Contents

User talk:TheImaCow

A tag has been placed on Category:A-Class vital articles in Art indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nominationbyvisiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:13, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TheImaCow,

I was just reviewing a file that you PROD'd and was so surprised to see your name in the edit history. You've been away for so long, it's nice to see you return. I talk from experience, pretty soon after I became an admin, I took a two year break from Wikipedia after I made a big cross-country move and underwent some medical treatment. But I decided to come back in 2018 and I guess you decided to give the project another try. Just remember that you are a volunteer and work on your terms, work on the tasks you want to do and don't take too much on. Wikipedia has the power to take over ones life and free time and that leads to burnout.

I hope you are well and that 2024 is starting off well for you. Take care! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:21, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind words!

Finally found some time & motivation again. We'll see for how long it lasts. --TheImaCow (talk) 12:28, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TheImaCow, I added context to the image whose deletion you proposed, in order to address the concerns you raised in your deletion request, I hope you are happy I have dealt with the issue. Pclive (talk) 12:54, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pclive Yes, it's perfect now, thank you for fixing this! --TheImaCow (talk) 15:55, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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

Hello, TheImaCow! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! asilvering (talk) 02:10, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work on these!

FYI, I have made a summary list of articles and their proposed deletion status at User:A. B./Sandbox2 --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 05:45, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I have redirected some more of those field articles to the list, as their PRODs would have expired tomorrow. --TheImaCow (talk)

Thank you for all the work you've done!!!

I've updated User:A. B./Sandbox2 to reflect the latest changes including recent additional proposed deletions. Note that James is now proposing non-Romanian fields for deletion; do you have any interest in trying to save those, too? --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 07:35, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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

A tag has been placed on Category:1668 in mass media indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nominationbyvisiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:30, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TheImaCow,

I see you PRODding some files so I'm hoping that you know more about policies surrounding images than I do. I came across File:Capt. Dr. Baghdad Khan Umerkhel.jpg by a less experienced editor and it looks like an image copied from a book and I don't see how it can be an editor's "own work". I was primarily looking at it because I can't see where there is any verification of whether or not the person mentioned in the file name is the person in the image. How do you recommend handling these situations? I don't work much with files but I see a lot of instances like this when I come across files from, say, 10-15 years ago. Thanks for any help and advice you can offer. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:10, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file definitly has insufficient source information. The scan is probably own work like stated, but the image itself obiviously not (the file is a "derivative work"). To determine the copyright status, we need - date, location (Country), source, author (known?) and content of the image (e.g. nature or a painting has different rules usually).

The date appears to be 1930-1950 (?), as this allegdly depicted "Baghdad Khan Umerkhel" was allegely born in 1900. This means the image is probably older than 50/70 years, and c:Template:PD-Afghanistanorc:Template:PD-Pakistan could possibly apply. But those countries are only guesses from the context of the article, and we don't know the exact one, could be a totally different one.

Further, we don't know anything about the orginal author. For example, assume the image was made in the 1940s by a photographer in his 30s, and this author is known e.g. stated in that source book. Afghanistan has "copyright expires" at death of author + 50 years. Assuming image was made in 1940, author lived until 1990, plus the 50 years=2040 -> image still protected. However, we can only guess stuff like that because we don't know anything about the orginal source. If the author is anonymous, the copyright has likely expired, but as mentioned we don't that.

Sometimes, the orginal source can be found using Google image search or TinEye (which does the same, but sometimes better). But I didn't get any results from that.

An entirely different rabbit hole is that the image needs to be public domain not only in the source county e.g. Afghanistan but also the United States, where the image is hosted. This is a complex topic where I don't know much at all about, but if the image was published +95 years ago (that would be before 1929 currently, it's fine (c:Template:PD-US), and if it was published without a copyright notice (C) until 1977, it should be fine too (c:Template:PD-US-no notice).

But however, we don't know the source of the image, and it needs to be clarified. There is a Commons gadget called "Quick Delete", which adds a "DW No Source" (DW=derivative work) button to the toolbar. (Don't know if that's enabled by default) This is ensentially tagging files as CSD F4 on Wikipedia using Twinkle, and it should be done on that file.

Hope I didn't forgot something important, and this was somewhat understandable.

--TheImaCow (talk) 09:14, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Right, one thing I forgot which should be said: In the general internet, de facto no one really cares about copyright or even realizes it exists (my impression). On Commons, it's the top #1 priority. --TheImaCow (talk) 16:07, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ping @Liz is another thing I forgot --TheImaCow (talk) 17:03, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Luzia Tschirky, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 20% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilipinas_Super_League#

https://www.philstar.com/sports/2023/12/01/2315644/nueva-ecija-hosts-davao-occidental-pilipinas-super-league-heads-out-town

If can add logo of mentioned page, appreciate in advance! Loptač01 (talk) 08:36, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Loptač01 Added! --TheImaCow (talk) 08:55, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pro Division teams section, i added few by alphabet following table. Most will need thumb addition in club article as used only for this league (but for few years, as correct as existing logos for another league). Try best you can, big thanks

https://www.instagram.com/p/Cz6K3ECutxQ/?next=%2Fkaterinacolors%2Ftagged%2F&hl=es-la (with careful cropping)

https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=829623372500724&set=a.504834574979607&type=3

https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=294484426831858&set=a.101370779476558&type=3

https://journalnews.com.ph/nueva-ecija-favored-to-extend-winning-streak/#gsc.tab=0

https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=122103159962126552&set=a.122103155966126552&type=3

https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-samsung-ss&sca_esv=1d7a1e4409694b8c&sxsrf=ACQVn0_Y6ROwF3T1E0yM8Cu7TVPyksRieg:1707556739255&q=san+juan+kings+logo&tbm=isch&source=lnms&prmd=invbz&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj02IHHuKCEAxUp1AIHHUhJA8kQ0pQJegQICRAB&biw=360&bih=649&dpr=3#imgrc=m6EEnA3Sd33kkM — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loptač01 (talk • contribs) 09:22, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by User4edits was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thank you for your work clearing out old, unnecessary files. It isn't a well-maintained area of the project and your work is appreciated! Liz Read! Talk! 18:36, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I appreciate it! --TheImaCow (talk) 18:39, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 16:11, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)

reliable

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

Rick Witsken, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

CDNA (microarchitecture), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 20% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

A tag has been placed on Category:Koći indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nominationbyvisiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:42, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]