User talk:Jenks24/Archive 22

Archive 15

←

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

NACs and Move Review

Hey Jenks, I noticed that a while ago you pointed out that we've seen a significant increase in move reviews overturning RM closes since the page mover ability was created. That definitely seems to be the case: we've had Max Reger works in May, plus Take Care (self-overturned by SSTFlyer) and New York (state) in June. The MR closer of Syrian Civil War also found a consensus to relist, but didn't carry it out due to the length of time that had passed (which has always been a major problem with Move Review). This means that 3 of 7 move reviews since then have found consensus to overturn, all of them from NACs. Obviously move review only represents a fraction of RMs that are closed, but it could be a problematic trend. I wonder if it might be time to start a conversation about this?--Cúchullain ^t/c 13:40, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm glad you feel the same, I was worried I was being overly negative when I brought it up earlier. My main concern is that, as you say, MRVs are only a fraction of all RMs and most editors who feel a poor decision has been made don't actually start a MRV because it's too much hassle. If this trend is representative, there may well have been plenty more poor or inadequate closures that have fallen through the cracks. I agree with you that a discussion needs to be started (at WT:RM or Wikipedia talk:Page mover?), but I often feel a bit awkward talking about NACs, like I come off as condescending or exacerbate the admin/non-admin divide that can appear on Wikipedia. Jenks24 (talk) 18:08, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Yeah... I hate to do it too, but I think it needs to be done. We never see that rate of overturning at MR, and it's striking that all of them are NACs at a time that a large numbers of non-admins are coming in. What I usually say when it comes up is that there's nothing inherent about being an admin that makes you better at closing RMs; in fact some of the best closers are or started out as non-admins, and I've seen some admins that just don't cut it. But admins are expected to be familiar with Wikipedia policy in a way others are not, and that does affect one's judgement. I think the discussion can be held without causing bad blood; I certainly don't want to see non-admins discouraged from participating.--Cúchullain ^t/c 20:12, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

That's well put. I think the discussion should probably be at WT:RM because the issue is not specifically with page movers. If you want to start the discussion please go for it, or I'll get around to it after the weekend. Jenks24 (talk) 19:54, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

• A very similar discussion, on admin board thread closings, and RFC closes, is occurring at Wikipedia_talk:Administrators'_noticeboard#Minimum_experience_on_thread_closing. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 20:20, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
  • I agree that generally there are some overly keen closers at AN/ANI (I made a minor complaint about this recently, here). The problem of course is that it's hard to set limits like the one proposed. There are editors with under a year's tenure who are fine to make closures and there are editors who have been around for a quite a while who shouldn't. Similar problem if you try and use something like edit count. Jenks24 (talk) 19:54, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Jenks24. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

130.185.150.120 (talk) 15:51, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Mind closing a discussion?

Jenks24, would you mind closing this discussion? I believe (by a clear consensus) the result is to keep its current name. I would close it, but I was involved in the discussion and would feel better if someone else did it. Also, would a move protection be possible? I have a feeling this will come up again in the future, or someone will move the page again. Corkythehornetfan 04:28, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Because it's not a formal RM discussion, it doesn't need to be closed. The consensus there is plainly apparent but I'd be happy to leave a note there myself if you'd like. I'm not in favour of move protecting at the moment because it seems like only one editor has ever wanted it moved and they're stopped. If it ever gets moved again without proper discussion leave me a note and I'd be happy to protect. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 12:38, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Nah, I was thinking it needed to, but didn't realize that only formals do. On the move protection, that makes sense and and I'll make sure to stop by if it happens again. Thanks for your reply! Corkythehornetfan 19:17, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

VFDs

Thanks for the pointer. Unfortunately, I hadn't thought of the transclusion issue. There are lots of remaining VFDs in their original locations (I'd not moved them because I was tired of moving pairs of pages), so I'll remember your words when moving them too. As far as -Ril's suggestion-, I was entirely unaware of any convention, decision, consensus, or anything else on this subject — I just assumed that it would be moved because when a page gets moved, its subpages normally get moved as well (if Wikipedia:Offensive material/Noticeboard existed, we'd move it if Wikipedia:Offensive material got moved), and this looked like an ordinary subpage. Nyttend (talk) 00:43, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Request

Hello Jenks24, I was ask by User:Gogo Dodo to get in touch with you for the undeletion for Dj Kentalky. The page now has more information to be written to meet the Wikipedia WP:MUSICBIO. According to what i saw most of the consensus said it does not meet the requirement of Wikipedia WP:MUSICBIO.--Markzy90 (talk) 23:39, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

FYI: Markzy90 has been confirmed as a sockpuppet. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:06, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Other red cell antigens listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Other red cell antigens. Since you had some involvement with the Other red cell antigens redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 17:02, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, Jenks24. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

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

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

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

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:32, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi Jenks24.

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

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

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

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Jenks24. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

New Challenge for Oceania and Australia

Hi, Wikipedia:WikiProject Oceania/The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/The 5000 Challenge are up and running based on Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge which has currently produced over 2300 article improvements and creations. The Australia challenge would feed into the wider region one and potentially New Zealand could have a smaller challenge too. The main goal is content improvement, tackling stale old stubs and important content and improving sourcing/making more consistent but new articles are also welcome if sourced. I understand that this is a big goal for regular editors, especially being summertime where you are, but if you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Oceania and Australia like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1700 articles in 5 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for the region but fuelled by a series of contests to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. The Africa contest scaled worldwide would naturally provide great benefits to Oceania countries, particularly Australia and attract new editors. I would like some support from existing editors here to get the Challenges off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile and potentially bring about hundreds of improvements in a few weeks through a contest! Cheers.♦ --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:12, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection policy RfC

You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a discussion ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 16:12, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry, merry!

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 19:14, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Imagine (song) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Imagine (song). Since you had some involvement with the Imagine (song) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. --Nevé–selbert 00:05, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

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

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67

Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

• A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
• Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
• Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news

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

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries

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

---

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Restoring Anuraag Pandey page

Hi Jenks24,

This is regarding the deletion of page Anuraag Pandey. I would like to restore his page. He's India's number 1 radio jockey and equivalent to a celebrity here in Indian film industry. I'm sharing a few news and interviews links with you that can be used as citation:

http://www.exchange4media.com/radio/interview.aspx?id=80 http://www.ibtimes.co.in/sony-mix-and-fever-fm-team-up-to-air-039tv-ka-pehla-radio-show039-on-sunday-489596 http://www.afaqs.com/news/story/38096_Sony-Mix-launches-TV-ka-Pehla-Radio-Show http://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/entertainment-others/medium-medley/

Please write back to me if you've any queries or need any additional information. Request you to respond as quickly as possible on this one.

Here's my email id: khyati.madaan@gmail.com

Thanks in advance.Vishky786 (talk) 11:27, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi Vishky786. Sorry that I wasn't around to respond to this. If you ever log back into Wikipedia and see this notification please feel free to talk to me about this issue again and I promise the response time won't be as lousy as this one. Apologies, Jenks24 (talk) 06:47, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Renaming of Dersim massacre

A RfC [[1]] has been running for over a month on whether the title of Dersim massacre should be Dersim rebellion (which was its original title). The opinion is, with a 100% consensus, that the correct title should be Dersim rebellion. Since you moved the article from that original title, would you restore it to Dersim rebellion. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 19:28, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

I have just noticed you have edited nothing since 19 July. I think if an administrator is going to be absent for a lengthy period he/she should place an announcement on their talk page to that effect, detailing how long they plan to be gone for. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 19:33, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Tiptoethrutheminefield and apologies for the very belated reply. You make a very good point about leaving a notice if I'm away from Wikipedia for an extended period. I had been telling myself all through this break that my return to editing would be just around the corner, but unfortunately it took many months longer than I'd hoped. However, that's not an excuse and I've taken on board what you said – if I do take another extended break from Wikipedia while retaining the admin bit I will leave a notice about it. Thanks, Jenks24 (talk) 06:50, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Magdalena Leones

Hello. I'm new to wikipedia. I would like to create a page for Magdalena Leones but wiki says you previously did one but got deleted and advised by wiki to contact you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesvon (talk • contribs) 03:02, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jamesvon and sorry it has taken me so long to get back to you. Magdalena Leones was deleted because it was an article about a living person that did not cite any reliable sources. You are free to re-create the article whenever you wish, provided that you use reliable sources. If you have any questions about that please feel free to contact me again. Wikipedia:Your first article might also be a useful resource for you. Sorry again about the lateness of this response. Jenks24 (talk) 06:55, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

looks like protected

I cannot see the capacity to edit {{RMarchive}} on the Perth talk page - it would be good to have that over at the category as well if possible, who knows when the next well meaning RM xxxxx turns up... JarrahTree 10:11, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

@JarrahTree: You can edit it at Template:PerthRMArchive I think? It doesn't look protected to me. Jenks24 (talk) 10:36, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for that, so much for being able to see where things are... JarrahTree 10:47, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Hah, that would make it too easy! Making things like that simpler would almost be like we want more people to participate in editing. Jenks24 (talk) 11:33, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

dont let me start down that rabbit hole :) JarrahTree 11:36, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Welcome back!

Great to see you back on the 'pedia. Welcome back!--Cúchullain ^t/c 17:20, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Cheers! I always think I should go around thanking those who have picked up the slack I left by disappearing, but I'd have no idea where to start. Jenks24 (talk) 13:14, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

+1 – Missed you. wbm1058 (talk) 17:12, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! Jenks24 (talk) 04:55, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

McGraw

do some research Dave Rave (talk) 03:02, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Compelling. Feel free to have a read of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and/or WP:BRD. Or maybe even discuss things before moving a page (and botching the first attempt) so that an admin is required to undo it. Jenks24 (talk) 03:18, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Dave, it wasn't at all appropriate to revert Jenks after he/she restored the singer back to base title when the singer is not only the clear primary topic (see the first linked page above for more detail on primary topics), but also is the only person who goes by that name and other topics are named after him. Your "do some research" comment is also unwarranted and hypocritical when YOU were the one who didn't look into how the singer starred in The Blind Side and asserted that someone else named "Tim McGraw" starred in the movie. Snuggums (talk / edits) 05:11, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

absolutely - he doesn't look at all like the man in the hat. I thought it was a dead obvious no brainer, and apparently, wrong muchly. oops me. a lot. Dave Rave (talk) 08:00, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

No worries mate. All fixed now and everyone makes mistakes. Sorry my first reply here was a bit short. Jenks24 (talk) 11:54, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Thanks for your help on the Naruto multi-move today! — JFG talk 07:47, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

silly decision

https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Talk:Ovda_Airport#Requested_move You refer me to a "correct" article... dude, I'm telling you, the word for "fact" is uvda. there is no discussion about it. There was never a debate about it. It's just wrong and nonsensical, and you help to keep it that way! How do you feel about being a preserver of misinformation? And again, there is no debate about "ovda" not being the name of the place. Just a common error, that wikipedia help to preserve. --Benderbr (talk) 01:12, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

I get the feeling that you didn't actually read Wikipedia:Correct. Basically, Wikipedia is a tertiary source and we simply reflect what the majority of reliable secondary sources do. This has positives and negatives, and at the moment you are seeing one of the negatives – even if you know something to be correct or true, it needs to be reflected in the majority of reliable sources for us to go with it. You are free to add a note to the article that the airport is sometimes referred to as "Uvda" and that it is considered the correct transliteration, even if it's not the most commonly used. Jenks24 (talk) 02:42, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Easy Rock Cebu

Jenks24 can you please upload a new logo for Easy Rock Cebu 'cause i can't upload that 'cause it's permission error so that i can't upload the photos on wikipedia, please? Jimcristabanao (talk) 11:39, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

G'day Jimcristabanao. I think the reason you can't upload a new image is because accounts under the four days old aren't allowed to. Either you can wait the four days, or I'd be happy to upload a new image for you if you want. If so, could you please give me a link to the new logo on another website so I can save it and then upload it to Wikipedia? Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 11:57, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2017).

Administrator changes

Amortias • Deckiller • BU Rob13

Ronnotel • Islander • Chamal N • Isomorphic • Keeper76 • Lord Voldemort • Shereth • Bdesham • Pjacobi

Guideline and policy news

• A recent RfC has redefined how articles on schools are evaluated at AfD. Specifically, secondary schools are not presumed to be notable simply because they exist.
• AfDs that receive little participation should now be closed like an expired proposed deletion, following a deletion process RfC.
• Defender, HakanIST, Matiia and Sjoerddebruin are our newest stewards, following the 2017 steward elections.
• The 2017 appointees for the Ombudsman commission are Góngora, Krd, Lankiveil, Richwales and Vogone. They will serve for approximately 1 year.

Technical news

• A recent query shows that only 16% of administrators on the English Wikipedia have enabled two-factor authentication. If you haven't already enabled it please consider doing so.
• Cookie blocks should be deployed to the English Wikipedia soon. This will extend the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user after they switch accounts under a new IP.
• A bot will now automatically place a protection template on protected pages when admins forget to do so.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:14, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Maintenance category G8's

I notice that you denied my G8 taggings of several empty counter categories. These are used internally, and are only useful when the parent category (whose name is in the parentheses) contains monthly subcategories. Where that is not the case, the counter category will always be empty, is of no use, and can be deleted. I have re-tagged them as G6 with an explanation. — Train2104 (t • c) 14:35, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Do you know when the changes took place and if they are ever a chance to change back? Obviously at some point in time these were useful tracking categories. Pinging Rich Farmbrough who might be interested considering he created most of them. The cats are Category:Monthly clean up category (Articles needing expert attention) counter, Category:Monthly clean up category (User-created public domain images (no Commons)) counter, Category:Monthly clean up category (Articles with limited historical scope) counter, Category:Monthly clean up category (Uncategorized) counter, Category:Monthly clean up category (Articles with invalid date parameter in template) counter, Category:Monthly clean up category (Articles needing attention) counter. Jenks24 (talk) 15:49, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

These two are obvious: Category:Monthly clean up category (User-created public domain images (no Commons)) counter [2] and Category:Monthly clean up category (Articles with limited historical scope) counter [3]. Going to leave it up to Rich Farmbrough to explain the others - some appear to have been created in error as the populating template as of the creation date didn't populate a monthly category by that name. — Train2104 (t • c) 16:30, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

• Category:Monthly clean up category (Articles needing expert attention) counter is not needed but Category:Monthly clean up category (Articles needing expert attention by month) counter is (not sure when the months were split off).
• Category:Monthly clean up category (Articles with limited historical scope) counter has merged as you indicate.
• Category:Monthly clean up category (User-created public domain images (no Commons)) counter] is now "...files..." can go.
• Category:Monthly clean up category (Uncategorized) counter can go (category moved) - I have g7'd it.
• Category:Monthly clean up category (Articles with invalid date parameter in template) counter may have never been useful.
• Category:Monthly clean up category (Articles needing attention) counter can go for the moment, it is not a dated category.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 21:16, 1 March 2017 (UTC).

Cheers Rich! I've deleted them now, appreciate you going through them. Pinging Xaosflux who declined CSDs on a couple of them for the same reason I did originally – in case you go back and see they were deleted, here's a more detailed explanation than just G7/G8. Jenks24 (talk) 01:22, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you - the minimal CSD edit summaries didn't lead me to spend much time reviewing. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:24, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Rohit Sharma

You have deleted the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC international cricketer to make way for a barely notable film-composer.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Spike 'em (talk • contribs)

@Spike 'em: Check back now. I was in the middle of a histmerge, which was required to preserve the attribution history. Jenks24 (talk) 15:10, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

I obviously caught you in the middle of it. Sorry! Spike 'em (talk) 15:12, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

@Spike 'em: No worries mate. While I've got you here, I think your suggestion to move John Hampshire (cricketer, born 1941) is a good one. Are you happy for me to go ahead with it? It will be a bit easier to do with the admin tools. Jenks24 (talk) 15:14, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Sure thing, I was worried I'd mess it up if I tried myself. Spike 'em (talk) 15:16, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Done! Jenks24 (talk) 15:21, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm AWBing away links to the old page Spike 'em (talk) 16:06, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Page move

Hi. I'm trying to move List of Naruto print media to List of Naruto media but it won't let me. Can I receive help please? MCMLXXXIX 15:29, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

@1989: Woah, hang on a sec. I was just getting to this (my timing is terrible today) but it's a bit messy because the target page has such a big history that needs to be preserved somewhere. Cut and paste moves are a bad idea on Wikipedia. It means we lose the history which is required for copyright attribution. I'll tidy things up a little, but can I ask you to hold off on making any edits to this set of articles for a little bit please? Jenks24 (talk) 16:09, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Sure. Are you planning to merge the history with List of Naruto video games as well? MCMLXXXIX 16:25, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

I can't unfortunately due to parallel histories. I've added templates to the talk page so as to show attribution. If there are any other articles that you merged into this one, would you be able to add a new {{copied}} template to the talk page? And if you've completely merged any article so that it's only a redirect, please add {{merged-to}} to its talk page. Let me know if you need a hand with any of that. Also, you can read Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia if you're interested in why this is necessary for copyright reasons. By the way, I'm done for now so you can get back to editing if you want. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 16:38, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Anamika Mishra

Hi. You closed an AfD on Anamika Mishra and protected the page Anamika Mishra. The article has reappeared as Anamika Mishra (writer). It seems better than the one deleted but I thought I'd check with you. Thanks. Tassedethe (talk) 16:35, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, looks fine to me. Definitely not a G4 candidate. I've moved it to the base title, Anamika Mishra. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 06:35, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Andrew Franck

Greetings Jenks24,

I'm beginning to write an article based on a series of lectures by the philosopher/multimedia artist Andrew Franck. Noticed his Wikipedia page was deleted by you in September 2014. I've interviewed Franck and later asked about the deletion; he neither knew there was a Wiki about him or that it was deleted. Out of interest, I'd like to resurrect that page seeing that the issue was it didn't meet certain Wikipedia citation standards. What's the best way to go about this? Thanks, Zed Cook Providence, Rhode Island — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derougemont (talk • contribs) 02:18, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

G'day Derougemont. I deleted that article due to a discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Franck. As well as concerns that is was a bit promotional (writing with a neutral point of view is one of Wikipedia's core policies), the main reason it was deleted was because the article did not demonstrate that the subject met Wikipedia's general notability guideline, i.e. having significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

So, to create a new article on Franck I would suggest that, in order to make it as unlikely as possible that it gets deleted, you go through the draft process and have a reviewer look over it to give feedback and publish it to article space when it's ready. You can create a new draft at Draft:Andrew Franck and add the code {{subst:submit}} to the top of the page when you're ready to have someone take a look at it. Alternatively, you can use the Article Wizard to help you with the structure and usual standards of Wikipedia articles. Ultimately it works the same way in that a reviewer will look over your work and provide feedback. Be warned that there are many people using this process and a limited amount of reviewers, so it is not a lightning quick process.

Let me know if you have any further questions. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 04:40, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Higher than the Sun

Hey Jenks, could you take another look at your closing at Talk:Higher Than the Sun? While there clearly wasn't any consensus to move the Keane song to the base name, Higher than the Sun (Keane song) is still misnamed. Per WP:SONGDAB and [RFC], we don't need the artist's name if there aren't other ambiguous song articles, and the title ought to be Higher than the Sun (song). I can open a new RM if it would be easier.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:37, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey mate. I did notice your comment, but I think mentally pushed it to one side because it was a bit difficult – if we're not going to move it to the primary topic because of the existence of another song should we still move it? But on the other hand SONGDAB is clear. Anyway, I've moved it now but if someone disagrees/reverts I think we'll need to go through a new RM. There wasn't enough discussion about the issue at the previous discussion to call it a consensus. Jenks24 (talk) 04:17, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Totally fair points. I guess my point of view is that we really only have coverage of one song (or anything) named "Higher than the Sun", so we should make it as easy as possible for readers to get to it. The article linked for the Primal Scream song says basically nothing about it. Things can always change based on new developments. One problem we have at RM, as I'm sure you know, is that we get a bunch of the same people showing up to everything, arguing the same things regardless of what the guidelines say or whether it's a good idea. I may well have a different outlook if participants had really addressed the point about SONGDAB, arguing that the Primal Scream single is just so much more important that we should overlook SONGDAB's recommendations, but as it stands no one did, and I'm willing to bet it's the last we hear about it for a good while.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:51, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Redirect

Do you mind removing the redirect you created for the Sing film? The 2016 version is the most relevant that people will be searching for. It doesn't make a lot of sense to redirect it to the disambiguation page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Auror Andrachome (talk • contribs) 04:34, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, but no. As was decided at the requested move discussion, "Sing (2016 film)" is ambiguous and should therefore redirect to the dab. I have disambiguated all the incoming links now so that should not be a problem. However, if you disagree with my decision you can start a WP:RFD discussion about retargeting the redirect to the 2016 American film if you want. Let me know if you need a hand with anything. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 15:47, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Orthilia

Please see Talk:Orthilia#Requested move 9 March 2017 since you commented on the same question at RMTR. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 17:25, 9 March 2017 (UTC)