This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
Bot operator top icon
This user has signed the confidentiality agreement for nonpublic personal data.
This user is a member of the Wikimedia volunteer response team.
This user uses Twinkle to fight vandalism.
This user uses Huggle to fight vandalism.
This user uses HotCat to work with categories.
This user edits using the gadget wikEd.
Identified as a precious editor on 12 February 2017
Email this user
This user has email notifications enabled.
This user uses the name JJMC89 on IRC.
JJMC89's page on GitHub

User talk:JJMC89

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This user has opted out of talkbacks

This user prefers to be notified by Notifications. Please use {{ping}} or {{reply to}} when you reply to this user. No talkback messages are needed.

By Year categories[edit]

Hey, JJMC89,

It looks like a lot of categories have been moved by your bot but not the contents. For example, the original category was Category:Years in surfing but it was moved to Category:Surfing by year and it was turned into a redirect. But the contents of the original category are still there. Will the bot get to that eventually or does this need to be put on a CfD page for action? Liz Read! Talk! 04:44, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Hey Liz. The bot is currently going through the categories and updating {{year by category}}. The categories that were moved are listed at WP:CFD/W/L while they're still processing. — JJMC89 04:48, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
The bot moved 1938 to 1992 from Category:Years in African football to Category:African football by year. The old category still has 1993 onwards and the new category was not created. I haven't seen the move listed anywhere (I don't object to the move). PrimeHunter (talk) 15:45, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
That was my fault. I've reverted them back to the original category. It should probably be moved for consistency with the others though. — JJMC89 01:04, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, JJMC89. And God bless bots who do so much manual work for us so we don't have to. ;-) Liz Read! Talk! 03:00, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Infobox Nepal district[edit]

A bit surprised at this close. Sure, there was a clear majority for deletion, but no arguments were given other than the generic opinion that consolidating infoboxes if a good idea. There were specific arguments why consolidating the infobox in this particular case would be a bad idea, and none of them were addressed. I'm not interested in taking this any further (all transclusions appear to have already been removed, so it's going to be quite an effort to do anything about it), but I don't like what this says about our discussion culture. I mean, why do we bother having these discussions at all, if the arguments don't seem to matter? – Uanfala (talk) 10:52, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

The others didn't agree with you. I do wish people would actually discuss instead of just polling though, especially when it comes to rebutting points others have made. — JJMC89 23:05, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
So that's the GIGO argument then? You know it works both ways though: people aren't going to have much of an incentive to discuss matters and present arguments if the closer of the discussion is going to let them have their way anyway if they're in the majority and completely ignore them if they aren't. – Uanfala (talk) 09:19, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
@JJMC89, it was Uanfala that didn't discuss in the first place.
  1. The proposal said: "Subst:itution will reduce the maintenance overhead, reduce the cognitive burden for editors, and enable articles to benefit more immediately from improvements to the current parent template" - and s/he wrote "Is there any problem that this is trying to solve?".
  2. S/he wrote "sex and literacy" is important in that part of Asia. It was replied that this data also exists outside Nepal and the parameters could be added to IB settlement directly. Fact checking revealed that the parameters were use on 9 articles. Sic: 9! For these "important" parameters. And it was never explained why they would only be relevent on the district level and not the others. Looks all more like trolling. Also "if an article gets created about the sex ratio in Nepal (the way there is one for India), then it can be linked with a single edit" - if the parameter would be in IB setttlement one would not need any specific edit in other infoboxes. Complete nonsense.
89.12.203.15 (talk) 07:20, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Undo edit[edit]

I need it if you can't find the lyrics. If you undo it again you will get blocked.— Preceding unsigned comment added by CuteDolphin712 (talkcontribs) 12:44, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)@CuteDolphin712: You do realize that JJMC89 is a Wikipedia administrator which means if he undid one of your edits then he probably had a very good policy or guideline based reason for doing so. In addition, some of the comments you made on your user page about another editor named Diannaa being a vandal could be seen as a personal attack and it's good thing that you removed that comment. Vandalism has a very specific meaning when it comes to Wikipedia which means you need to be really careful when accusing others of vandalism as explained in Wikipedia:Avoid the word "vandal". Just in case you didn't know, Diannaa is also a Wikipedia administrator and if she removed any content from a page, then she too most likely had a very good policy or guideline based reason for doing so. If someone makes an edit that you don't understand, then it's OK to ask them to explain why; pretty much all administrators will be happy to explain exactly why they made a certain edit; it's not, however, very wise to going around accusing a Wikipedia administrator of wrongdoing just because you don't understand or don't agree with something they did because, unlike you or me, an administrator can actually block another editor for making false accusations or for other types of disruption. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:01, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
First, stop putting copyright lyrics on Wikipedia pages. We do not permit them. Second, your vandalism and disruptive editing will lead to a block if you don't stop. — JJMC89 22:46, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
And someone besides me is trying to vandalize the page. I don't understand why the lyrics are copyright! Maybe due to controversy?--CuteDolphin712 (talk) 14:29, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
@CuteDolphin712: Vandalism has a specific definition when it comes to Wikipedia editing; so, the first thing you need to do is make sure as best as you can that an edit is actually vandalism as explained in Wikipedia:Vandalism#Types of vandalism and Wikipedia:Vandalism#What is not vandalism. Sometimes editors make edits that we may not think are improvements or that we may not understand, but that doesn't necessary make such editors vandals. If after taking a close look at the edit and at relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, you still think the edit is vandalism, please follow the advice given in Wikipedia:Vandalism# How to respond to vandalism. Some types of vandalism you may be able to undo yourself, other types might require administrator assistance. As long as you assume good faith and try to resolve the issue in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, you should be OK. You only find yourself having problems if you start accussing others of being a vandal or undoing edits as vandalism, when neither is really the case.
As for lyrics, pretty much all creative work is going to be considered to be protected by copyright unless it clearly states it's not or it clearly is not eligible for copyright protection for one reason or another (i.e. Wikipedia:Public domain). Artists who paint pictures, authors who write books, poets who write poems, playwrites who write plays, musicians who make music, and songwriters who write lyrics, etc. all create new works that are almost always going to be considered protected by copyright. It might be possible to include certain lines from a poem, play or even a song in a Wikipedia article per MOS:QUOTE, but almost always it's never going to be OK to include all of the lyrics of a song in article for copyright reasons as explained in MOS:LYRICS. In some cases, you may find the lyrics posted (either partially or in their entirety) on some other website, but that's not really Wikipedia's direct concern. If you're going to add content to Wikipedia, you're going to have to do so in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:57, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Removal of File:Natsumeatari.png from article[edit]

Hi JJMC89. Your bot seems to have removed the image in the headline from the infobox for Natsume (company) for lacking a NFUR, even though it has one on the description page (in fact the bot fixed it pointing to Natsume before removing it from the article). I've gone ahead and undid that edit since I don't see any reason for it to have been removed, but I just want to make sure that a) it doesn't happen again and b) that if there is a problem with it, it's made more clear what it is so I can avoid repeating it in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonictrey (talkcontribs) 21:14, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

That was my fault. I was testing something and screwed up the order of operations. The link on the file page was the only thing that should have been changed. — JJMC89 22:43, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Edit warring[edit]

For any pages you've been edit warring me on, I've explained my justification for my edits, which you seem to have ignored. Can you answer my issues? If not, I'm going to revert the edits and it's you, not me, who may be in danger of being blocked from editing. Buh6173 (talk) 04:47, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Per policy: The creator of a page may not remove a speedy deletion tag from it.WP:CSD Further, the template instructs if you think the image should not be deleted, please discuss the matter with the editor who placed this template on the image. You can also place comments on the image talk page. — JJMC89 04:55, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
I've initiated discussion on the image's talk page. Buh6173 (talk) 05:00, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Replied there. — JJMC89 05:13, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

2019 European Parliament election in Bulgaria[edit]

Hey there, I reverted the party thumbnail edit before I realized the bot account was tied to an administrator one, apologies for that. But why is it that these specific images cannot feature on the opinion poll table, yet they are placed within the boxes on the respective parties' Wiki pages? Skycycle (talk) 17:30, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

All uses of non-free media must comply with the non-free content policy. In this case, there is no non-free use rationale for the article in question (criterion 10c). Even if there were, such use wouldn't satisfy criterion 8, see WP:NFTABLE and WP:NFC#CS. — JJMC89 19:05, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Me botching up a move[edit]

Hi JJMC89

Can you help a dolt? I was trying to move the article Iron Eagle on the Attack to Iron Eagle IV the actual theatrical release title of a feature film, where Iron Eagle on the Attack was the DVD title when the film finished its limited theatrical release. I accidentally made the move title: Education Program:Iron Eagle IV because I did not notice the drop down menu had listed the title as "education program". Can you change the article title to Iron Eagle IV. Many thanks. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 18:28, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 23:09, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, I'm not around much right now, but Anthony has taken care of it. — JJMC89 19:01, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Infobox townlands[edit]

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 May 15#Template:Infobox townlands - could you close it? 77.11.54.17 (talk) 19:37, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

 Done — JJMC89 03:15, 24 May 2019 (UTC)


Hi, thanks for closing this TfD. Just a question though: why should the template be replaced with {{infobox settlement}} rather than {{Infobox UK place}}? Thanks! – Uanfala (talk)

This was explained in the discussion. 77.183.25.35 (talk) 14:43, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
The only thing that was said against using Infobox UK place was a claim that it isn't used on NI articles. And that was shown to be incorrect. – Uanfala (talk) 18:54, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
You are not stating the truth. Are you doing that on purpose, i.e. are you lying? 89.12.15.31 (talk) 06:55, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Infobox_Prefecture_Japan[edit]

Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2019_May_16#Template:Infobox_Prefecture_Japan - a wrapper with just 49 transclusions. Discussion is only about these 49, not about the 1000+ transclusions of Infobox city Japan. (Japan one of the few countries with more than one wrapper.). 77.183.25.35 (talk) 14:42, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Note: Uanfala seems to watch your page. Only after I wrote here, s/he went to vote Keep. 89.12.15.31 (talk) 06:56, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Thomas Asline Ward[edit]

I was about to create an article on this chap rather than delete his entry in Ward (surname), and find that one has been deleted, possibly by you. He was editor of the Sheffield Independent and kept a diary, later published, which may now be a source for history of Sheffield. He was mentioned in a poem about reformers by Ebenezer Elliott. Doug butler (talk) 16:09, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Psychic IP![edit]

Regarding spam1, spam2. Okay, the weird thing is I was just looking at merging List of Presidents of Ethiopia with President of Ethiopia not 10 minutes ago, I kid-you-fuckin-not. I mean, what are the odds! Imagine my shock. (I see you are out of town, but I had to get it out my system.) El_C 08:26, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

@El_C Why they were doing this? Masum Reza📞 09:07, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Who knows. The mystery of psychic IPs runs deep! El_C 09:09, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
So true. Masum Reza📞 09:12, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

No point in updating Listeria lists[edit]

Hoi, when a picture is used in a Listeria list, the image is on Commons and it is used in Wikidata. So no, you have it wrong and you cannot permanently remove something from a Listeria list permanently. By definition. Fix Commons and Listeria will follow. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 15:52, 26 May 2019 (UTC)