User talk:Jameslwoodward
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikimedia Commons, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Commons itself. The original talk page is located at http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jameslwoodward
My formal name is James L. Woodward, but I prefer to be called "Jim"
Closing an RfdeA[edit]
Dear Jameslwoodward,
Commons:Administrators/Requests/Kallerna (de-adminship 2) has ended now since 01:43, 15 January 2024.
To prevent more votes after scheduled time the nomination is probably worth a protection and an archive.
Thanks for your attention. Best regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:59, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
OK It seems the rules are different from there, so no rush. Have a good day! -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:23, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Hmm, if I counted correctly there was only 19 remove votes and not 20. (one was striked) --Zache (talk) 16:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Right you are, thank you. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:38, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Jim,
- The last two votes were posted after the scheduled time. Not that it changed anything, but IMO that should be corrected. Yann (talk) 19:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
- As you say, it doesn't change anything, but I'm not sure you are correct. Although there is no guidance on this for de-adminships, the guide for admin votes says, "Bureaucrats may, at their discretion, extend the period of an RfA if they feel that it will be helpful in better determining community consensus." Although this case more inattention than intended on the part of the crats, it still seems clear that votes made after the deadline can and should be counted. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:36, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Closure in Undeletion requests[edit]
Hi, Jameslwoodward. You wrote here "Below the ToO and also past the copyright period" (which apparently, correct me if I'm wrong, are reasons for the file not to be beleted) but yet you closed the request as not done, and the file remained... deleted. Was this an oversight or I'm missing something? Strakhov (talk) 20:04, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Done Good catch, thank you. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:19, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Recovery of formation impact image[edit]
sent via talk to you link by Cresterest:
The following is a follow up question to a now closed undeletion request:
Ca (talk) 01:53, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The deleted photo is not a photo of a crashed airplane / airplane crash site. Thuresson(talk) 16:28, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply] Comment The photo depicts four airplanes flying together in a tight formation. Abzeronow (talk) 18:06, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, can you describe the “tight formation,” i.e. was it line-abrest? Can you somehow show me the deleted formation image? Also you may be more experienced on Wikipedia than I— I can’t find the edit where the formation crash ground scar I was trying to replace with my errant undeletion request was lost from this article. I would like to place that image to the same location where it was lost from. Maybe it was because of a now-dead link? Cresterest (talk) 02:24, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can see the image at
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/320811173426378057/
This is the only image that has been removed from the WP:EN article 1982 Thunderbirds Indian Springs Diamond Crash. You can see that by examining the history for that article for April 2018 (click on View History near the top of the page). . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:42, 23 January 2024 (UTC)