User talk:Jonathunder

This user may have left Wikipedia. Jonathunder has not edited Wikipedia since February 2022. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Many thanks for all your hard work over the year. Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:16, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:04, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

June

cornflowers

some wildflowers of thanks and understanding --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:44, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, forgive me for being a busybody, but a couple of things about WP:CBAN. First, the ban is usually recorded at WP:Editing restrictions. Second, although not required, you can place a tag on the editor's userpage. A non-administrator did that, and I reverted because it's your call and because non-admins shouldn't be tagging other editor's userpages anyway.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:56, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I believe that Mzmadmike shouldn't have been placed in Editing Restrictions, because it states that "editors who are subject to site bans are listed at Category:Banned Wikipedia users instead". Feel free to ignore this if I'm incorrect, that's just how I understand it and I wanted to bring it up to you. Best, -- Rockstonetalk to me! 01:55, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're right, but I was just following the instructions in the above section. Jonathunder (talk) 02:01, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I would undo it, but I really don't feel like drawing any more ire against Bbb23 (They're also wrong about non-administrators not being allowed to place CBAN tags on users, but that's a separate issue). I guess maybe ask another admin? -- Rockstonetalk to me! 02:06, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing to undo because Jonathaunder hasn't put the user in editing restrictions. However, you bring up an interesting point because editing restrictions does say what you said, but that conflicts with WP:CBAN. If you want to do something useful, I would go to the talk page of WP:CBAN and point out the discrepancy because it should be resolved. As for the category, when Jonathaunder undid my revert at the user's userpage the ban tag automatically places the user in the category, but it's a hidden category. Hope this helps a bit.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:16, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I'm wrong, Jonathunder edited a section of it, and that doesn't show up in the history of the overall page. I'm not sure what I'd do at this point, but I think I'd undo the editing restriction edit, at least for the moment, but I don't see any of this as urgent, and I'm going off-wiki now.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:19, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go make a note on the talk page of WP:CBAN about it, thank you for the suggestion! I think the reason indefinite bans aren't supposed to be listed in Editing Restrictions is for the same reason we don't have LOBU anymore: basically they just amount to gravedancing. At least, that's how I understand it. -- Rockstonetalk to me! 02:25, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quick edit: I think the intent is that a community site-ban sanction be logged by adding the banned user template to the user page, which is what I was trying to do when I applied the template to Mzmadmike's userpage (which like you said, causes it to show up in the list of banned users category, which is what we would want). That's at least how I reconciled current practice (posting the CBAN template on a userpage) with what it says. Like I said, I'll make a post about it in the talk page. I almost think I should make a post at the village pump regarding revising the whole way we do community site bans. -- Rockstonetalk to me! 02:29, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ottavio Bottecchia has been tagged with needing ref improvement. Can you help remedy that? Otherwise, if I can't fix it myself, I may be forced to replace him. Thanks. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 15:34, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I replaced him with Kurmanbek Bakiyev (b. 1949) as this will be his 70th birthday and the article is better referenced. Feel free, of course, to undo that or replace with a third person if you find someone better. Jonathunder (talk) 16:41, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2019).

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, the page Wikipedia:Office actions has been changed from a policy page to an information page.
• A request for comment (permalink) is in progress regarding the administrator inactivity policy.

Arbitration

• Editors may now use the template {{Ds/aware}} to indicate that they are aware that discretionary sanctions are in force for a topic area, so it is unnecessary to alert them.

Miscellaneous

• Following a research project on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to improve the privacy of IP editors. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page.
• The new page reviewer right is bundled with the admin tool set. Many admins regularly help out at Special:NewPagesFeed, but they may not be aware of improvements, changes, and new tools for the Curation system. Stay up to date by subscribing here to the NPP newsletter that appears every two months, and/or putting the reviewers' talk page on your watchlist.

  Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.

---

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2019).

Administrator changes

Bradv • Chetsford • Izno

Floquenbeam • Lectonar

DESiegel • Jake Wartenberg • Rjanag • Topbanana

CheckUser changes

Callanecc • LFaraone • There'sNoTime

Oversight changes

Callanecc • Fox • HJ Mitchell • LFaraone • There'sNoTime

Technical news

• Editors using the mobile website on Wikipedia can opt-in to new advanced features via your settings page. This will give access to more interface links, special pages, and tools.
• The advanced version of the edit review pages (recent changes, watchlist, and related changes) now includes two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions". They will filter the view to just those namespaces.

Arbitration

• A request for comment is open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2019 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.

Miscellaneous

• A global request for comment is in progress regarding whether a user group should be created that could modify edit filters across all public Wikimedia wikis.

---

Hi there,

I see in the history of the article that you AC-ed it today for a week, but the padlock doesn't seem to have appeared - could you confirm that you added the {{}} bit of it? Or that there isn't another issue at play?

It may need EC-protection if another AC-permissioned editor vandalises it.

Nosebagbear (talk) 17:15, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the note. When I've protected a page in the past, I think a bot or someone who attends to such things has applied the padlock, but to be perfectly honest, I haven't paid attention. Can anyone watching this page do what is needed or tell me what to do? Jonathunder (talk) 16:56, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Judging from a previous protection action, it looks like you have to add the Page protection template manually. | Uncle Milty | talk | 17:07, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Minnesota State Highway 277, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chippewa County (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:29, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Today I made it to Lakewood Cemetery and came away with a not great but usable image. Maybe you can do better. I wondered if Lakewood accepts money for cleanup of graves. Most of her family is there but it's difficult to see exactly where. I couldn't find her brother Nebraska, the pianist. File:Dorsey_Lakewood_Cemetery_20190928.jpg. -SusanLesch (talk) 23:37, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So good to hear from you again, Susan. Could I ask what time of day the photo was taken? Perhaps an overcast day later this fall will provide more even light and good color. I can try. Do you have the specific location of this marker? Jonathunder (talk) 13:00, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, Jonathunder the Kind. Burial Search for "Ida Dorsey" will yield a link to "Print Map" which is a map of Section 11. She's in Lot 506 which can be inferred to be close to "Priene." Priene is a small monument and I never saw "Bulmer" that the map labels. The tree might be the best landmark to help you find the Dorseys. -SusanLesch (talk) 14:39, 1 October 2019 (UTC) P.S. I think I made this one around noon. -SusanLesch (talk) 14:51, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2019).

Guideline and policy news

• Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories.

Technical news

• As previously noted, tighter password requirements for Administrators were put in place last year. Wikipedia should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.

Arbitration

• The 2019 CheckUser and Oversight appointment process has begun. The community consultation period will take place October 4th to 10th.
• The arbitration case regarding Fram was closed. While there will be a local RfC focus[ing] on how harassment and private complaints should be handled in the future, there is currently a global community consultation on partial and temporary office actions in response to the incident. It will be open until October 30th.

Miscellaneous

• The Community Tech team has been working on a system for temporarily watching pages, and welcomes feedback.

---

Hey, Jonathunder. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! PATH SLOPU 11:20, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Jonathunder,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more. ​

Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 01:53, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to check Special:WhatLinksHere when moving a file without a redirect and update any links pointing to that file. In the case of File:2019-10-07DanFeehan.jpg, a redirect should have been left behind per WP:FILEREDIRECT and WP:PMRC. While you are the uploader and can change the file name to whatever you would like, "Overly long name" would generally fall under WP:FMNN unless the name was seriously approaching the 240 byte limit. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 11:21, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There's no need for a redirect to the overly long name you came up with, as it will never be used. For one thing, it's not a unique description: the file on Commons is also of Feehan at a campaign announcement. You might have asked me before moving the file. Jonathunder (talk) 13:07, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mia Native American Artists Edit-a-Thon

Hello Jonathunder. You are invited to attend a Native American Artists edit-a-thon at the Minneapolis Institute of Art (Mia) on Saturday, November 9, 2019, from 11am to 4pm. In celebration of Native American Heritage Month, join in honoring Native American artists whose work is represented in Mia's collections by creating or enhancing Wikipedia articles. Date: Saturday, November 9, 2019 Location: Minneapolis Institute of Art, 2400 Third Avenue South, Minneapolis Please register here

Thank you for the invitation, but I will be attending the WikiConference North America 2019. Jonathunder (talk) 14:18, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to continue the discussion on the Statue of Leif Erikson (Boston), but in the meantime, just wanted to thank you for your work expanding the article. Just FYI, if you're interested in public art/sculpture in Boston in general, I am currently using the project page Wikipedia:WikiProject Sculpture/Boston to expand List of public art in Boston and create articles about public artworks in the city. I'll be creating a similar list for Cambridge as well. I doing this work ahead and of the upcoming WikiConference and hope to continue creating many more pages! Thanks again for your help. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:02, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I plan to go to the same conference; perhaps I'll see you there. I found the monument when compiling a list of sites to visit and try to improve the photos, as I have long been interested in Leif Eriksson and Norse exploration in general, being from Minnesota and claiming descent from Vikings. Jonathunder (talk) 16:10, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathunder, I'll be there!, so say hi if you see me around. I hope to visit some of these monuments as a walk around the city outside the conference. Whether or not you tackle any other public artwork articles, happy editing! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:12, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

I see you made a change to my edit rights based on The SignPost article. I gave SmallBones the citation to the AN Closure Board of the ANI Review of all of these same allegations, but he did not use it. SoWhy, an uninvolved admin summarizing the admin consensus said Feinberg’s story was written by someone who “has no idea how Wikipedia works” and that I had not violated any Wikipedia policies or Terms of Use. [1]. Swarm, an admin who was involved in the discussion, did his own summary of the ANI review: "Eight admins have replied to the thread. All eight appear to be on the same page that the article is exaggerated sensationalism, and that the editor has not actually has done anything wrong. It has been suggested that the user should probably be more concise, but we haven't seen anything to support the notion that they're relentlessly argumentative or engage in "bludgeoning" behavior." [2] The ANI review included the PayTalk and bludgeoning accusations that Smallbones is bringing up again. Dozens of editors looked at every contribution I ever made and found no violation. My entire consulting practice is based on ethical behavior and strictly following Wikipedia policies.

Farrow says in the end notes to his book that the accusations against me are taken from the Huffington Post story. I don't see why changing my status is justified just because the press repeats the same accusations and finds Wikipedia's COI policies objectionable (that there is a sanctioned process for paid conflicted editors to propose changes and have them reviewed by independent Wikipedia editors).

Cheers, Ed BC1278 (talk) 19:02, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I simply don't see the need for the extended edit right on an account which is only used for paid advocacy. Jonathunder (talk) 19:08, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If it's something you want to propose to your fellow admins for all self-declared paid editors, then that's understandable. To be frank, I don't understand the full implications of what you've done yet. Maybe it makes sense. My point is that more than any other paid editor in recent years, my work has already been poured over. So why treat me differently than other paid editors? BC1278 (talk) 01:08, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And I certainly don't engage in WP: Advocacy. Much of my work consists of suggesting to other editors that they correct biased and inaccurate language and POV being flung at the subjects of articles. I often use the official channel just to ask for corrections. Some of the admins who actually looked at the accusations closely at ANI, like Swarm, said my work made Wikipedia more accurate. You're taking this action based on a newsletter column that's based on press accounts written by people who have no experience on Wikipedia. The columnist on Wired takes the position that anyone getting paid is engaging in "paid advocacy." He thinks he's making up a new term -- he doesn't know Wikipedia has its own policy with the same name. BC1278 (talk) 02:04, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia actually does not have a policy with that name. And you are certainly engaging in paid advocacy on behalf of your clients as e.g. defined by Jimmy Wales. I think Jonathunder made the right decision here. Regards, HaeB (talk) 03:21, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Adding my +1 as an admin in support of removing the extended rights too. Personally, I'm fine with uncontroversial paid editing (rather, proposed edits on the talk page as you do), the controversial editing and back-and-forth about proposed edits is much more problematic. tedder (talk) 03:40, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to weigh in here to note that BC1278 (talk) has repeatedly mischaracterized the discussions that took place around the propriety of his editing behavior (and he steadfastly refuses to link to the full discussion for that very reason). The consensus seems to be that he's either completely unethical but manages to violate the spirit of Wikipedia guidelines without violating their letter, or that he's blatantly breaking the rules. He has a history of scrubbing his talk page, but has been repeatedly admonished by other editors for his aggressive advocacy in the past. DaRonPayne (talk) 02:31, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the advice from other admins. I have not examined BC1278's history in detail, much less taken a position on any disputes, so I think I remain uninvolved. I simply don't think an account for paid editing, which is mostly confined to talk pages, needs the extended edit right. I don't think what I did should really make much difference. Jonathunder (talk) 04:16, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2019).

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC was closed with the consensus that the resysop criteria should be made stricter.

• The follow-up RfC to develop that change is now open at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2019 Resysop Criteria (2).

• A related RfC is seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure.

Arbitration

• Eligible editors may now nominate themselves as candidates for the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections. The self-nomination period will close November 12, with voting running from November 19 through December 2.

---

Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:44, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:26, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jonathunder,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Calvin Brown for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Kingsif (talk) 15:19, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, figured I'd follow up here since I'm going off-topic.

Did you wind up doing the whole Freedom Trail? I took a lot of pics at the Granary Burying Ground, Bunker Hill Monument, and the Skinny House, but just a few elsewhere. I feel like there are a lot of opportunities at Faneuil Hall, etc. if only I had a better lens with me or the light were more cooperative. :) I lived in Boston for a while, but never actually got around to most of the touristy stuff, so it was nice to come back (frigid though it was).

Also just curious if there's a story behind your choice of license? I'm not used to seeing that on new files, so just curious (I'm not someone who's particularly passionate about choice of license FWIW). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:28, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I walked only part of the trail, as there was so much to see and photograph. I want to visit Boston again and get more. As for why I choose the GFDL, it's because I've found in practice Creative Commons gets treated as Public Domain and with it work all too often gets reused elsewhere without attribution. Jonathunder (talk) 22:34, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

After Copp's Hill it's just the USS Constitution and Bunker Hill Monument. Much longer walks to those than the others, so a sensible cut-off point.

What about being GFDL leads people to either not use or actually provide attribution? Or is it by virtue of not being on Commons? I do see all manner of attribution (or non attribution) to my photos. Sometimes if I see that one's being used frequently I'll reverse image search it and find a bunch of low rent blogs, etc. using it without attribution (or e.g. "via Wikipedia"). Meh. It's annoying but I complain only when it's flagrant or a particularly high-profile publication (Huffington Post, etc. should know better). In a couple cases, nontrivial publications have even slapped their own name on it (!). Thankfully they're usually willing to fix their mistakes... — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 23:26, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2019).

Administrator changes

EvergreenFir • ToBeFree

Akhilleus • Athaenara • John Vandenberg • Melchoir • MichaelQSchmidt • NeilN • Youngamerican • 😂

CheckUser changes

Beeblebrox

Deskana

Interface administrator changes

Evad37

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC on the administrator resysop criteria was closed. 18 proposals have been summarised with a variety of supported and opposed statements. The inactivity grace period within which a new request for adminship is not required has been reduced from three years to two. Additionally, Bureaucrats are permitted to use their discretion when returning administrator rights.
• Following a proposal, the edit filter mailing list has been opened up to users with the Edit Filter Helper right.

Technical news

• Wikimedia projects can set a default block length for users via MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry. A new page, MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry-ip, allows the setting of a different default block length for IP editors. Neither is currently used. (T219126)

Arbitration

• Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 2 December 2018 UTC. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.

Miscellaneous

• The global consultation on partial and temporary office actions that ended in October received a closing statement from staff concluding, among other things, that the WMF will no longer use partial or temporary Office Action bans... until and unless community consensus that they are of value or Board directive.

---

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:ChastenPeteButtigieg.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 03:18, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for continuing to make Wikipedia the greatest project in the world. I hope you have an excellent holiday season. Lightburst (talk) 23:13, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

...and initially bet on snake eyes with Eve, sending his son down to Earth to play rock paper scissors with its primates for awhile was one of his better ideas. Happiest of Christmas and New Year's to you and yours, and a blessed 2020 to follow! Randy Kryn (talk) 13:33, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your input at 1, 2, or 3 would be welcome. -SusanLesch (talk) 17:14, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:39, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2019).

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment asks whether partial blocks should be enabled on the English Wikipedia. If enabled, this functionality would allow administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces, rather than the entire site.
• A proposal asks whether admins who don't use their tools for a significant period of time (e.g. five years) should have the toolset procedurally removed.
• Following a successful RfC, a whitelist is now available for users whose redirects will be autopatrolled by a bot, removing them from the new pages patrol queue. Admins can add such users to Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Redirect whitelist after a discussion following the guidelines at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Redirect whitelist.

Arbitration

• The fourth case on Palestine-Israel articles was closed. The case consolidated all previous remedies under one heading, which should make them easier to understand, apply, and enforce. In particular, the distinction between "primary articles" and "related content" has been clarified, with the former being the entire set of articles whose topic relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly interpreted rather than reasonably construed.
• Following the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Beeblebrox, Bradv, Casliber, David Fuchs, DGG, KrakatoaKatie, Maxim, Newyorkbrad, SoWhy, Worm That Turned, Xeno.

Miscellaneous

• This issue marks three full years of the Admin newsletter. Thanks for reading!

---

Would it be better for me to back the deletion nomination (which is seemingly lacking) of the current file in question and re-upload it with a free license to remediate the "fair use" issue causing the other user to disruptively edit the article? It is a far higher quality image and without anyone else in frame, far more fitting for the article, in my opinion. ☧Catholic Laitinen ☧ (talk) 08:31, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Where did you get File:Lexi Kaufman Wikipedia.jpg? When you uploaded it, you wrote "This picture was taken at a public event" but you did not say who took the picture. That's important. Did you get it off the Internet? Jonathunder (talk) 11:49, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No no, it's not off the Internet, the photo itself is mine. However, I am not in it and I felt it would be a better fit than the previous one which has others in the shot, appears grainy, etc ☧Catholic Laitinen ☧ (talk) 23:12, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you took it yourself with your camera, please say that in the deletion discussion. It may help to say what kind of camera you used and other circumstances you are willing to share. If you are indeed the photographer, the photo should not be deleted and you deserve thanks for uploading it. Jonathunder (talk) 01:04, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your input. If and when can the picture be restored to the article? Should I refrain from doing so until the deletion request is denied? ☧Catholic Laitinen ☧ (talk) 02:47, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: I re-uploaded the file with a free use license along with more information and restored it to use in the article. I removed my prior comments in the deletion discussion fighting the nomination and stated it now meets the "redundant file" criterion for speedy deletion. If the user who took issue with the fair use license removes it again, I will report them for disruptive editing. Thank you for your earlier assistance! ☧Catholic Laitinen ☧ (talk) 06:09, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your photo. It's better for the article than what was there before and I'm glad what I wrote was helpful. Jonathunder (talk) 15:12, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem and thanks again! :) ☧Catholic Laitinen ☧ (talk) 19:12, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonathunder: Just when I thought it was over...Etacarinaee is again replacing my image with the grainy one, now claiming that my photo is inferior because it's a few months older. I'm concerned that they won't stop because they remove any warnings I put on their talk page. They also added unreferenced controversial biographical info to the article and it appears disruptive editing behavior extends back to at least October. Perhaps they've already been sufficiently warned to be blocked? ☧Catholic Laitinen ☧ (talk) 17:38, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seems silly to revert to an inferior image, but if it happens again, don't edit war yourself; let me know or post on the article talk page. Jonathunder (talk) 02:50, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonathunder: Will do :) ☧Catholic Laitinen ☧ (talk) 03:08, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonathunder: Etacarinaee reverted to that inferior image again. My image has since been moved from the infobox to a lower section after a newer quality image was uploaded, but I thought you should still know the problematic behavior is continuing. [3] ☧Catholic Laitinen ☧ (talk) 00:22, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Since I agree your photo is better for the infobox I put it back there, but please don't leave the other editor messages implying they will be blocked. Instead, if reverted, please discuss on the article's talk page. Jonathunder (talk) 15:03, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonathunder: Acknowledged :) ☧Catholic Laitinen ☧ (talk) 22:35, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Jonathunder! If you recall, several months ago you offered feedback to my requested updates to History at Mayo Clinic. Based on your thoughts and those of another editor, I updated my request. However, no one has yet had a chance to review the proposed improvements. If you are still interested in editing articles about Mayo Clinic, I would really appreciate your feedback. Thanks! Audrey at Mayo Clinic (talk) 04:06, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jonathunder, yesterday while you were making this photo I was right around the corner at HiFi records to see Steve McClellan. I remember walking by that building and seeing a wedding party gathered inside about 3pm. They were gone when I came back through a half hour later. Are you taking photos as a member of a WikiProject? -SusanLesch (talk) 13:00, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I was snooping around trying to close the Minneapolis RfCs. One down two to go. -SusanLesch (talk) 14:14, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jonathunder. I respectfully disagree with your restoring "mental retardation". Yes, articles are written for nonspecialists, but that doesn't mean excessive weight needs to be placed on outdated terminology. See euphemism treadmill. Mental retardation redirects to the article, and the terminology is explained in much detail in the article. Since this is a medical article, and with WP:BRD in mind, I ask that you revert your edit and discuss on talk page where medical editors can discuss. Thanks. Sundayclose (talk) 17:43, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatively, the term could be placed in parentheses: "Intellectual disability (ID), also known as general learning disability (and sometimes the outdated term "mental retardation) ..." That would at least let the reader know immediately that the term is rarely used by professionals. But I much prefer that it be removed completely, or at least discussed. Sundayclose (talk) 17:58, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As the article discusses the term in detail, it should be mentioned in the lede and the brief mention there is not undue weight. But by all means go ahead and discuss further on the article talk page. Jonathunder (talk) 22:49, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. Actually, considering that ICD-11 (which does not use the term) won't be released until 2022 I think I'll wait for its release to revisit the issue. Sundayclose (talk) 01:23, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2020).

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, partial blocks are now enabled on the English Wikipedia. This functionality allows administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces rather than the entire site. A draft policy is being workshopped at Wikipedia:Partial blocks.
• The request for comment seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure closed with wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input. No proposed process received consensus.

Technical news

• Twinkle now supports partial blocking. There is a small checkbox that toggles the "partial" status for both blocks and templating. There is currently one template: {{uw-pblock}}.
• When trying to move a page, if the target title already exists then a warning message is shown. The warning message will now include a link to the target title. [4]

Arbitration

• Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2020 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2020, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2020, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
• The English Wikipedia has reached six million articles. Thank you everyone for your contributions!

---

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2020).

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops must not undo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather than should not.
• A request for comment confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.

Technical news

• Following a discussion, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your Twinkle preferences.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2020 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: BRPever, Krd, Martin Urbanec, MusikAnimal, Sakretsu, Sotiale, and Tks4Fish. There are a total of seven editors that have been appointed as stewards, the most since 2014.
• The 2020 appointees for the Ombudsman commission are Ajraddatz and Uzoma Ozurumba; they will serve for one year.

---

Hi Jonathunder. Your help would help at Talk:Minneapolis#RFC_on_city_history. Thank you. -SusanLesch (talk) 15:01, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear User:Jonathunder, I hope this message finds you doing well. I note that you have uploaded many wonderful photographs related to WikiProject Christianity and was wondering if you know of any suitable images of traditional churches during the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic. It would be nice to have one or two of them for the Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on religion article. I hope this helps and look forward to hearing from you. With regards, Anupam^Talk 20:04, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for noticing my photographs and for the barnstar. Here is a photo I took this Sunday morning of a sign on the red door of an Episcopal Church announcing it is temporarily closed due to COVID-19. Perhaps it will be of use. Jonathunder (talk) 22:38, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jonathunder, thank you for taking this photograph. I really appreciate it and have added it to the article. Kind regards, Anupam^Talk 23:26, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

		The Christianity Barnstar
		Dear Jonathunder, I award you The Christianity Barnstar for all your hard work in WikiProject Christianity-related articles, especially the high-quality photographs you have added to various articles such as chalking the door. Keep up the good work! Your efforts are making a difference here! With regards, AnupamTalk 20:06, 17 March 2020 (UTC))[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2020).

Guideline and policy news

• There is an ongoing request for comment to streamline the source deprecation and blacklisting process.

Technical news

• There is a plan for new requirements for user signatures. You can give feedback.

Arbitration

• Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a Arbcom RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. A draft RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC (Draft) and not open to comments from the community yet. Interested editors can comment on the RfC itself on its talk page.

Miscellaneous

• The WMF has begun a pilot report of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The report is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.

---

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2020).

Administrator changes

Gnangarra • Kaisershatner • Malcolmxl5

CheckUser changes

Callanecc

Oversight changes

HJ Mitchell

Guideline and policy news

• Discretionary sanctions have been authorized for all pages and edits related to COVID-19, to be logged at WP:GS/COVID19.
• Following a recent discussion on Meta-Wiki, the edit filter maintainer global group has been created.
• A request for comment has been proposed to create a new main page editor usergroup.
• A request for comment has been proposed to make the bureaucrat activity requirements more strict.

Technical news

• The Editing team has been working on the talk pages project. You can review the proposed design and share your thoughts on the talk page.
• Enterprisey created a script that will show a link to the proper Special:Undelete page when viewing a since-deleted revision, see User:Enterprisey/link-deleted-revs.

Miscellaneous

• A request for comment closed with consensus to create a Village Pump-style page for communication with the Wikimedia Foundation.

---

Jonathunder - thank you for your message and guidance regarding my edits to Louis DeJoy. I am an independant logistics consultant that follows logistics organizations extensively; an industry he was in for many years. That is how I know of Mr. DeJoy. Over the past few days, my Louis DeJoy google alert has exploded my inbox, which is how I learned of Mr. DeJoy's appointment for Postmaster General. When I found his Wikipedia page, I was disappointed that the content appeared to be mostly negative leaning which prompted me to provide edits.

Since the first paragraph only spoke to Mr. DeJoy's major donations to the President and to the Republican Party, which some readers may view as negative, I felt it important to also highlight his philanthropic endevours through his family foundation which I would think is also relevant. Additionally, since there was no photo of Mr. DeJoy, I contacted his office to get the photo which I uploaded. That is the same photo they provided for the Business Journal article you reference and is owned by Mr. DeJoy, not the business journal. They advised me that the same photo was recently provided to the postal service for their use. I can provide a contact in Mr. DeJoy's office if needed to validate.

I am not familiar with the process for requesting that my edits be approved, and would appreciate your guidance or acceptance based on the above.

Thank you, --SMLwriter (talk) 02:26, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]