User talk:Gryffindor/Archive13

Hey Gryffindor , I am here to tell you that I removed File:Princess_Masako.jpg from Crown Princess Masako because I think it's bad fair use there. I believe that the book cover can only be used to illustrate an article about the book, which we do not have. Obviously, now your image is not being fair-used anywhere, so I guess it'll be deleted in due course unless we can find another place for it. -- Y not? 23:39, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know, I reverted a lot of moves you made e.g. Zlín Region, because the title "Zlín (region)" is somewhat misleading, akin to moving Warwickshire to Warwick (shire). You wouldn't say "I'm in Zlín" meaning "I'm somewhere in the Zlín Region" in the same way you can say "I'm in New York" meaning somewhere in NY State, not necessarily the city. With South Bohemia, Central Bohemia, Moravia-Silesia and South Moravia I think you may have a point, though a uniform naming system seems more appropriate. The name "Moravian-Silesian Region" is used by the region itself.[1]

We could open a centralised discussion on this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Czech Republic if you still disagree. - filelakeshoe 15:18, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Filelakeshoe, I don't understand Gryffindor's transfers of articles about the Czech regions. South Moravia, South Bohemia, Central Bohemia, Moravia-Silesia and Vysočina (region) are not correct name forms of this regions. If you say in the Czech language South Moravia, you mean Jižní Morava, a part of historical land. But it is not the same as Jihomoravský kraj (South-Moravian Region). I think it should be South-Moravian Region, South-Bohemian Region, Central Bohemian Region, Moravian-Silesian Region and Vysočina Region. I'm sorry of my bad English, hope you understand me. --Miďonek (talk) 20:12, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment at Talk:Moravia-Silesia. - filelakeshoe 09:09, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your change of the Syrian flag on Wikicommons is causing a problem in the infobox of Syrian Civil War where the two-starred flag should appear. (It appears its formal name is Standard_of_the_President_of_Syria.) Shouldn't you have "archived" it so it can be used as a variant like you can the 1932 flag? I'm a novice when it comes to the syntax of icons so I can't seem to put it right. Mezigue (talk) 14:06, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry my bad, the change you made was not on Wikicommons - it's a Wikipedia resource. Mezigue (talk) 16:00, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The change at {{Country data Syria}} is being discussed at ANI. Your comment is welcome. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 16:04, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gryffindor, I reverted your edit to Template:WikiProject Syria where you replaced the Syrian state flag with a natural map of Syria. This should only be done if the government is replaced and chooses a new flag. Either way any proposal of the sort should be discussed and a consensus reached before making the change. Cheers! --Al Ameer son (talk) 02:42, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know it's been a while, but I was wondering if you could explain why you moved Coat of arms of Eritrea to Emblem of Eritrea without first discussing it on the article's talk page, after a lengthy move request discussion there had previously yielded no consensus to move. Curiously, it looks like it was allowed to stay at emblem for almost a year before being moved back to coat of arms, then you moved it back to emblem again, and just as curiously, it has stayed there another year without any complaints raised on the talk page. I'm not reporting you to AN/I or anything, because this is all old news and no one has complained on the article's talk page. I'm just curious what the rationale was and whether the article can be expected to be stable. I also hope you're not moving articles over community consensus, but apparently no one got too heated over this one. The whole reason I even encountered the article is that it is currently listed in the backlog for article reassessment at WP:HV. Personally, I'm not going to get worked up either way, about the article's title. It is a coat of arms in the same sense as any coat of arms of a peeress or member of the clergy, which usually use a lozenge or oval rather than a shield, but from the only two sources I could find, the government of Eritrea themselves refer to it as an emblem, so I suppose one title is as good as the other in this case, perhaps with a slight advantage to emblem. I just want an idea what's going on with the article and how to assess it. Wilhelm Meis (☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 04:45, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

hi there,

thank you for your message. I was not aware that there had been a vote when I moved the article you mentioned. Such votes should be respected obviously. I personally still think Emblem is the correct term, this is heraldicaly speaking not a coa. The article has been moved back. sincerely Gryffindor (talk) 06:52, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It's always a good idea to check an article's move history and talk page before moving it, just in case of a previous move/revert or move discussion. Looking at the discussion and at the device itself, I could honestly go either way on it. I'd say some such emblems are decidedly unheraldic, like the so-called coat of arms of Nepal, but then this one is not such a cut and dry case. Looking at it in a heraldic perspective, I see a fieldless heraldic badge (historically, badges were frequently placed on roundels and the field was sometimes treated as untinctured) with a camel Or, all within a laurel wreath Or. Of course there is still a difference between a badge and a coat of arms, but then it could be called a coat of arms on a round shield, but at least it does seem to respect tincture (even if it places Or upon argent). But this is all stuff for discussion on the article's talk page. Thank you for respecting consensus, or at least lack of consensus to move. Wilhelm Meis (☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 14:48, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have a great birthday! Sincerely, Clockery ^{talk contribs}

I see that some time ago (September last year), you moved several National Assembly of Fooland pages to National Assembly (Fooland). I have no objection to this, but it would have been nice if you could have fixed the incoming links from templates (e.g. the Politics of templates). Any chance you could clean this up now? Thanks, Number 57 13:48, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gryffindor,

Your recent move of Fernando II of Portugal to Ferdinand II of Portugal was unhelpful. You did the move without any discussion or consensus and likely without the knowledge of the years long naming disputes on Portuguese monarchs. It is best to know a situation and then act instead of merely acting without thinking.

Thank you

Cristiano Tomás (talk) 16:41, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not move pages without discussion. There have been only nine empresses regnant in the approximately 2 millennia of the Japanese monarchy, with the last during the 18th century, and the modern laws do not have equal primogeniture so there is no reason to change "Emperor" to "monarch" just because the English language has different words for male and female rulers of what is known as an "empire".—Ryulong (琉竜) 01:26, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have opened up discussion at Talk:Enthronement of the Japanese Emperor#Title Move Discussion. You are invited to provide your opinion in the interest of consensus. Boneyard90 (talk) 14:06, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Las Huelgas Reales Monastery is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Las Huelgas Reales Monastery until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:31, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. I'm withdrawing the nomination. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:49, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This move request was open for only 7 minutes before you closed it here, without any input or discussion of the rationale between the nomination and the move. I, and perhaps others, would like to weigh in on this important change. Please undo the move so that we can continue the discussion and the opinions of others can be taken into consideration before a move is effected. Thanks. FactStraight (talk) 20:34, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In case the notification system didn't alert you, this is now at move review. Yes, seriously. -- tariqabjotu 21:52, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:OEH logo.PNG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 16:47, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The earthquakes that you have just renamed had titles that reflected the suggestions of Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Japan-related_articles/Archive_25 and the names used in many reliable sources. Take for instance the 869 Jogan earthquake - that name returns 72 hits from Google Scholar [2], 869 Sanriku earthquake gets just 2 [3] (actually the same reference). Can I ask you to reconsider these moves please? Mikenorton (talk) 22:27, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You recently moved Hainaut to Hainault with no explanation beyond 'English name'. Do you have any sorts of sources for that? A unilateral page move with no discussion on a page that's been at that name for over a decade seems quite bold. Oreo Priest ^talk 14:26, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It seems you're right; I've restored mention of the archaic spelling to the article. The name isn't used anymore though. Oreo Priest ^talk 02:51, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York City#Incorrect_URL. I don't think that it makes sense to redirect Ritz-Carlton New York Central Park to Hotel St. Moritz since they aren't the same hotel. Anyone looking for information about the Ritz-Carlton will just be puzzled to end up at a page about an unrelated business. The Ritz-Carlton isn't a successor business to the Hotel St. Moritz; it's just a new tenant of the same address. Pburka (talk) 01:18, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand why you completely undid my revision of the page for Ritz-Carlton New York Central Park. That hotel is not just a tenant in the building. The entire building is the hotel and the Ritz-Carlton residences. It is the new name of the building, and the old name has not been used in years. Also, you undid other corrections I made such as correcting the spelling of the name of Rumpelmeyer's. If you insist on keeping the page under the St. Moritz name, I'll go along with that, though I think it is not useful. However please do not delete the rest of my accurate and current updates again unless you are arguing that they are incorrect. jamesluckard (talk) 12:44, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for renaming "Sukiennice" to "Cloth Hall, Kraków".

Some years ago I made a similar change but was reverted by a backward editor.

Do you think the pattern of "Kraków Barbican" could be adapted here, modifying "Cloth Hall, Kraków" to "Kraków Cloth Hall"?

Nihil novi (talk) 03:48, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I also think that the Kraków Cloth Hall would be preferable. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:37, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
A year after this AN/I thread you're still making hundreds of undiscussed moves. Some of which have been problematic. If you think pages should be moved, please use WP:RM in future, so that other editors can contribute to the decision. Does that sound reasonable? bobrayner (talk) 21:12, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't create articles with empty {{coord}} templates—as you've done at St Michael's Chapel, Wawel Castle and Café Noworolski, for instance—since doing so disfigures the articles with a big red error message. If you don't know the coordinates, just omit the template or add an appropriate {{coord missing}} template. Deor (talk) 15:30, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I support naming consistency, and this is probably something that would be better discussed more publicly, probably somewhere in WP:NC namespace. Regarding translations, sure, I agree - there's only so much that the few active editors of WP:POLAND can do. With the current team, we will probably translate most of Kraków related articles, within no more than 20 years or so. You are welcome to help! :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:19, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		The Polish Barnstar of National Merit, 2nd Class
		For your continued edits to Poland-related articles, and starting many Poland-related stubs, I award you this The Polish Barnstar of National Merit, 2nd Class, on behalf of WikiProject Poland. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:27, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
		this WikiAward was given to Gryffindor by Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here on 04:27, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Gryffindor, I wanted to let you know that I reviewed your article and DYK hook for Henry Clay Frick House, but cannot quite approve it for DYK until you've completed your QPQ review. Great job on a wonderful article! -- Caponer (talk) 17:37, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• It's no problem Gryffindor, I definitely understand! The DYK nomination process is always evolving. When you submit at DYK nomination of your own creation, you must review another article. (The rules are here). Once you've completed your review of another article and its hook, you list the article you've reviewed under your own nomination submission. When you've listed the reviewed article under your submission, I can go ahead and clear Henry Clay Frick House for DYK! If you ever nominate an article that was not created or expanded by yourself, you are not required to complete a QPQ review. Please let me know if you have any additional questions! -- Caponer (talk) 18:35, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Give me about five/ten minutes and I'll see what I can do. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 20:53, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That should do it. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:07, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure - always happy to be of help. Keep up the good work, and happy editing! --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:22, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, a lot of what I do is trial and error. HotCat helps a lot in that regard - it fills in category suggestions as I go. That way I learn the proper syntax for the category names (which aren't always the most logical to me), and can see what I might be missing. So I'm flying blind a lot of the time. :-) --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:34, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - it's on the user preferences page, on the gadget subpage. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:39, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 November 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Henry Clay Frick House, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Henry Clay Frick House (pictured) on New York City's Fifth Avenue was the model for the Avengers Mansion? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Henry Clay Frick House. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I made the map you requested for on Badakhshan. See Wikipedia Graphics Lab. Wereldburger758 (talk) 14:44, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain what caused you to to recreate this article after it was recently deleted by another Admin after substantial edit warring and abuse of multiple WP:COI accounts. If you leave this page in place I would appreciate that all the old edit histories are also placed back as a record of what went on earlier.Notabede (talk) 15:45, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To avert an edit war, I request you to kindly reinsert the complete edit history of all contributors to this article page including the editors prior to the article being deleted. I suspect that the article seems to be either a hoax or a fringe theory to promote a school of dance which is self admittedly concocted by its exponents based on sculptures on wall of some old temples.Notabede (talk) 05:40, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Gryffindor, you made a good faith mistake when you made this move earlier today. Die Freiheitlichen has never been the name of the article, let alone its original one! I totally agree with you when you say that we should "discuss first", thus I ask and expect you to move the article back to its former name (The Freedomites) or its original one (The Libertarians). Many thanks, --Checco (talk) 17:40, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was sure of your good faith and intellectual honesty, but many thanks! --Checco (talk) 22:35, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have made a few maps on Galicia (after your request on Wikipedia Graphics Lab). Before I upload one of them, I want your opinion on them.

• http://i938.photobucket.com/albums/ad223/flyingdutchman12/Location_European_nation_states_a_zps72942154.png
• http://i938.photobucket.com/albums/ad223/flyingdutchman12/Location_European_nation_states_withborder_zps1e3d86d9.png
• http://i938.photobucket.com/albums/ad223/flyingdutchman12/Location_European_nation_states_smaller_zpse0c20297.png

Give me your thoughts about them. Regards, Wereldburger758 (talk) 20:39, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The same colours as the old map? What about blue and green? See wikipedia graphics lab for the map I made. Wereldburger758 (talk) 12:36, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have made a map of Bengali but you should look at it before I upload it. Right now my ftp is down but I will post a link here when you can download it and have a look. Now I got it working and you can download it here http://skulpturalasmycken.se/images/wikimedia/bengal_gj.svg Give me feedback, thanks. Goran tek-en (talk) 19:31, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What a great innovation to a longstanding problem! Thanks for moving Kingdom of Kashi to Benares State. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:00, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Because you were involved in a previous discussion on the subject, or related to the subject, please see RfC: What is the best name for the article about the street called "Broadway" which originates in Manhattan? BMK, Grouchy Realist (talk) 02:49, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! The ref to the claim was provided in my edit summary and its here again; the Uni's website. Some ref already exists in the article's listed refs. Even if you were changing is to was, there was no need to remove Category:Rabindra Bharati University faculty as such category is not only for current faculty of for dead and decayed faculty too. Removing "Dr." from title is fine, but i still don't know it's reason. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 00:53, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh i get it! You didn’t find her name because you don't know that Mukherjee means Mukhopadhyay. Also, look before blindly reverting. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 07:56, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay... i get it. Will add the Uni's website as source. And i was calling this edit as blind revert as i was only fixing the reference; the old link wasn't working. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:01, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You moved it to an English name. I don't think it's uncontroversial. Did you see the name question on the talk? The common name seems to be the German name. If I was you, I would move it back and formally request a move on the talk page. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:40, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I think that you have uploaded this file on Wikipedia. Don't you have this image with a better quality?Keivan.f^Talk 19:51, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for answering as soon as you could. I'll try to find some information about this painting and of course a better quality of it.Keivan.f^Talk 20:57, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see you added the reference for the name and I thank you for that but why remove Mughal emperors and Mughal weapons from see also section? Sajjad Altaf (talk) 16:25, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gryffindor, and thank you for your contributions!

An article you worked on Indian War Memorial Museum, appears to be directly copied from http://www.visitindiahelp.com/museum/indian-war-memorial-museum/. Please take a minute to make sure that the text is freely licensed and properly attributed as a reference, otherwise the article may be deleted.

It's entirely possible that this bot made a mistake, so please feel free to remove this notice and the tag it placed on Indian War Memorial Museum if necessary. MadmanBot (talk) 22:03, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gryffindor
I would really like to complete and finish the Red Fort but I need your feedback, so please go there and give me feedback, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 11:51, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm MrNiceGuy1113. Gryffindor, thanks for creating Inayat Khan (historian)!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Hi, being a history article, it deserves a little more detail and references. Can work wonders if elaborated as it's got for back-up a rich history of a land of mystique called, India. Best regards

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. MrNiceGuy1113 (talk) 16:02, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Chunam. Since you had some involvement with the Chunam redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. KJ ^{click here} 02:18, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What are you hoping to accomplish with this behaviour? And an admin, no less, so you can't really feign ignorance. Curly Turkey (gobble) 16:23, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You explanations do no cover why none of the categories belong in the main article. Plain and simply, categories go in articles. If you have a category on the topic, then you can put categories there if they apply to the vast majority of the content in the subcategory. By definition that pretty much says that not every category that belongs in the article does not belong in the subcategory. As I said along the way, one example is that jewels are not a fort! Vegaswikian (talk) 19:07, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, i am currently cleaning up the Map Workshop. Is your request regarding the Red Fort resolved? Is the current version as you want it? If so, please mark it as{{resolved|1=~~~~}}, if not, please specify what more needs to be done. Thank you.--DLommes (talk) 16:08, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, on the EU talk page I have made a proposal for a new introduction for the EU that I believe summaries the EU better and makes it more engaging. I would be grateful for any constructive feedback. My hope is to have the page become a featured article and contribute to Project European Union as a whole. --Erzan (talk) 14:20, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a go at making the triangular flag over at the Graphics Lab. NikNaks _{talk - gallery} 23:19, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have made some of the changes you asked for and commented over at the lab. NikNaks _{talk - gallery} 13:57, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Still waiting to hear whether the current version is satisfactory. Thanks! NikNaks _{talk - gallery} 13:00, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Given that you've been editing and haven't posted a response, I will assume you are satisfied and mark the request resolved. NikNaks _{talk - gallery} 23:35, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article Arasta Bazaar has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

NN mall.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Epeefleche (talk) 02:08, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Gryffindor, I partially reverted your edits at South Tyrol (the Bolzano/Bozen part). In English the common name of the city is Bolzano, and the majority of the people speaks Italian there. There is a long standing consensus at south Tyrol articles (see the talk page about that) to use Italian forms for Bolzano/Bozen and Merano/Meran, and German for all the other cities. I would be also happy to use double denomination everywhere, but the decision was another. If you are not satisfied with it, please open a thread on the talk page, thanks. Alex2006 (talk) 03:48, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is the first thread of the South Tyrol talk page, named "It's Bozen and Meran, not Bolzano and Merano". If you don't agree, pleae open a new thread and leave in the mean time the stable version in peace, thanks (WP:BRD) Alex2006 (talk) 09:50, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Gryffindor, you have to excuse me, I just looked at the article, and I see that now the city toponyms are used consistently with their German and Italian form (which is the solution that I prefer), indipendently whether they have italian, german or chinese .-) majority. Sorry, I am just trying to avoid edit wars here, not to provoke another one. :-) As long as this choice is consistent (that is, we have Bolzano/Bozen AND Sterzing/Vipiteno, and not Bolzano/Bozen and Sterzing) I am perfectly happy with it. Alex2006 (talk) 09:57, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: The street name with dual form is perfectly in ordnung. An encyclopedia should inform, not make ethning cleansing (on one side or the other). Alex2006 (talk) 09:59, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would not call it a compromise, it is the best choice. :-) Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 10:00, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Same to you, and glad to see that someone mit kopf is patrolling that article... :-) Alex2006 (talk) 10:04, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Kuhn & Komor, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://cefiro.main.jp/Kuhn_And_Komor.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 09:34, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Hello Gryffindor, I see you removed the Bot's notice from the page, but didn't explain the removal, or address the copyright issues. If there is another source that was released under a free license (making the other source a mirror), please advise so we can close this out. As it stands now, there is still a fair amount of text copied straight from the source the bot mentioned, as seen here:[4], and the article may be deleted (or at the very least heavily pruned) if not addressed. Crow^Caw 19:32, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, there. You do realize that Shizuoka City is the capital of Shizuoka Prefecture, don't you? The city's not even the biggest city in the prefecture. I live here, and even I wouldn't assume "Shizuoka" referred to the city. The disambiguation really is needed. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 10:51, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• How did you conduct your search? This search gives the prefecture as its first hit, and seven of the ten hits refer to the prefecture—only two for the city (one for the university, which is located in both Shizuoka City and Hamamatsu). Also, Shizuoka Prefecture was named Shizuoka Han in May 1868 (becoming a prefecture when prefectures were introduced in 1871; the city was renamed Shizuoka from Sunpu on July 28, 1869. Who told you the prefecture was named after the city? If you asked people around the country, I can guarantee you they'd think "Prefecture" before "City". Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 22:56, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The cities of Hiroshima and Osaka are obviously better known than their prefectures, but you know full well it has nothing to do with "any city in Japan" being "better known first than the surrounding prefecture"—they're cities famous around the world; Shizuoka City is not. I've given you more than enough objective evidence that you're wrong: searches turn up far more hits for the prefecture than the city; the city was named after the prefecture; Shizuoka's not even the largest city in its prefecture. Do I need to open an RfC? Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 21:05, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for attempting to improve the Japan related articles. I apologise, but I disagree with the changes that have been made. The main reason for this is that the changes directly contravene Wikipedia's manual of style (see: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Japan-related articles#Place names). Has there been a consensus, of which I am unaware, to move the articles? Thank you for your time, JTST4RS (talk) 15:57, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing out the disambiguation notice, I apologise for failing to notice that. There are one or two I disagree with but I will mention those on the individual talk pages. Thanks again for your time, JTST4RS (talk) 16:53, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Gryffindor: I have reverted many of your moves of Japanese prefectural capitals per the process at WP:RM regarding undiscussed moves and requests to revert undiscussed moves, as the ongoing discussion at Talk:Shizuoka, Shizuoka shows that these moves were not uncontroversial. I have also informed the relevant Manual of Style (WP:MOS-JP) of the discussions. Dekimasuよ! 07:37, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Kuhn & Komor, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from http://naturalisticspoon.com/Kuhn_And_Komor.html, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Kuhn & Komor and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Kuhn & Komor, in your email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Kuhn & Komor. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0", or that the material is released into the public domain, or if you have strong reason to believe it is, leave a note at Talk:Kuhn & Komor with a link to where we can find that note or your explanation of why you believe the content is free for reuse.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Kuhn & Komor saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:45, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gryffindor. I appreciate your work on a rewrite of the problem identified above, but I'm afraid that the rewrite is not usable as it is still closely paraphrased from the source. For one example, please see:

Source text	What you originally put on Wikipedia	What your rewrite says
In March 1919 when all "enemy" nationals were forced to leave Shanghai, Isidor Komor and his family were repatriated by the British to Hamburg, Germany. In January 1920 his eldest son Paul Komor returned to Shanghai. Isidor Komor rejoined his son only in 1933 after the death of his wife.	In March 1919 when all "enemy" nationals were forced to leave Shanghai, Isidor Komor and his family were repatriated by the British to Hamburg, Germany. In January 1920 his eldest son Paul Komor (1886-1973) returned to Shanghai. Isidor Komor rejoined his son only in 1933 after the death of his wife Frieda (Abeles) Komor	In March 1919 all "enemy" nationals were forced to leave Shanghai. Isidor Komor and his family were evacuated by the British to Hamburg, Germany. The eldest son Paul Komor (1886-1973) returned to Shanghai in January 1920, Isidor Komor rejoined his son only in 1933 after the death of his wife Frieda (Abeles) Komor

To help make the problem more visible, I have bolded the words that are precisely the same in the source and the text you placed. In the final example, you have omitted some words and rearranged a little. You have changed a word. But what you have is still clearly derivative of the original.

While facts are not copyrightable, creative elements of presentation – including both structure and language – are. Your proposed text takes both the original language and the structure from the source. As a website that is widely read and reused, Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously to protect the interests of the holders of copyright as well as those of the Wikimedia Foundation and our reusers. Wikipedia's copyright policies require that the content we take from non-free sources, aside from brief and clearly marked quotations, be rewritten from scratch. See Wikipedia:Copy-paste for more information as well as links to relevant policies and guidelines.

Because of the persisting problems, your proposed rewrite is not usable and has been deleted. The history section of the originally tagged article has been removed as well. If you wish to add content on the history, it will need to be completely rewritten to comply with our copyright policies. The essay Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing contains some suggestions for rewriting that may help avoid these issues. The article Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches, while about plagiarism rather than copyright concerns, also contains some suggestions for reusing material from sources that may be helpful, beginning under "Avoiding plagiarism". Please let me know if you have questions about this. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:32, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gryffindor, I appreciate your note on my talk page.

However, being somewhat surprised to have to leave this note for an admin, I looked a bit more and see that this isn't the first time you have had or been notified of this issue. For instance, in January 2014, User:Wizardman was forced to delete much of Indian War Memorial Museum due to content like the following:

Source

Content as placed on Wikipedia

The last two galleries show the impact of European industrialization over the weapons and communication since radars, telephone, telegraph, signal lamps, guns with periscope, trench periscope etc were introduced during the war. Various types of badges, ribbons, uniform of Turkish and New Zealand army officers, and flags are also put on display. Model of army transport cart and railway goods track, model of Baghdad Arab port and Basra dockyard exhibited in the museum attract the attention of the visitors. Another attraction of the gallery is the complete dress of Maharaja Jodhpur. His Highness Pratap Singh including kurta (long shirt), belt, trouser, turban with zari work, shoes and inscribed sword with sheath.

The last two galleries show the impact of European industrialization over the weapons and communication since radars, telephone, telegraph, signal lamps, guns with periscope, trench periscope etc. were introduced during the war. Various types of badges, ribbons, uniform of Turkish and New Zealand army officers, and flags are also on display. Models of army transport carts and railway goods track, a model of Baghdad Arab port and Basra dockyard are also exhibited. Another feature of the gallery is the dress of Maharaja Pratap Singh of Idar, which includes the kurta (long shirt), belt, trouser, turban with zari work, shoes and inscribed sword with sheath.

Again, I have bolded precise duplication. While there are minimal changes, these changes remain too close to the copyrighted original to comply with our copyright policy and terms of use.

I have just blanked Crown of Bahadur Shah II as a copyright problem as well. I am not sure if you originated that text or moved it from elsewhere, as it is unusual to create an article with a maintenance template already in place. If you moved it, it may be an issue of copyright for unattributed copying, unless you had originally placed it wherever it was. If you placed it here, it is the same sort of problem as that described above. Did you take it from another article, or did you place it here?

Looking at this edit, I see the following:

Source	Placed on Wikipedia	As subsequently modified
The Nawab Ahmud Bukhsh Khan, father of the wretched Nawab of Ferozepoor, was an exception to this rule, for he repaired the Mosque in question with a view to the benefit of the neighborhood. Soon after when passing by with his second and favorite son, he was attacked by an infuriated elephant, who killed one of the horses and dashed the vehicle to pieces. The Nawab and his son were only saved from destruction by the proximity of this mosque in which they were able to take refuge.	The Nawab Ahmud Bukhsh Khan, father of the Nawab of Ferozepoor, repaired the mosque with a view to the benefit of the neighbourhood. Soon after when passing by with his second and favourite son, he was attacked by an infuriated elephant, who killed one of the horses and dashed the vehicle to pieces. The Nawab and his son were only saved from death by the proximity of this mosque in which they were able to take refuge.	Nawab Ahmad Bakhsh Khan, father of the Nawab of Firozpur, repaired the mosque to benefit the neighbourhood. Not long after its renovation, Nawab Ahmad Bakhsh Khan was attacked by an infuriated elephant while out with his son. His horse was killed in the attack, and his vehicle was destroyed. The Nawab and his son were only saved from death by taking refuge inside this mosque.

Placed less than a year ago, this passage uses language solely from the source, with the exception of a single word. The subsequent modification remains closely paraphrased, although it is far better than it started. As it started, it was a clear violation of our copyright policies and our terms of use. Every time you hit "save page", you are verifying that your content is compatible with our license. It isn't, when it's copy-pasted with minimal alterations from your source.

This really concerns me. :( I am unsure at this point what to do and worried that further review may be necessary. Are you aware of any other articles to which you may have added copied or closely paraphrased content? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:08, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am updating to note that I have opened a contributor copyright investigation to facilitate cleanup of issues. Further check has, fortunately, not shown more of the kind of issues identified above to this point, but a spot-check has shown so far seven instances of copying from Wikipedia articles without attribution. One of these had been repaired after an IP editor identified the problem, but the other six remained violations of copyright until attribution was provided today. This unattributed copying ranged from 2005 to March of this year. Wikipedia's content is, of course, reusable within Wikipedia (and elsewhere), but it is not public domain. It is liberally licensed, but the terms of the license require attribution. Information on how to supply attribution is found at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. The page is listed at Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Gryffindor.

As I mentioned in my response to your email, it is not customary for you to receive individual notices of issues found. If you would like to keep track, please watchlist that page and its subpages, as issues should be annotated there. Your assistance particularly in correcting copyright issues related to unattributed copying would be most welcome. Without note in edit summary, it can be difficult to trace these back, and you could speed the cleanup here considerably by working with that issue.

If you have any questions about the copyright policies on the site or how to comply with them or about how to write content in your own words, I am happy to try to assist, and I'm sure others will be willing to work with you as well. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:06, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are a small group of stalwarts who help with CCIs, but unfortunately we have quite a backlog so it's very likely that it will be a long time before this one is finished. It's listed in the CCI queue along with the dozens of others still open. I've poked at a little bit more, but this kind of work is slow-going, and I try to put the bulk of my copyright time into preventing horrendous backlog at WP:CP. While it would be ideal if we could instantly address these, it's just not a very quick process. :/ I've addressed Crown of Bahadur Shah II and resolved the issue at the copyright problems board. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:23, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Gryffindor,

Many thanks for your effort on the Twelve Symbols national emblem. I've added some sources for reference on the Commons page. Also there was one thing could be improved in the article. The bird-like animal on the left is a common pheasant (in Traditional Chinese: 華蟲 or 雉雞) instead of a phoenix. :)

Best regards, --Ericmetro (talk) 14:22, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:AMAG logo.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --Mdann52talk to me! 16:15, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]