User talk:Iridescent: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 07:41, 13 August 2014 editGerda Arendt (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers380,734 edits →Precious again: tunnel and light, hope and experience← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 00:12, 23 December 2024 edit undoJJMC89 bot (talk \| contribs)Bots1,161,631 edits →Imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity: new section
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Not around\|is not currently active on Misplaced Pages\|date=16 December 2023}}
	{{User:MiszaBot/config		{{User:MiszaBot/config
	\|maxarchivesize = ~~350K~~		\|maxarchivesize = 500K
	\|counter = 17		\|counter = 50
	\|minthreadsleft = 5		\|minthreadsleft = 5
	\|minthreadstoarchive = 5		\|minthreadstoarchive = 5
	\|algo = old(~~90d~~)		\|algo = old(30d)
	\|archive = User talk:Iridescent/Archive %(counter)d		\|archive = User talk:Iridescent/Archive %(counter)d
	}}		}}
	{{User:Iridescent/Talk header}}		{{User:Iridescent/Talk header}}

			==Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Watts – Hope stamp Jordan 1974 low res.jpg==
	== Pig-faced women ==
			]
			Thank you for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Misplaced Pages may not meet the criteria required by ]. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from ] is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an ]; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

			If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with ]. If you have any questions, please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-disputed fair use rationale-notice --> '''] ]''' 23:57, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
	I changed to "Oppose" at ], respectfully deferring to your judgment as FA nominator.

			:To any talk page stalkers that are around, I (as a long-absent talk page stalker) only just noticed this non-free image deletion(of a stamp depicting the subject of the article), and am wondering whether it is worth contesting it? As far as I can tell from viewing the deleted version, the rationale was sound (not quite sure why it was nominated). Where is the best place to start here? The image was used in the ] featured article where it was commented out . Maybe someone can also explain the removal of from the same article? As far as I can tell, what would be needed there is a ''separate'' non-free use rationale added to ]? But whether that would be accepted is another matter (the differing viewpoints are whether a reader should be expected to click through to the article to see the image, or whether it is better for the reader to see the Picasso image within the article they are reading). ] (]) 14:10, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
	Did you have a more ideal date in mind for the article's future Main Page appearance?
			::I don't have admin goggles, so I can't see the image or fair-use rationale in question, but from looking at the article ]#8 looks like the obvious issue – {{tq\|Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.}} Given the very brief mention of the stamp, it's difficult to argue that illustrating it "significantly" increases readers' understanding of the topic. (The same argument would also apply to including an image of ''The Old Guitarist'', if ]#6 didn't explicitly forbid this kind of use anyway.) ] (]) 15:38, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
			:::I can copy out the rationales for the stamp (image ) ("Author: original author unknown and not easily identified, copyright on textual elements will be held by Jordan Post. The central image is Hope by G. F. Watts (died 1904) and already in the public domain"; "Purpose of use: To illustrate that the image was still in popular circulation 70 years after the author's death; its use on Jordanian stamps is specifically discussed in the article" and "Replaceability: No, as it likely to be a copyrighted image and the purpose is to illustrate the image's use in the 1970s. As the graphic elements are already in the public domain, it is possible that the textual elements are below the threshold of originality."), but you are right that for the Picasso one, UUUI #6 does apply - for the record, I have always disagreed with that as articles should be self-contained (e.g. for readers who are reading an article off-line or a printed version). But I do get that some elements of NFC apply to the encyclopedia as a whole, and thus being able to refer to another part of the encyclopedia that contains the image is the line in the sand. Thank you for the advice. What do you think of the stamp rationale? ] (]) 17:00, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
			::::Like you, I'm not entirely sure that I agree that our policy needs to be as strict as it currently is. That being said, on the question of what policy is and how it's currently applied, I think that the deletion is reasonable. Possibly a case could have been made for keeping the image, but suspect if would have been deleted regardless.{{br}} The two main points I would expect to be made against any such case are: (1) "its use on Jordanian stamps is specifically discussed in the article" is overstating the situation rather. Its use on Jordanian stamps is briefly mentioned in the article; the hardline free content purist would ask what the illustration actually adds to a reader's understanding here. (2) "To illustrate that the image was still in popular circulation 70 years after the author's death": is it definitely the case that there are no possible free images which could illustrate the long-term influence of the painting? The majority of the section on §Later influence discusses its influence on Barack Obama, via ]: there is certainly a free image of Obama delivering ]. Sure, it's a rubbish image, but a rubbish free image is by policy preferred to a good non-free one.{{br}} The remaining alternatives are, for my money: (1) add more sourced commentary about this stamp and write a Fair Use Rationale why makes a clearer case for the importance of illustrating that stamp specifically, (2) know enough about Jordanian copyright law to determine whether or not the stamp design is likely to still be in copyright, and if it's not upload it to commons (3) choose a different image for that section. ] (]) 22:52, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
			:::::Impeccable logic. :-) May do number 3 at some point. ] (]) 01:58, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

			== TFA ==
	Thank you for your numerous high quality ] contributions to Misplaced Pages,

			{{User QAIbox
	— ''']''' (]) 06:05, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
			\| image = Himmelsschlüssel, Engweder Kopf.jpg
			\| image_upright = 1.3
			\| bold = ] · ] · ]
			}}
			Thank you today for ], introduced (in 2016): ""Bright rising sun illuminating the clouds over a featureless horizon" has become such a staple image since the advent of modern photography, it's easy to forget that it had to begin somewhere. Likewise, if George Frederic Watts is remembered at all nowadays it's as the painter of formal portraits of dignitaries and of earnestly portentious paintings with titles like Love and Death and The Slumber of the Ages, not as the painter of dramatic landscapes. After the Deluge is an explicitly religious painting, yet contains no religious imagery of any kind, and is an interesting snapshot of the transition between 19th-century symbolism and 20th-century abstraction. Because this has spent the last century in the backwater of Compton rather than in a high-profile institution like the Tate Gallery or the Yale Center for British Art, there hasn't been all that much written about this particular piece so the article is shorter than usual, but I believe this collates together everything significant that there is to say about it. And yes, I know it looks like I've accidentally cut-and-pasted a chunk of body text into the wikilink but Light and Colour (Goethe's Theory)—The Morning after the Deluge—Moses Writing the Book of Genesis genuinely is the name of Turner's painting of the same subject." - We miss you. Best wishes for whatever you do! -- ] (]) 07:27, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

			== CfD nomination at {{Section link\| Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 14#Museum collections }} ==
	:I know you know, but for the benefit of anyone else reading this, replied at ]. If you're looking for peculiar FAs which haven't run yet, ] is still floating about (although it doesn't have the eye-catching images PFW has). To some extent, Domery has the same problem, that some people will consider showcasing it an attack on a particular group (in this case, the Poles and to a lesser extent people with eating disorders), but it doesn't have the same element of simultaneously being offensive to the Irish, French, Dutch, women, animal-lovers and the disabled which PFW brings with it. (Domery is part of a trio on 18th-century eating disorders, all of which have a high WTF-factor; I'd prefer ] not run for the moment, and ] has already run.) ] could be dressed up for the occasion also—from the title it sounds dull as ditchwater, but it's actually an extraordinary story of a showpiece event that went so disastrously wrong, the government and courts seriously considered banning locomotives. George Stephenson had a standing offer from the Tsar to take his newfangled steam engine to Russia and if he'd been banned from making or using them in the UK would presumably have done so, which would in turn have kept the United States a thin coastal strip (the locomotives which opened up the interior were imported from Newcastle) and made Imperial Russia an unstoppable force, able to use their new industrial power to swat aside any hapless Turks and Prussians trying to stop them. The OOTLMR is a turning-point that (outside of Liverpool and Manchester themselves) doesn't get the credit it deserves.

			<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the ] guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at '''{{Section link\| Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 14#Museum collections }}''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd mass notify--> Thank you. ] (]) 07:25, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
	:If the "never repeat a TFA" rule is ever relaxed*, ], ] and the aforementioned ] would all be workable as April Fools TFAs. I have a soft spot for ] in particular, which really is a case of the truth being stranger than fiction.

			== pictured ==
	:Per my outburst at TFAR, in my opinion the April Fools/Halloween tradition is an embarrassing relic of Raul's tendency on occasion to presume that whichever idea he'd happened to have embodied The Will Of The Community, and should be shown the door. With the possible exception of that film last year, to the best of my knowledge ''every'' April Fools TFA (], ], ], ], ], ], ]) has led to a wave of lunatics hijacking the article, generally followed by the author of the article being blocked for edit-warring when they try to restore it to something approaching stability; ask ] or ] just how well the system works. – ] 22:15, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
	:<nowiki>*</nowiki><small>I'd personally support a change to "never repeat a TFA within five years". The argument that it gives undue prominence to the topic is hooey, since nobody except die-hard wiki-obsessives will even realise the article has run before. The argument that "it prevents other TFAs having their day in the sun" is also baloney—many if not most of ] are either old FAs of embarrassingly poor quality, articles which their authors would prefer not run, or arcane articles like ] which would be pointless to run since the only people who would find them interesting are people with enough of an interest in the topic that they've already read them.</small>
	::Yes I think alot of mine are in the last category....] (] '''·''' ]) 03:13, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
	:::I will concur that Banksias did flit through my mind as I wrote that (along with extinct bat species), but it seemed a little churlish to pick somebody else's as an example, especially given that I have ] (which may hold the record for the highest significance/interesting-things-to-say-about-it ratio of anything ever built) to my name—it even had ] on the main page. At some point I ought to ask ] to run it as TFA (it ''is'' eligible…) and see if it makes the usual suspects who whinge about boring content on the main page* self-destruct with indignation. – ] 11:45, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
	]
	:::<nowiki>*</nowiki><small>As ] and ] had the pleasure of hearing me drunkenly trying to explain at great length recently, Wandsworth Bridge's single interesting feature is also a damn nuisance; it retains its remarkably effective wartime camouflage. This is a major piece of ironmongery—as of about five years ago the second busiest road bridge in the UK—but it's astonishingly difficult to take a photograph in which the bridge doesn't either blend into the background or appear to be much smaller than it is.</small>
	:::<nowiki>**</nowiki><small>Special mention to ].</small>
	::::Just imagine it is ] chatting about it on ]...it'll seem more worthwhile then - just been watching a couple of episodes of this with my kids....dunno, must have more intrinsic merit than Miley Cyrus or a Kardashian....] (] '''·''' ]) 12:38, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
	:::::Since ''QI'''s research team's methodology appears to be "go through the contribution history of myself, ] and ], share out the results between Fry's scripted questions and the guests' scripted answers, and pad it out with whatever happens to be on that day without ever bothering to check its accuracy or credit the author", my opinion of it is not high. I've caught them previously passing off blocks of Misplaced Pages text verbatim (and uncredited, natch) as their own content. See ], where the chat about ] is literally taken verbatim from Misplaced Pages, right down to the slightly awkward phrasing about "a toddler" I used to avoid close paraphrasing issues with "a child between one and two" which appears in every source other than Misplaced Pages. (Not as odd as it sounds that they'd all use the same wording, as they've all drawing from Percy's paper as a primary source.) While I'm on this tirade, if you're ever in Manchester then visit ]'s new and see if there's something oddly familiar sounding about their showpiece exhibits on the ] and the ]. (I'm amazed ''QI'' haven't picked up on ] yet—possibly the single most peculiar biographical article I've ever written, and one which I keep hoping someone will find the sources for to flesh out and take to FAC. Given that she's "one of the most researched, written and talked about women in Nevada history"—and that's the University of Nevada Department of Women's Studies saying that, who presumably ought to know—I find it singularly difficult to find any of said research, writing or talking other than what I already used. {{ping\|Dr. Blofeld\|Rosiestep\|p=,}} did you find anything when you were writing ]?) – ] 16:37, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
	::::::::I was on a game show once where '']'' was described as the quintessential toadstool and I could say, "" wonder where ''that'' came from! ''(chuckle)'' ...now I am depressed about QI....oh well....] (] '''·''' ]) 10:11, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

			{{User QAIbox
	:::::::::I'm trying to think of what game show could possibly have included the phrase "Amanita muscaria is the quintessential toadstool", and failing miserably. I think every assumption I have about Aussie TV must be seriously wrong.
			\| image = Dahlias, Elisengarten, Aachen.jpg
			\| image_upright = 0.8
			\| bold = ] · ] · ]
			}}
			Today I had reason to look at 10 years ago, and saw ]. Thank you for clarification in that matter and many others. We'd need more of it, but best wishes for what you do instead! -- ] (]) 07:38, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

			== Pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity ==
	:::::::::That particular "Illness" episode of ''QI'' had ], self-appointed arch-scourge of uncited statements and misuse of sources (incidentally ] is the history of Misplaced Pages in miniature, complete with people demanding to include The Truth I Read On A Website Somewhere, a conspiracy theory about SlimVirgin, sarcastic comments from Andy Mabbett and interminable ramblings about reliable sourcing), as one of the panelists. Cut from the original broadcast, but retained in the extended ''QI XL'' version included on '']'''s endless loop of repeats, is an impressively uncomfortable scene in which Goldacre says that in his opinion the ''QI'' franchise is the single worst offender for giving spurious legitimacy to untrue claims. (Personally I think that's an unfair statement in a world in which the ''Daily Mail'' and the laughably-named ''Independent'' exist, albeit the BBC is theoretically meant to be held to a higher standard.) The cringe on Stephen Fry's face is worth the licence fee alone. My personal opinion of ''QI'' books and programmes as a source is identical to my opinion of the ''Mail''—if what they claim is true, then a genuine reliable source somewhere will have covered it, but they have far too much of a history of reprinting press releases, cut-and-pasting from dubious websites without fact-checking, and cherry-picking data to suit the story they want to tell <small>(yes, I can give examples if someone wants to argue this particular toss—the reporting as undisputed fact of Klar's 2004 '''' paper, which 'proves' that gay men and straight men are physically different, and whose results AFAIK no other researcher has managed to replicate in the subsequent 10 years, for instance)</small> to be reliable in their own right. – ] 17:44, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
	::::::::::<small>(])</small> Since you mention the ''Mail'', it's one of its perennial appearances on ], where it's being defended with the usual combination of "but the BBC makes errors too!" and "you just don't like it 'cos of your liberal bias". In my view, the evolution of these ''Mail'' reliability threads is indicative of the steady decline in aggregate cluefulness of our editor corps. Last time around, a prominent editor who's sometimes mistaken for a voice of reason told us that in the ''Mail''. I was inspired to add #21 to the ] as a result. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 19:17, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
	::::::::::::::@iridescent - ] - one had to pick and esoteric subject to be on. I was on three times - first time I chose ], which is why alot my early edits were on these - I figured actively editing to buff up for a game show was better than passive learning. Second time I went on I chose ....(first time was but that was before I edited here)] (] '''·''' ]) 20:11, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
	:::::::::::::::@Mastcell - aaah yes good medical research. I just checked - article cites (hint - look at the prerandomization bit). Now via the newer article it will end up in Review literature. ] (] '''·''' ]) 20:21, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
	{{od\|:::::::::::::::}}Last year, someone else who shall remain nameless (but rhymes with "Bealdgyth") was defending the ''Mail'', and literally within two minutes popped up as "breaking news". Sometimes, the ''Mail'' is beyond parody. (As I write, is one of their "Editor's six of the best" for the day.) is my personal favourite piece of recent ''Mail'' nonsense. Well, if "a former consultant" said it on a comedy show, it ''must'' be true! – ] 21:25, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
	:I used to struggle to articulate why the ''Daily Mail'' is hopeless as a source beyond "well obviously". That was until they and still managed to introduce errors. ] (]) 17:49, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
	::Yes, but the ''Mail'' is ever with us, so long as ] threads on its reliability are dominated (or at least filibustered) by the same small but vocal set of clueless editors. (It's not that the ''Mail'' is the only bad source we use. It's just that if we can't even agree that the ''Mail'' is unsuitable, what chance do we have of dealing seriously with more borderline cases?) ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 19:38, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

	== Undeletion of "Lingwa de planeta" page ==
	My request is about ]. Tha conlang has progressed a lot since 2007, and now there are not less than 50 real speakers (that is, writers) of the language, the (relatively) huge amount of texts and songs and a few good references. I've prepared the new article here: ]. That is the translation of Russian article, and there still are some things I can't get (like template for citing an artice as a source). English is not my native language, so the text may not be perfect, but I hope to get some help.

			] Established ] provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have not made any edits or logged actions in the preceding twelve months. Because you have been inactive, your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to activity within the next month.
	In 2007 the article wasn't deleted by you personally, but all the other administrators participating in discussion are either retired or not active more. Waiting for your answer, ] (]) 09:04, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

			Inactive administrators are encouraged to rejoin the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at ]. If you do not intend to rejoin the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at ].
	:The new draft is certainly a much better article than the version that was deleted, but I'm afraid that because it's a topic on which I know little, I'm not well placed to judge its validity. The best place to ask for advice would be ] as they'll know which sources are reliable in this context. – ] 08:15, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
	::Thank you for the answer! The fact is that ] put the artice into the mainspace and added the template in the talk page. So I hope it's OK now just to wait for any discussion to arise. --] (]) 09:11, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
	:::I did that in part because ] is about to be published (this week) in Lidepla, and that puts it firmly in the field of "notable" in terms of conlangs. -- ]·] 11:33, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

			Thank you for your past contributions to the project. <!-- Template:Inactive admin -->— ] 00:26, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
	== Precious again ==

			:End of an era? ] ] ] 00:40, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
	<div style="margin: auto; max-width: 60em; {{box-shadow\|0.1em\|0.1em\|0.5em\|rgba( 192, 192, 192, 0.75 )}} {{border-radius\|1em}} border: 1px solid #a7d7f9; margin-bottom: 1em; padding: 0.5em 1em 1em; color: black;" class="ui-helper-clearfix">
			::I hope not. Hope you are well and that we will see you back soon, Iri. ] (] <nowiki>\|</nowiki> ]) 11:17, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
	<div>
			:::@] Same! ] ] ] 16:22, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
	<div style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; background-color: #ddd; border: 5px solid #ddd; {{box-shadow\|0.1em\|0.1em\|0.5em\|rgba(0,0,0,0.75)}} {{border-radius\|0.5em}}">]</div>
			:Oh, bollocks. ]'']'' 13:17, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
	'''quality standards'''<br />
			:Still hoping they may emerge in time. ] (]) 14:23, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
	Thank you for quality articles such as today's ], for patiently trying to reach the best possible quality, for {{diff\|Misplaced Pages talk:Today's featured article/requests\|518371030\|\|understanding the difference}} between "ownership" of an article and responsibility for it ("People familiar with the topic are more likely to know of problems regarding it" isn't a blasphemy against the spirit ...), for presenting yourself not in userboxes but in dialogue, - repeating: you are an ] (7 February 2009, 29 January 2010)!
			:Admin tools or not, I hope Iri will be back around. Much missed. --] (]) 20:16, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
			:Fun though an Iridescent re-RfA would be, it would be a massive hassle for Iri, so I don't want us getting any closer to that. Also concerned; hope they don't have you in a sealed bunker somewhere or something. Please return soon, if only to tell us how we're all messing up :-( ] (]) 16:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

			==Invitation to provide feedback==
	--] (]) 12:19, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
			Inspired by Worm That Turned's ] where he noted administrators don't get a lot of feedback or suggestions for improvement, I have decided to solicit feedback. I'm reaching out to you as you are currently one of the users I've selected as part of my ]. I hope you will consider taking a few moments to fill out my ''''''. Clicking on the link will load the questions and create a new section on my user talk. Thanks for your consideration. Best, ] (]) 15:58, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
	</div></div>
	A year ago, you were the 517th recipient of my ]] ],

			:@] Iri is, at best, on a long-term Wikibreak. ] ] ] 09:10, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
	:Thanks, although if I'm going to be remembered for something I'm not sure ] would be the one I'd choose. That one's so boring, even the vandals didn't bother with it. – ] 10:57, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

			==Io Saturnalia!==
	:: Same for ] ;) - What would you want to be remembered for? - I put mine in my user's infobox, --] (]) 11:03, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

			{\| style="border:2px ; background-color: #FF0000;"
	:::In terms of articles, ], ] and ] for (I hope) showing that it's possible to treat really peculiar topics sensitively without engaging in "hey, look at this weird thing!" posturing; ] for (I hope) explaining why something 99% of readers will never have heard of was a genuinely world-shaking event with consequences that are still affecting all our readers' daily lives today; ] and ] for showing that it's possible to write on a dry technical topic without going into "the 4-4-2 Manning Wardle tank engine was fitted with twin reciprocating camshafts" nerdiness; and ] for bringing those wonderful drawings to a wider audience.
			\|rowspan="2" valign="right" \| ]
			\|rowspan="2" \|
			\|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 2; vertical-align: left; height: 1.1em;" \| '''Io, ]!'''
			\|-
			\|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" \| Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. ] (]) 15:14, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
			\|}

			== Season's Greetings ==
	:::In terms of Misplaced Pages meta-issues, as one of those who fought to show that there isn't a clear dichotomy between Good Misplaced Pages editors who toil tirelessly for the greater good, and Evil banned users who circle the project like a pack of wolves (or if you prefer, Evil drones who slave for Jimbo's self-aggrandizing machine, and Good fearless rebels who dare to challenge the established order and are blocked by the evil cabal), back when the us-and-them mentality was far more entrenched than it is now.
			{\| style="border:2px ; background-color: #FFF7E6;"
			\|rowspan="2" valign="right" \| ]
			\|rowspan="2" \|
			\|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 2; vertical-align: left; height: 1.1em;" \| '''Season's Greetings'''
			\|-
			\|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" \| Wishing everybody a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! The '']'' (1563) by ] is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. ] (]) 17:36, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
			\|}

			==Merry Christmas!==
	:::In practice, I know damned well that my Misplaced Pages tombstone will read 'Coiner of the phrases ''"Indefinite means undefined not infinite"'' and ''"Without content Misplaced Pages is just Facebook for ugly people"'' ', with a brief footnote of 'only person ever to be expelled from Arbcom'. – ] 11:29, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
			{\| style="border:1px solid 3px; background-color: {{{color\|#fdffe7}}}; padding: 5px;"
			\|rowspan="2" valign="center" \| ]
			\|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: center; height: 1.1em;" \| '''A very happy Christmas and New Year to you!'''
			\|rowspan="2" valign="centre" padding: 5px;" \| ]
			\|rowspan="2" \|
			\|-
			\|style="vertical-align:top; border-top:1px solid gray"\|
			<br />
			<big>Have a great Christmas, and may 2025 bring you joy, happiness – and no trolls or vandals!</big>
			<br />
			<br />
			<big>Cheers</big>
			<br />
			<br />
			<big>] (]) 08:30, 21 December 2024 (UTC)</big>
			\|}

			== Imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity ==
	:::: Thank you, for explaining and for treating really peculiar topics sensitively! - I wish you were on arbcom! ] for me to appeal my sanctions, - but how can I appeal to people who didn't look and understand in the first place? - In practise: I'm in the ], --] (]) 11:52, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

	:::::I've been sanctioned by ArbCom as well Gerda but it bothers me not at all. I've never even considered appealing, and I very much doubt I ever will. Where's the fun in prostrating yourself before a bunch of sanctimonious windbags? ] ] 12:09, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

			] Established ] provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have not made any edits or logged actions in the preceding twelve months. Because you have been inactive, your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to activity within the next several days.
	:::::: It doesn't bother me too much, the restriction to 2 comments in a discussion is even a true blessing, which should be handed out more generously. I only said that I seem to be expected to appeal. No, I won't. My sanction is so ridiculous, example: I wrote more than 90% of ], but I am restricted not to add an infobox because I didn't literally "create" it = turn red link to blue. I had simply forgotten that I hadn't done that, this was in 2009, I only remembered the work I put in. Even more ridiculous is that my police bothers to follow me, revert me, and write a warning. Could some merciful soul perhaps restore the infobox? This is not a composer, there's no controversy on musical artists, - it's just ridiculous. --] (]) 13:03, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
	:::::::Actually ], but that's beside the point: you're expected to ''either'' appeal ''or'' stick to the restriction - doing neither is not an option, and helping you to do neither is no mercy. ] (]) 00:32, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

			Inactive administrators are encouraged to rejoin the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at ]. If you do not intend to rejoin the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at ].
	:::::::: Did you hear today's music, ]? When I started the article on ] I had no idea that he played the famous horn calls. I gave him an infobox recently, and also several of his colleagues. ] was reverted, per my restriction. Does it make sense? (The restriction leading to inconsistent treatment of articles, I mean.) Would it make sense to appeal a restriction that doesn't make sense with the very same people who passed it? No. --] (]) 07:07, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

			Thank you for your past contributions to the project. <!-- Template:Inactive admin -->— ] 00:12, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
	<div style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; background-color: #ddd; border: 5px solid #ddd; {{box-shadow\|0.1em\|0.1em\|0.5em\|rgba(0,0,0,0.75)}} {{border-radius\|0.5em}}">]<p style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 0;">hope over ]</p></div>
	Thank you for the ], - hoping for light at the end ;) --] (]) 07:41, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 00:12, 23 December 2024

This user is not currently active on Misplaced Pages. Iridescent has not edited Misplaced Pages since 16 December 2023. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

The arbitration committee "assuming good faith" with an editor.

Archives

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Watts – Hope stamp Jordan 1974 low res.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Watts – Hope stamp Jordan 1974 low res.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Misplaced Pages may not meet the criteria required by Misplaced Pages:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Misplaced Pages:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:57, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

To any talk page stalkers that are around, I (as a long-absent talk page stalker) only just noticed this non-free image deletion(of a stamp depicting the subject of the article), and am wondering whether it is worth contesting it? As far as I can tell from viewing the deleted version, the rationale was sound (not quite sure why it was nominated). Where is the best place to start here? The image was used in the Hope (Watts) featured article where it was commented out here. Maybe someone can also explain the removal of this image from the same article? As far as I can tell, what would be needed there is a separate non-free use rationale added to File:Old guitarist chicago.jpg? But whether that would be accepted is another matter (the differing viewpoints are whether a reader should be expected to click through to the article to see the image, or whether it is better for the reader to see the Picasso image within the article they are reading). Carcharoth (talk) 14:10, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

I don't have admin goggles, so I can't see the image or fair-use rationale in question, but from looking at the article WP:NFCCP#8 looks like the obvious issue – Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. Given the very brief mention of the stamp, it's difficult to argue that illustrating it "significantly" increases readers' understanding of the topic. (The same argument would also apply to including an image of The Old Guitarist, if WP:NFC#UUI#6 didn't explicitly forbid this kind of use anyway.) Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 15:38, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

I can copy out the rationales for the stamp (image here) ("Author: original author unknown and not easily identified, copyright on textual elements will be held by Jordan Post. The central image is Hope by G. F. Watts (died 1904) and already in the public domain"; "Purpose of use: To illustrate that the image was still in popular circulation 70 years after the author's death; its use on Jordanian stamps is specifically discussed in the article" and "Replaceability: No, as it likely to be a copyrighted image and the purpose is to illustrate the image's use in the 1970s. As the graphic elements are already in the public domain, it is possible that the textual elements are below the threshold of originality."), but you are right that for the Picasso one, UUUI #6 does apply - for the record, I have always disagreed with that as articles should be self-contained (e.g. for readers who are reading an article off-line or a printed version). But I do get that some elements of NFC apply to the encyclopedia as a whole, and thus being able to refer to another part of the encyclopedia that contains the image is the line in the sand. Thank you for the advice. What do you think of the stamp rationale? Carcharoth (talk) 17:00, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Like you, I'm not entirely sure that I agree that our policy needs to be as strict as it currently is. That being said, on the question of what policy is and how it's currently applied, I think that the deletion is reasonable. Possibly a case could have been made for keeping the image, but suspect if would have been deleted regardless.
The two main points I would expect to be made against any such case are: (1) "its use on Jordanian stamps is specifically discussed in the article" is overstating the situation rather. Its use on Jordanian stamps is briefly mentioned in the article; the hardline free content purist would ask what the illustration actually adds to a reader's understanding here. (2) "To illustrate that the image was still in popular circulation 70 years after the author's death": is it definitely the case that there are no possible free images which could illustrate the long-term influence of the painting? The majority of the section on §Later influence discusses its influence on Barack Obama, via Jeremiah Wright: there is certainly a free image of Obama delivering his 2004 speech on "The Audacity of Hope". Sure, it's a rubbish image, but a rubbish free image is by policy preferred to a good non-free one.
The remaining alternatives are, for my money: (1) add more sourced commentary about this stamp and write a Fair Use Rationale why makes a clearer case for the importance of illustrating that stamp specifically, (2) know enough about Jordanian copyright law to determine whether or not the stamp design is likely to still be in copyright, and if it's not upload it to commons (3) choose a different image for that section. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 22:52, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Impeccable logic. :-) May do number 3 at some point. Carcharoth (talk) 01:58, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

TFA

story · music · places

Thank you today for After the Deluge (painting), introduced (in 2016): ""Bright rising sun illuminating the clouds over a featureless horizon" has become such a staple image since the advent of modern photography, it's easy to forget that it had to begin somewhere. Likewise, if George Frederic Watts is remembered at all nowadays it's as the painter of formal portraits of dignitaries and of earnestly portentious paintings with titles like Love and Death and The Slumber of the Ages, not as the painter of dramatic landscapes. After the Deluge is an explicitly religious painting, yet contains no religious imagery of any kind, and is an interesting snapshot of the transition between 19th-century symbolism and 20th-century abstraction. Because this has spent the last century in the backwater of Compton rather than in a high-profile institution like the Tate Gallery or the Yale Center for British Art, there hasn't been all that much written about this particular piece so the article is shorter than usual, but I believe this collates together everything significant that there is to say about it. And yes, I know it looks like I've accidentally cut-and-pasted a chunk of body text into the wikilink but Light and Colour (Goethe's Theory)—The Morning after the Deluge—Moses Writing the Book of Genesis genuinely is the name of Turner's painting of the same subject." - We miss you. Best wishes for whatever you do! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:27, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

CfD nomination at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 14 § Museum collections

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 14 § Museum collections on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ham II (talk) 07:25, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

pictured

story · music · places

Today I had reason to look at 10 years ago, and saw a great pictured comment by you. Thank you for clarification in that matter and many others. We'd need more of it, but best wishes for what you do instead! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:38, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have not made any edits or logged actions in the preceding twelve months. Because you have been inactive, your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to activity within the next month.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to rejoin the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to rejoin the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:26, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

End of an era? I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 00:40, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

I hope not. Hope you are well and that we will see you back soon, Iri. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 11:17, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

@Clayoquot Same! I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 16:22, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Oh, bollocks. SerialNumber54129 13:17, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Still hoping they may emerge in time. Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:23, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Admin tools or not, I hope Iri will be back around. Much missed. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:16, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Fun though an Iridescent re-RfA would be, it would be a massive hassle for Iri, so I don't want us getting any closer to that. Also concerned; hope they don't have you in a sealed bunker somewhere or something. Please return soon, if only to tell us how we're all messing up :-( Yngvadottir (talk) 16:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to provide feedback

Inspired by Worm That Turned's re-RfA where he noted administrators don't get a lot of feedback or suggestions for improvement, I have decided to solicit feedback. I'm reaching out to you as you are currently one of the users I've selected as part of my recall process. I hope you will consider taking a few moments to fill out my feedback form. Clicking on the link will load the questions and create a new section on my user talk. Thanks for your consideration. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:58, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

@Barkeep49 Iri is, at best, on a long-term Wikibreak. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 09:10, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Io Saturnalia!

		Io, Saturnalia!
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:14, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

		Season's Greetings
		Wishing everybody a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! The Adoration of the Magi in the Snow (1563) by Pieter Bruegel the Elder is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod (talk) 17:36, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

	A very happy Christmas and New Year to you!
	Have a great Christmas, and may 2025 bring you joy, happiness – and no trolls or vandals! Cheers SchroCat (talk) 08:30, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:12, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Categories: