W?F	This Wikimedian opposes rebranding the WMF as Wikipedia.

This user opposes the Wikimedia Foundation's arbitrary, opaque, and dictatorial office-banning of administrators when the community and ArbCom are more than capable of handling the issue themselves.

Welcome!

Hello, Alexis Jazz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! RJFJR (talk) 18:33, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Archive 1

Some of your images or media files have been listed for discussion. Please see Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2021 January 1 if you are interested in preserving their usage.

• File:Semnan Damghan train collision.jpg
• File:Semnan Damghan train collision wreckage.jpg

Thank you. Wikiacc (¶) 09:10, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Minister of defense Mohammad Hossein Jalali.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. Wikiacc (¶) 09:13, 1 January 2021 (UTC) Wikiacc (¶) 09:13, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Second World War Memorial in San Marino.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. Wikiacc (¶) 09:26, 1 January 2021 (UTC) Wikiacc (¶) 09:26, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I noticed you responded to my recent VMware image move request. Since this is a personalized request, and you know exactly what you need to do ;p, could you please move File:VMWare Fusion 7.0 Icon.png as well? Thanks. Silikonz (alternate account) (💬│🖋) 09:36, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Silikonz-alt:  Done — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 15:02, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a thank you to all contributors to Wikipedia, who are excellent at writing correct English. (After all, they are the ones who pick up much of the slack when others add content imperfectly.) Regards from a Scandinavian i.p. ! 89.8.71.4 (talk) 11:46, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your concerns about me not filing enough rename media’s, however Alexis, I did nab both this & this today. I really do put in effort. Celestina007 (talk) 00:10, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was having the hardest time bringing that file into full compliance with all of the pertinent Wikipedia protocol, specifically the file data and display sizes, some red squiggly lines that were appearing in it (because I had imported it from the original PDF to Word, without also doing an edit check, and did a screen capture on it to be able to save it as an image that I could upload), and then that bot "chasing me" (as you said) because I hadn't specified the origin or creator (which I had, I just had forgotten that one bracket, as you noticed and corrected, earlier up the page which threw the code off for the rest of the page which apparently did not register with that bot), so Thank You. I am not the very greenest of Wikipedians, but I know I can always learn more, especially from one so obviously proficient and advanced as you. QuakerIlK (talk) 18:16, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adjusting the photo. There is a discussion on the talk page as to whether the photo should be reverted to the old one, and one editor feels that it is too dark and his facial features are not so clear. This is why I tried to adjust it. Amirah talk 14:16, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2021 February 15 § Orphaned files uploaded by Krise. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:02, 15 February 2021 (UTC)Template:Z48[reply]

If an editor claims the right of an image has been transferred to them and the owner of he image has sent a mail to the OTRS to this effect, as non OTRS volunteers, Is there a way this claim can be verified? Celestina007 (talk) 23:12, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Celestina007: Essentially no, we are supposed to trust OTRS and the permission templates added to file pages by OTRS volunteers. (OTRS doesn't always manage to sniff out copyvios, so on occasion this is problematic, but what are you gonna do?) Obviously, if the identity of the owner is publicly known and they can be contacted off-wiki, you could attempt that. Also if you have severe doubts you could report your findings to OTRS, it's possible they retract the permission if you can prove it to be fraudulent. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 23:47, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

that does make sense. Thanks for taking your time to explain this. Celestina007 (talk) 23:54, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Alexis Jazz. 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.

Celestina007 (talk) 17:55, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thank you for all the support and having faith on my contributions. Best wishes — Amkgp 💬 17:34, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#User:Carlossuarez46 and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Hog Farm _Talk 04:16, 30 March 2021 (UTC) Hog Farm _Talk 04:17, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Did you really need to say "I'm sure responsabilidad isn't in your dictionary either."? User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 05:10, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@力: Yeah okay that could be shorter, changed it a bit. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 05:17, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! Two questions:

1. Why do people want to be a party to the case? Is there some benefit (maybe glory) in being a party to the case? What about the drawbacks? Is it possible that users other than Carlos face sanctions in this particular case?
2. What does "resolving by motion" mean? How does it differ from a full case?

Thanks 4nn1l2 (talk) 15:03, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@4nn1l2: He accused me pretty directly of conspiring in secret against him, I think that makes my statement relevant. Can't speak for others, I am unaware of benefits. But there is no community-based desysop vote process on enwiki (afaik), that might be why that ArbCom case kinda seems to turn into one.

I'm not the best person to ask as I have little experience with ArbCom. But wikt:motion should clarify: A parliamentary action to propose something. A similar procedure in any official or business meeting. The way I see it, a proposal is made and voted on. Otherwise, there's a bunch of stuff with numbers and timetables and having tea with the queen. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 16:48, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• @4nn1l2: Being a "party" mostly means that you're one of the people directly involved. Like a lot of what happens at ArbCom, it's quasi-legal language borrowed from English court/judicial terms. As far as I am aware, ArbCom can pretty much sanction anybody, as long as it's the English Wikipedia. Resolving something by motion means that the committee feels the problem is simple enough that they can hold a quick vote on what to do, rather than having a full case, which requires several long steps and could take several weeks to conclude. GMG^talk 16:57, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Several motions have been proposed at the case request you are a party to. If you would like to comment on them, you may do so in your section at the case request. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 19:10, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A request for arbitration that you were a party to has been resolved by motion. A permanent link to the motion can be found here and the announcement can be found here. For the Arbitration Committee, GeneralNotability (talk) 02:58, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, a suspended case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Carlossuarez46. For the Arbitration Committee, GeneralNotability (talk) 00:39, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I have been working on the Wikipedia:Licensing update on many wikis and I noticed that Category:Wikipedia license migration candidates still get new files. I thought that was just due to mistakes. Then I made User:MGA73/sandbox to look for orphan GFDL-files to see if they are still useful or if they should be deleted. And as you noticed I nominated many for deletion. But I found a few recent files so I found out that it was not due to mistakes that files are uploaded as GFDL. My guess is as pointed out that some users use GFDL as a way to avoid commercial-use or as a way to keep the files away from Commons. I know that not all like Commons so that I can't fix. But I think we can do something about the non-commercial trick. But perhaps there are any good reasons why someone prefer GFDL. I just don't get them. --MGA73 (talk) 10:47, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]