implications of contributing here so as not to regret it later.—Odysseus1479 03:36, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi again mate. I have another favor to ask. I recently made an article regarding a Danish city called "Mundelstrup". However, to distinguish it from other cities with the same name, I made a new one called "Mundelstrup, Denmark". So, If you could go ahead and delete the old one named "Mundelstrup", that would be awesome.

Thank you,

- Jonas Vinther

When moving a page, it's important not to do it as a cut-and-paste move, as you lose all the editing history, which is required for attribution. Regardless, for this particular article, the title does not need disambiguation as we do not have articles on any other locations named Mundelstrup. So the article should be at Mundelstrup, not Mundelstrup, Denmark. I will fix this by making Mundelstrup, Denmark into a redirect and reinstating the first article Mundelstrup. Unless you plan on making other Mundelstrup articles in the near future, this should work fine. Please see Wikipedia:How to fix cut-and-paste moves for more information as to why we move pages using the move function rather than doing cut and paste moves. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:50, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh I see. Thanks very much. I'm sorry for the trouble, but I'm a bit new on Wikipedia, I appreciate your help and patience :).

- Jonas Vinther

Deletion of New Orleans elevation map

Could you please provide an explanation as to why the elevation map of the city of New Orleans was deleted? I am the creator and uploader of the image. It was an update to a previous map. The deletion reasoning claims "F4: File without a source for more than 7 days," although I am fairly confident that I did provide copyright information. The map was used by that page for several months without being marked. The map that was replaced by mine also had clear copyright information (that author relinquished it to the public domain, and specifically asked people to make improvements to it). I'm confused as to why, if there was a concern, the image wasn't just reverted back to the previous one until this issue could be resolved? Instead the image was just deleted, breaking the link to the image on the pages where it is referenced? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slincoln (talk • contribs) 22:43, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Mr Lincoln. The problem with both versions is that permission is missing for the underlying map. In the case of the upload by Tim Vasquez, it was a map, and for your version, it's a satellite photo of unknown provenance. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:15, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

RE Scott Walker article

Hi. I just read your block denial in that you view the matter as a content dispute and not vandalism on the part of a one-topic, new user who leaves no edit summaries and has made 3 rvs in a few hours time, corrected by two seasoned editors. In regard to 3RR, I assume I cannot rv again as I have already done so twice. So what to do then, just open up a discussion on the talk page? I know you're busy so please feel free to reply here at your convenience and I'll check back. Thanks for your advice. Yours,Quis separabit? 21:03, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

The addition sample diff is not vandalism. Whether or not the content belongs in the article needs to be discussed on the talk page. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

User:NJElderOmbudsman

Hi Diannaa. I noticed this new user with a questionable username. I know we block names with bot or administrator, but I've never seen one with Ombudsman before. INeverCry 01:03, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

And their user page indicates the account will be used by more than one person. I don't know much about this field so I have reported the user at Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:11, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I wasn't quite sure either. INeverCry 01:49, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

As promised. A cookie for your efforts dealing with WP:RFPP NeilN talk to me 03:49, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks ~! – Diannaa (talk) 04:05, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Is there a way?

Hi! I'd like to know what did you mean by "There's only been one IP edit in the last two weeks"[12]. Sorry if my request was clumsy. What I meant by it was impossible to talk is it is meaningless to leave message on the user's multiple talk pages. I think it's irrelevant to talk about the misuse of warning template [13] [14] and inappropriate edit summary [15][16] on the article talk page, but because of the IP changes, I don't think the user see his/her previous IP talk pages. I want to talk with the Amazon user with 54.199. xxx.xxx. IP on one user's talk page. That was why I asked for semi-protection of the article. As for the article talk page protection, it was my mistake. If the article is semi-protected and the user wants to edit the article, s/he has to create an account and I can talk on the user's talk page. If there's a way that I can talk to the editor with multiple IPs on one user's talk page, please let me know. Regards. Oda Mari (talk) 15:35, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

The best way to resolve the content dispute is to talk to the person behind the dynamic IP is to discuss the article content on the article talk page. We don't force people to get accounts, and we don't protect article talk pages except in extreme cases of extreme disruption such as insertion of malware, extreme BLP violations, and things like that. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:44, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. I use the article talk page and talk to the IP user. I am thinking about bringing the matter, inclusion of criticism, to NPOV noticeboard or asking for RFC as there are not many editors talking about it. Which is appropriate? Or is there a better place? Oda Mari (talk) 16:20, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

I have used the RFC process myself with good success. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:22, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Happy editing! Oda Mari (talk) 16:34, 28 February 2014 (UTC)