User talk:Locke Cole

• Eat.
• Brush teeth.
• Have a better day.
• Repeat as necessary.

―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 11:47, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I neglected bullet 5:

• Consider permanent/long-term semi-retirement. Set narrower boundaries for your Wikipedia participation, and stay within them for the most part. It works great for me, and we have a lot in common. (There are other external factors contributing to my success with this game change, so YMMV.) ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 05:23, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I'm taking things a day at a time for the moment, but longer breaks may not be the worst idea. —Locke Cole • t • c 18:14, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not speaking of wikibreaks. Rather, just dialing it back, duration TBD but extended. "Semi-retirement" is the term I use for that. ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 05:50, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bullet 6:

• Serenity Prayer. Learn it. Love it. Live it. If this continues I'm sending you a bill. ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 15:08, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Final Fantasy VI (SFC retail box art).svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:29, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and thanks for your recent participation in AfD. I would like to hear your thoughts about the process. Please check this survey if you are willing to respond.Czarking0 (talk) 01:56, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Tom94022 (talk) 18:47, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Locke Cole. Per your request, your account has been granted temporary-account-viewer rights. You are now able to reveal the IP addresses of individuals using temporary accounts that are not visible to the general public. This is very sensitive information that is only to be used to aid in anti-abuse workflows. Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer for more information on this user right. It is important to remember:

• You must not share IP address data with someone who does not have the same access permissions unless disclosure is permissible as per guidelines listed at Foundation:Policy:Wikimedia Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy.
• Access must not be used for political control, to apply pressure on editors, or as a threat against another editor in a content dispute. There must be a valid reason to investigate a temporary user. Note that using multiple temporary accounts is not forbidden, so long as they are not used in violation of policies (for example, block or ban evasion).

It is also important to note that the following actions are logged for others to see:

• When a user accepts the preference that enables or disables IP reveal for their account.
• Revealing an IP address of a temporary account.
• Listing the temporary accounts that are associated with one or more IP addresses (using the CIDR notation format).

Remember, even if a user is violating policy, avoid revealing personal information if possible. Use temporary account usernames rather than disclosing IP addresses directly, or give information such as same network/not same network or similar. If you do not want the user right anymore then please ask me or another administrator and it will be removed for you. You may also voluntarily give up access at any time by visiting Special:Preferences. Happy editing! —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:32, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you and noted for future reference. —Locke Cole • t • c • b 18:36, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article Duane Roberts has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:SINGLEEVENT seems to apply here - sources only now exist due to his death, and not able for perhaps inventing the frozen burrito. (I don't see co-owning the hotel as generating any broad coverage from the past).

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ZimZalaBim ^talk 21:49, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. 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 2025 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) 00:18, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Explain please. Many images taken from the Mint's website have been deleted at Commons as they were taken by a third-party contractor from whom the Mint has acquired the copyright. Wehwalt (talk) 17:49, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notwithstanding Commons being... Commons, even per Commons:Determining if U.S. coins are free to use and, more specifically, User:Mysterymanblue/Copyright statuses of U.S. coins and medals, the observe design is PD. There is a question of the reverse "shield" design, but the images I used at Lincoln cent were only the obverse (PD) side of the coin. I think the design is likely copyrighted for the reverse side, but as there's other artists after the designer (the engraver, one could argue the person minting the coin, and then finally the photographer), I think there's more to this than just simply deferring to the designer. It appears not everyone has gotten the memo either... I also don't give a lot of weight to anything said at Commons, after all, these are the same people who think file attribution is optional.

Also, you put "FFD?" as the title here, I was referring to WP:FFD in case that wasn't clear. Sorry for the alphabet soup response. —Locke Cole • t • c • b 18:17, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for that. No, I wasn't talking about the copyright of the obverse at all, I agree that it is unquestionably out of copyright. I was talking about the copyright of the photograph of the coin, assuming that is a photograph and not done with graphics. Many photographs of US mint coins have been deleted because they were taken by a third-party vendor of the Mint, a firm called Burwell & Burwell. See here and the footnoted deletion requests]. The image pages say that the images were created by federal government employees. How was this determined? Wehwalt (talk) 18:36, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you view the auction PDF (available here, archive here), skip to page 11 where these images are presented with the caption "(Rendering courtesy of the United States Mint)". This obviously includes the obverse and reverse, which at least, according to Commons, means the shield images aren't PD, but unless it's your position that the rendering was done by someone besides a government employee...? FWIW, I've reached out to the Mint directly to try and get additional clarity on who produced the images. —Locke Cole • t • c • b 21:53, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think given that so many images were deleted as copyvio, yes, it has to be shown that it was a Mint employee who took the pictures of the coins. Wehwalt (talk) 14:27, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As indicated above, Stack's Bowers refers to the images as "renders", and to me that makes it far more likely to be the work of a government employee (someone rendering it in software vs. taking a photograph of the physical object). I've reached out to the Mint, but as it was late on Friday I don't expect to hear back until next week at the absolute earliest. As to the shield images specifically, the discussion doesn't appear to have involved many people, and surprisingly nobody bothered to look up if a copyright registration was issued or not. I'd also argue that the shield design falls short of COM:TOO as it is simple shapes and text.

FWIW, the Commons contributor who went on the deletion crusade freely admits they are not a lawyer, and neither am I, but I find it difficult to believe a work for hire where the Mint ends up with the copyright is somehow a loophole around 17 USC § 105. These are taxpayer funded works, which is precisely what § 105 is meant to protect. —Locke Cole • t • c • b 20:50, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on File:Wikipedia Alphabet Soup.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, as it exhibits signs of having been generated by an AI model with no clear human review. Text produced by these applications can be unsuitable for an encyclopedia and output must be carefully checked. For further information, see the section G15 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think these signs were incorrectly identified and you assert that you did carefully check the content, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Additionally – if you would like to create an article but find it difficult, please ask for help at the Teahouse. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 23:24, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

3df has given you a brownie! Brownies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a brownie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Locke, I wanted to let you know that I liked your image and appreciate your work. I noticed some editors being, maybe, unnecessarily cold towards you. Even though you should be getting credited for realizing the idea in the first place. Regardless of which image ends up on the page, it is a better page because of your actions. It's unlikely that a photo shoot would have happened without you! There just wouldn't be a picture.

On one occasion, a friend and I spent 12 hours shooting a sandwich, only for the final picture to not end up being used in the article (did not go to RFC). I don't know how much work you put into your image; from the correct acronyms on the label, I'm guessing it was at least more than five minutes. But if you feel anything like I did back then, then I wish I really could bake you a brownie. See you around - 3df (talk) 04:52, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I do not feel that you are handling this gracefully. That some people might have been crass does not give you a pass to start making heavy accusations and name-calling in an RFC. Respectfully, I recommend retracting all of that and apologizing forthwith, and maybe sleeping on it and coming back tomorrow. 3df (talk) 06:41, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's always nice to be bullied over something trivial. I was reminded of how I sought out the person who first used the "alphabet soup" phrase to thank them, and then I contrast it with the behavior I just witnessed. I'm sure ArtemisiaGentileschiFan and Dot.py are very proud of "their" work... and now that it's obvious that canvassing and civility are irrelevant, it makes me wonder what the point is continuing here really is. —Locke Cole • t • c • b 00:46, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 15:10, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for continuing incivility and personal attacks, including calling your opponents "bullies". Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:23, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]