User talk:Explicit/Archive 5
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
Re:Possibly unfree file and OTRS
With something that old unanswered, I'd be inclined to say no email was received- a quick search is not throwing anything up. I'd be inclined to delete it. J Milburn (talk) 23:41, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Heisman Trophy winners
Thanks for quickly coming along and throwing the protection up on the page. It was desperately needed, with the glut of kids thinking it was witty to see themselves listed as a Heisman winner. --fuzzy510 (talk) 02:16, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- No problem at all. WP:RPP climbed it's way to the top of my watchlist, so I was there in a jiffy. — ξxplicit 02:19, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Sock help
Hello. I see that you blocked PhoneBed (talk · contribs) as a sock. Is TheDopestEthiopian (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) from the same stable? Angus McLellan (Talk) 02:24, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- I don't believe that PhoneBed (sockmaster being TrEeMaNsHoE (talk · contribs)) would be TheDopestEthiopian. Socking from this user always follows the same characteristics. For example, TrEeMaNsHoE's usernames being tends to be random items (as seen in Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of TrEeMaNsHoE) and he likes to revert articles to his preferred versions. I find it unlikely that he would talk to himself, as he isn't exactly the type of user who would try to pretend to be someone else. Last, but certainly not least, TheDopestEthiopian would have come up in the sockpuppet cases if it were a sock of TrEeMaNsHoE, as TheDopestEthiopian was created early October, while the first checkuser case was initiated in later October. — ξxplicit 02:35, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- Makes sense! Many thanks for that. Angus McLellan (Talk) 02:54, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Soke Kubota Takayuki
Thanks you for cleaning up this mess. If you have time, could you look at the moves in this diff [ https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=Sensei_0208 ]? It seems that this new user and his sock puppets are trying to establish a different Japanese naming convention from the MOS. Thanks! jmcw (talk) 09:57, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hmm, if there's disruptive sockpuppetry going on, you should consider taking the issue to WP:SPI. Has the user been informed of the manual of style? — ξxplicit 21:07, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- Both users have been warned about sock puppetry [1] [2]. Sensei_2105 has be brought to ANI [3]; sock puppetry was mentioned.
- I am still AGF: I suspect a young, impulsive editor who might still learn our rules - I would like a firm implementation of wiki rules as a lesson. jmcw (talk) 11:37, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Empty category
I've restored Category:Article Incubator candidate for articlespace, it's used by a WikiProject. It'd have been better for you to have checked with me (as I created the category) or at WT:Article Incubator before deleting it. I've added the emptycat template now. Fences&Windows 22:30, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- The category was at CAT:SD at the time I deleted it. I wasn't aware it was meant for a WikiProject. Sorry about that. — ξxplicit 22:36, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Re; your closing summary on CFD
No you don't :) On first viewing it was a sensible proposal, and I can see why you suggested it for renaming. It looks like the whole dance by type/nationality tree's pretty messy, so it was good to get someone giving some of it a once-over, whether the renaming suggestion succeeded or not. Grutness...wha? 00:02, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Would you
Be interested to join THIS? --Legolas (talk2me) 11:17, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Will you delete?
Would you please delete Wikipedia:WikiProject Louisiana/Stubs? It is obselete and I moved the existing stubs to here. Thank you. Btilm 22:18, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
- I don't think that can be deleted outright (either by WP:CSD or otherwise). It might be worth taking it miscellany for deletion. — ξxplicit 22:35, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) I'd say it could be deleted as G6 if all incoming links have been removed (they haven't) and all content has been relocated (you could probably use {{deprecated}} since it is a subpage that is transcluded on the main page and thus "template-y"). Regards SoWhy 22:41, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Request to reopen
Although the posting editor posted notification [5] of this category for discussion for renaming [6] only one editor of many who consistently work on TM related articles posted a comment. I, at least, was not aware of the discussion or would have posted. I would like to request that the discussion be reopened, and I will post notification on the talk pages of the TM related articles to ensure all editors are aware of the discussion. If you don't feel you can do this I can always open a new discussion. Thanks for your effeorts and consideration. (olive (talk) 15:49, 18 December 2009 (UTC))
- Hi there Littleolive oil, I'm afraid I can't reopen the discussion as there was no object prior to its closing and the category has already been renamed. If you disagree with the category's new name, you should consider bringing that up to WP:CfD with your rationale. I'm assuming you would have opposed the suggested renaming? — ξxplicit 23:14, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
"When nominating a category, it's helpful to add a notice on the talk page of the most-closely related article. Doing so would not only extend an additional courtesy, but possibly also bring in editors who know more about the subject at hand."
Lady Gaga discography
There is an ongoing discussion at Talk:Lady Gaga discography#Other appearance concerning the appropriateness of including Lady Gaga's credits as songwriter on tracks performed by other vocalists. As you have previously weighed in on the "discogrophy" vs. "songography" question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Discographies/style, I would like to invite you to contribute your opinion to the debate. --Peter Farago (talk) 08:29, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
Right Round as Kesha's featured single.
This is not correct, and I've explained that Atlantic Records does not consider it as such. Chase wc91 23:49, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Justin Bieber category
Why did you remove Justin Bieber's songs out of the Category:Justin Bieber? Candyo32 (talk) 03:24, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
- Because only Category:Justin Bieber songs belong on the articles about the songs—that's its entire purpose. When a subcategory like this is used, the parent category (in this case, being Category:Justin Bieber) is omitted. — ξxplicit 03:47, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
- Well if that's the cast, is there really any purpose for the category, seeing that there are categories for his audio samples, albums, images & songs? Candyo32 (talk) 03:55, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
- They are useful if there are several related articles. For example, take a look at Category:Michael Jackson; it's currently filled with 56 articles, none being albums, songs and so on, because the subcategories take care of that. It also comes in handy when there are multiple subcategories, as it becomes more convenient to browse through those. — ξxplicit 03:59, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
CfD closures
Hi, regarding Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 December 7#Category:Neighbourhoods of Gdańsk and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 December 7#Polish boroughs - you closed the discussions to rename, but the renaming hasn't happened except for one of the boroughs categories - could you set the wheels in motion for the others? Thanks,--Kotniski (talk) 20:29, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hmm, that's strange. I went through the history over at WP:CFDW and found I did add them. Perhaps another admin mistakenly removed them as completed. I'll add them shortly. — ξxplicit 20:39, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Speedy, massive subcategory renaming - Rugby union players
Merry Christmas!
Recently, the Category:Rugby union footballers was changed to Category:Rugby_union_players, but unfortunately all the subcats have not been done. I have asked the question at the CfD talk page as well, but are you perhaps aware of an easier way to do this huge renaming. Apart from the 87 subcategories, there are a host of other categories that also contain the "footballer" term, and need to be renamed... Any chance of a bot doing the hard labour? - Sahmejil (talk) 12:54, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hmm, I'm not aware of any bot that can perform this task. I haven't downloaded AWB onto this computer and sort of forgot how to use it. I wouldn't mind doing it manually, though it would take me a few days to complete the task and a expect big tip afterward.
— ξxplicit 06:20, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
Request to take a second look: deletion of File:Walter kamba2.jpg
In regard to the above deletion, made 16 December 2009, can I request you to reconsider deletion as the reason stated "Non-free picture of a living guy" is erroneous: the subject died in 2007. Babakathy (talk) 07:53, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
- Ahh, I see, the article lacked the death date (and birth date) at the time of the deletion. Restored and added back into the articles. Regards. — ξxplicit 06:20, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
Deleted Killing Joke images?
Why did you delete those images? we already had a discussion on the images and how i had legitimate permission to use them in the first place. they should not have been nominated for deletion anyways because i explained that the owner of the copyrights from Discogs.com gave me special permission to use them for wikipedia use only. can you please explain why i was not notified of this deletion beforehand and why i was not given a chance to explain myself? this is highly unfair and out of line. --J miester25 (talk) 15:33, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
- Could you please specify which images you're referring to? I've deleted thousands, it would be quite a task if tried to figure out which ones you're speaking of. Additionally, if you received permission to use the images only for Wikipedia, theses images would fall under speedy deletion for improper license as images must be licensed to be used on Wikipedia and for commercial purposes. — ξxplicit 22:25, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
Deletion of alternate album cover
I'm a bit new to this but I was wondering how a discussion is concluded in the case of deletion requests. In the case of the alternate album cover deletion proposal Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2009_December_19#File:UnitedNotions_ToshikoAkiyoshi_FSR.jpg I see the original proposal for deletion (with a justification based on what was incorrectly presumed by the submitter to be the only image differences - in logo and font) and I see (only) one fairly lengthy, but I hope rationale, response (from me) to keep. I see no other discussion. Apparently you found my keep arguments unconvincing. Or perhaps I "buried" my keep vote too far down into the text - or I failed to check some "keep" box? I'm certainly willing to accept a deletion if that is an appropriate conclusion but I was a bit surprised at the lack of discussion before the deletion. Also, comparing this deletion to others proposed on the same day (some deleted, some still under discussion) I feel no better enlightened on the appropriate application of Wikipedia non-free content criteria in these 'alternate album cover' cases. It still seems a bit ambiguous / arbitrary. Many thanks for any insight you can provide. Pugetbill (talk) 18:04, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
- Well, the nominator basically argued that the alternate cover wasn't significantly different from the main one because the small differences could be described with text alone. Although you did argue to keep the image, you did manage to add a textual description of the alternate cover, making the alternate cover fail WP:NFCC#1. So, essentially, you resolved the issue. Think about it this way—does the reader really need an additional image to show that an additional person was added on the album cover? The nominator didn't, and you adequately described that in the article, which resulted in the deletion of the image. — ξxplicit 22:25, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi Explicit. Please be a little more careful when using automated tools such as twinkle to delete files. For instance, the fair-use dispute tag placed on File:Free music logo.png does not provide a valid reason to justify the file's deletion per WP:CSD#F7. Rather, this issue could be addressed by placing a {{Non-free reduce}} tag on the page (which was already done). -FASTILY (TALK) 00:12, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
- Whoops, I must have misread that. My mistake, I'll be more careful next time. For what it's worth, I believe it was orphaned, so I there isn't too much harm done.
— ξxplicit 00:16, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Please help
I posted a question at WP:HELP DESK here however they didnot give me a concrete answer. Could you please take a look? --Legolas (talk2me) 11:36, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hmm, it seems that the Madonna WikiProject assessments have been updated, but the Lady Gaga assessments don't exist yet. I'd wait another 24 hours, just in case the bot missed it. — ξxplicit 21:41, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
The Singles Collection cover
I do not believe your rationale for keeping File:TheSinglesCollectionCover.jpg was correct and I have thus taken the issue here. Feel free to comment. Chase wc91 06:59, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Explicit! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current 936 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:
- Neo Da Matrix - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 06:56, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Page deletion after blanking
How come you deleted my page so quickly ? Does wikipedia provide you a tracking mechanism ? Or are you a bot ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexsoddy (talk • contribs) 19:26, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, I find articles tagged for speedy deletion in this category. The fact that I found it right away was sort of a hit or miss thing, as I randomly click on links to see the rationale. Before the article was deleted, you had blanked it, and someone had tagged it with {{db-g7}}, which assumes you would like the article deleted as you blanked it. If I were a bot, I'd be far more efficient. — ξxplicit 19:36, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
RPP
Can you look over my RPP for Template:Same-sex unions? It's been over 14 hours, thanks. CTJF83 chat 19:54, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Mass deletion
Many thanks. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:57, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for
Helping me with the Gaga wikiproject bot. Could you also take a look at this FLC? Its huge! --Legolas (talk2me) 08:51, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- Will chip in later today or tomorrow. I'm also going through the featured content venue—Aaliyah is going through the process as we speak. — ξxplicit 21:31, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Audio clips
The concern isn't length but bit-rate..
If they already below about 96Kbps in bit-rate terms ( The guideline is technically 64kbps but this was reckoned to be too low on IRC), then the non-free reduce tag can be removed. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:38, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Liam Frost image
Hello,
Just wondering why you deleted the Liam Frost 2nd Album promo image...I am the subject of this article, and under my label Emperor Records, I own the rights to this image. If you could explain to me what I've done wrong here, it would be very much appreciated. I'm relatively new to this.
Thanks for reading
Liam
Pitseleh1983 (talk) 12:47, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi there, the file you uploaded—File:Liam Frost 2nd album.jpg—was tagged with a speedy deletion tag when you uploaded it because you indicated that the file may only be used on Wikipedia. Unfortunately, files must be released for use on Wikipedia and for commercial purposes, as part of our copyright policy regarding free images. — ξxplicit 00:23, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Jason Ricci Photo Deletion?
I'm a new contributor to Wikipedia, and I've been hired by musician Jason Ricci to maintain his wikipedia page. I have finally managed to edit and rewrite his page to pass muster, having to learn all the proper documenting and formatting rules in the long process, but I seem to be stuck on adding his photo to his page. I have read and re-read the rules and procedures, and have made more than a good faith effort to do this properly, but my photos keep getting deleted.
You deleted my most recent attempt to add a photo. My first attempt was also deleted. This puzzles and frustrates me greatly, and it certainly annoys Jason. The first photo was taken from Jason's online, public electronic press kit, abailable specifically for publicity, informational, promotional, and press usage. I do not know why it was deleted, as I can't imagine any copyright issues with something he put out there with hopes to be used publicly. This time, I tried what I thought was an even more foolproof plan, and that is to upload a picture taken by my friend at a recent local show. I have the friend's enthusiastic permission, and I have the picture in my posession.
What gives? Please help. Thanks.Blake
Blake46long (talk) 13:48, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
- In order to answer your question Blake, Wikipedia doesnot accept non-free images of living people. If you want to upload a picture of Ricci, it should be a free image released with an appropriate public domain license tag. If Ricci wants to publish his photo on Wikipedia, he needs to send his permission to permission-commons@wikimedia.org in the format present at WP:CONSENT when an administrater with an OTRS account will verify it and then you can use the image. --Legolas (talk2me) 06:27, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
A problem
Did you see my querry at Aaliyah FAC? Other than that I have a problem. Can you chime in at Talk:Paparazzi (Lady Gaga song)/GA1? A deeply biased reviewer is basically stating that the article is a pile load of shit becuase it is full of critical reviews and receptions by other people. Can you help? I'm basically in deep coma after seeing the level of biasness from this reviewer and his absurd demands like contacting the record company of Gaga for their certification of the article. :-o --Legolas (talk2me) 06:27, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of Vega Strike logo
Hello, you deleted the Vega Strike logo [7] because it was unused and non-free. It is actually an open source game i.e. a public domain artwork. It was used on the article for some time and then someone deleted the link because it wasn't a free image or something untrue. Of course logos may be used anyway, free or not for illustration purposes. I have restored the link to the logo on the article and I wonder if you would undelete it please. I will hunt it out and upload it again anyway if that's not possible but check out if you like the game is a Sourceforge project. If the license is not given properly I think I will be checking back and fix it to whatever one they are giving on Sourceforge. ~ R.T.G 18:45, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Desysop
Copied from meta. Since your SUL doesn't exist, can you please confirm this here? Thanks, Pmlineditor&inbsp;∞ 08:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
- Indeed, that was me. — ξxplicit 16:17, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
- Even if it is not permanent, I hope you have thought this through. You were just getting started... Anyway, all the best. Regards, decltype (talk) 19:52, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
- Wow, that was a quick burnout. I'm very sorry to see this! Have a nice retirement, Amalthea 09:26, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
|
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 04:31, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Selena image
The image for the Selena article is needed here on the wiki. This picture is displayed all over web-sites! So why can't wiki allow it here? And another thing just becuase this is the only article that has this picture doesn't mean that this picture is not notable it is. AJona1992 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:16, 2 February 2010 (UTC).
- The image is up for deletion because it is orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles. Per our non-free content criteria policy, non-free files must be used in at least one article (point 7). Even if this image is added back into the article, it would still fall under deletion because non-free files must be used at a minimum (point 3a). Notability is not a criteria for the use of files. — ξxplicit 21:53, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Your message
Hi there. This editor added a link to the Islamophobia article into the "See also" section of a BLP article. I then reverted the editor's edit, placing a NPOV tag on the user's talk page. The other editor then reverted my edit. I stopped my edits there, and brought the issue to both RfP and AiV. On AiV an admin wrote this: User has been incorrectly or insufficiently warned. Re-report once the user has been warned sufficiently. Next, I asked the admin for an explanation, and he wrote: You are never violating the three revert rule if you're reverting vandalism. Thus I went ahead and reverted the edit of this editor again, this time citing addition of uncourced material.
How can I now be accused of "disruptive behaviour" when I am not the one who added the controversial link to the BLP article? I am the one fighting off vandalism on that BLP article, and now I am being accused of disruptive behaviour. I asked an admin what to do, he gave me the go ahead to revert the disruptive edits, and now a different admin appears accusing me of edit-war. Could you please look into this matter in detail, and check the time of the edits to see that I am not involved in any edit war, that I am merely fighting off vandalism? Lastly, when you write "discuss your issue on the article's talk page", shouldn't this be what the other editor ought to have done in the first place before adding such a controversial link into the BLP article? Amsaim (talk) 02:01, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Amsaim, you seem to show very "problematic behaviour" by requesting page protection and Aiv for something trivial. Adding a link to See Also here do not violate BLP policy and your understanding of vandalism seem to be very immature. It doesn't matter if you consider the term Islamophobia as controversial or not. Hirsi is a prominent critic of Islam. Having a link there is NOT a statement that she is an Islamophobe, rather a balance to Criticism of Islam and abundant similar links that are alread there. Also your edit comment "addition of unsourced material" doesn't make any sense as in general, Wikilinks in See Also section do not need a reference. Or do you have an explanation why links to Irshad Manji, Wafa Sultan, Tasleema Nasreen and Criticism of Islam do not violate NPOV and are there unsourced whereas link to Islamophobia violates NPOV? In the best case you could have used the article talk page or dropped me a personal message instead of leaving some vague message that I violate NPOV, I violate 3RR etc. etc. etc. Also Zencv Whisper 13:00, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey guys, sorry for the late reply, was out last night and just got home a few minutes ago. Anywho, Amsaim, your edit summary here suggested that your reverts were based on WP:NPOV. If an edit violates this policy, it is not vandalism. Also, Fastily (talk · contribs) reanalyzed the situation and agreed that the reverts weren't vandalism, but a content dispute, as I had pointed out. In your above post, you called the edits a bias point a view, vandalism and unsourced; quite the contradiction. With the notes I left both parties, I warned you both from edit warring. Further edit warring would be considered disruptive, justifying in blocks. Luckily, neither of you have reverted further and a discussion on the talk page has commenced. Please form a consensus there before making reverts in the future concerning this issue. — ξxplicit 23:24, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- No consensus was reached. The contentious material was reinserted into the article without any consensus. I have thus reported the issue to AiN and BLPN. Amsaim (talk) 13:45, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
SuperBowl protection
You might want to jump in on this AN/I thread.
— V = I * R (Talk • Contribs) 00:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Non-Free Image
Can I replace "file" with "image"? TbhotchTalk2 Me 05:06, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Vancouver
Hi Explicit. I requested Vancouver to become semi-protected and was approved by another admin for 5 days. I requested to that admin that its expiry time match that of the article Olympics as the Olympics and Paralympics continue until the end of March. That admin has not replied to my request so I appeal to you. Many thanks. Mkdwtalk 11:09, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
- Seems that JamieS93 has replied on his talk page. — ξxplicit 19:24, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
- The semi-protection on the article Vancouver has expired and the vandalism has returned to above our normal levels. Any chance I can appeal for a semi-protection matching the Winter Olympics protection rather than submit another formal request? I doubt 5 day at a time requests will resolve this solution until the Olympic and Paralympic Games are over. Thanks, Mkdwtalk 02:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
book cover deletions
Thanks for your recent deletions there has been multiple issues with the uploaders contributions. Off2riorob (talk) 21:15, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
The Fame Monster salts redirects
Hi, I'm in the mist of doing some house cleaning and found two salted redirects pointing to the The Fame rather then the latterly created The Fame Monster article. The two redirect pages are The Fame Monster (album) and The fame monster (album), at one point you had salted The Fame Monster but then unsalted citing this news item - I post it here in the hope that it may assist recollection of the situation. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:47, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
- Unsalted and redirected both to The Fame Monster. Thanks for bringing this up. — ξxplicit 01:12, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you! Quick also :) SunCreator (talk) 01:16, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
"File:Hashomer Hatzair 2008.png"
you speedy deleted this file becouse there is one exactly the same in commons, only that becouse of copyright issues the file should and will be deleted from commons while in wikipedia it can stay becouse it is a scout organization logo. could you please undo the delete and delete the one in commons? thank you -LadyofHats (talk) 23:44, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, I deleted that file because there was an exact copy here on Wikipedia: File:Hashomer Hatzair.png. I'm not an admin at Commons, but I've marked it as a copyright violation there. Regards. — ξxplicit 23:55, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Would you please take another look at John Huldt which you recently deleted to make sure it really was the author requesting deletion or blanking the page. Thanks, PanchoS (talk) 14:22, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
- Rechecked: created and blanked by Gagewashere (talk · contribs) about 22 minutes later. I should also note that the user created the article in their userspace. — ξxplicit 19:27, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion
Hiya, I've been trying get my page off Wikipedia for years but the staff keep undoing my edits. I've lost my account password for years but could you delete my page?
Link to my user page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sina_Rahmani —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.151.120.250 (talk) 16:03, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hi there, unfortunately, I am not able to delete the page as the user has to be logged in to request deletion of their own userpage. — ξxplicit 19:27, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Deletion question
I noticed that back on February 9 you deleted File:Wangchenrinpoche.jpg that I nominated here. Perhaps you overlooked the second image File:WangchenRinpoche2.JPG by the same uploader with the identical issues that I mentioned should be deleted, but you did not delete it at the same time. Will you do it, or do I have to renominate it? Drop me a talkback when you respond. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 02:12, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hmm, I must have missed it when deleting files that day. I've gone ahead and deleted it, not much reason to wait another two weeks to come to its evident conclusion. — ξxplicit 06:53, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Artificial Intuition page deletion
I wanted to add a page for Artificial Intuition, but I see that you deleted a previous page on 4 Dec 2009 at the request of the author. Is there any way of retrieving this page to see what it was about? Is there any objection to creating a new one, if not?
Thanks.
Msml (talk) 07:01, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- I can restore the page and move it into your userspace if you'd like (for example, User:Msml/Artificial Intuition) and you can view its history and work on the page there. As long as the topic is notable, I see no reason why anyone would be against its creation. — ξxplicit 07:04, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Bot request to complete a category move
Hi Explicit
You closed Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 February 5#Category:Association_football as "rename all". All but one of the categories has been processed by the bots, but one is still stuck in the queue: Category:Football (soccer) logos to Category:Association football logos.
This one needs a bot to complete the move, as explained at Wikipedia_talk:Categories for discussion/Working#Bot_needed_to_move_Category:Football_.28soccer.29_logos_to_Category:Association_football_logos.
I have opened a request for a bot to do this, at Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 34#Bot_needed_to_change_template_parameter_for_football_logos. Please could you take a look at the bot request, and add your comment there on what you think of the request?
Thanks! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)
Can you supply more information as to why the...
license for image file: RoccoRossi-image1.jpg was revoked.
I have uploaded the exact same image again, this time however I have included different information in the tags. Please contact me via my user page or here (on your userpage) about any issues surrounding this image before it gets deleted. The article is about a candidate involed in a Toronto city mayor campaign and their campaign office has been having issues with vandalism on their candidates page. (I am merely an impartial third party trying to supply my wikipedia skills to produce fair and NPOV writing across all the articles involved into this mayoral race.) THanks Explicit! -- Contributions/Skychildandsonofthesun SKYchild 08:15, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hi there, sorry for the late reply. The file you previously uploaded—File:RoccoRossi-image1.jpg—was deleted under the third criteria for speedy deletion of files as you indicated that the image can only be used for non-commercial or educational purposes. Files must either be licensed freely or under fair use. If the image you uploaded is licensed under the public domain, CC-BY or CC-BY-SA, then the image can remain if there is a proper source to verify the license. At its current state, the new file—File:RoccoRossi-image2.jpg—has no licensed and has been marked as such; the file will be deleted in seven days if license is not provided. — ξxplicit 04:01, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
File:GajamanNona.jpg
Could you please revert this back. i ve done all the nessary steps to prevent on deletion. and pl provide me valid deletion of this image. thanks regards . (Eeriyaka (talk) 08:31, 18 February 2010 (UTC))
- The file File:GajamanNona.jpg was deleted because of the outcome of the possibly unfree files discussion. As pointed out by another, Sri Lanka does not have freedom of panorama. — ξxplicit 04:01, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
No bot flag
Any idea why Category:Football (soccer) logos to Category:Association football logos is tagged no bots on the work list? Vegaswikian (talk) 21:44, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- The category is produced by the {{Non-free logo}} template when a parameter is added, as such:
{{non-free logo|football (soccer) logos}}. Cydebot can't get through that, so it's pretty much stuck there. There's currently a bot request to get another bot running for this task, so we're waiting on that. — ξxplicit 21:54, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Can you please delete this redirect? The page should be moved like it was moved in German Wikipedia. Her official name is Nystad. --Yoda1893 (talk) 22:09, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
You deleted two images that WERE IN USE - WHY?
These two images were used in the M26 Pershing and the Tiger I articles, respectively.
The deletion rationale used was "F5" that these were unused, non-free images.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Tiger_I_-_M26_Killer.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:M26_Fireball.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1
They are both very likely U.S. Army Photos - I just have not had the time to trace their roots and properly document that they are free use images.
In any case, whether they were non-free, fair use or free use images, they were both being gainfully employed in their respective tank articles to illustrate important points. I have NO IDEA why they showed up on your radar as being "unused". If it was some bot that you are using to search for these things, well, it ain't working right.
I would appreciate it if you could restore these two images, the written content that went with both of these images, and put them back into the articles where they were located.
I put a fair amount of work into those two photo files. I was rather shocked to find them completely erased with absolutely no warning, notice, or even a hint of where or why they disappeared. DarthRad (talk) 01:24, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- Those files were not used in any article when they were up for deletion; they end up in CAT:ORFU and are deleted seven days after being tagged as orphaned. I should point out that files licensed under fair use must be deleted in these cases (see WP:NFCC#7). Feydey (talk · contribs) originally tagged both images as orphaned. Reviewing the user's edits, he removed both images here and here. Perhaps you should contact this user and attempt to address the issues he raised in his edit summaries. — ξxplicit 01:45, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- OK, that was one of those sneak attack deletes by Feydey, which I was not aware of. The reasons he gave for deleting those photos are completely unwarranted. I intend to take up this issue with him. You on the other hand have created an enormous problem, because I was not aware that these photos had been deleted from the two articles, was never notified that these photos were being considered for deletion. It did take a bit of work to write up the blurbs that went with those two photos. Is there a way to restore these two files? Or is this delete bot of yours permanent?
- If there is no save/restore mechanism for your delete-bot, all I can say is this really sucks big time, and you are not doing anybody any good here, only wasting everybody's time. I am going to have to waste a lot of time to regenerate these two photo files. It is taking all of my self control here not to violate the Five Pillars here and type in what I really want to say about what I think about you and your delete-bot. I read recently that the numbers of people writing for Wikipedia has started to drastically decline, and I am sure that running into these self-nominated and self-important editorial roadblocks is one huge reason that people get turned off.
- I tracked down Richard P. Hunnicutt, the author of the book "Pershing". In fact, I just got off the phone with him. He lives in Granite Bay, California, and can be found easily through the White Pages for that town. The two photographs in question are from his book and are U.S. Army Photos, as they were taken by then-Major Elmer Gray, working in his official capacity on the Zebra Mission with the U.S. Army. Gray kept the negatives after the war, then gave them to Hunnnicutt, who published them in his book. Elmer Gray has since passed away, and Hunnicutt gave his entire collection of photos and negative to the Patton Museum. So the originals are now with the Patton Museum. Hunnicutt expressed his opinion that "nobody would care if you used these photos" and "they're probably U.S. Army Photos because Gray was working in the U.S. Army for the Zebra Mission then - you should just credit Elmer Gray". As such, I am just going to state that these are U.S. Army photos, and credit them to Maj. Elmer Gray as the photographer, with secondary credit to Hunnicutt and his book "Pershing" as the scan source. DarthRad (talk) 23:40, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- Notifying you of the deletion of the files is the responsibility of the person who tags them for deletion, not the deleting administrator; there's no fault on my end. The files can be undeleted, though I noticed you uploaded one already. I can restore the other file if you plan on addressing the licensing issue, if you'd like. — ξxplicit 00:47, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Mexican Drug War
Thank you for protecting the 'Mexican Drug War' article. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Could you please do the same with its navigation template?: Template:Mexican Drug War. Did i say thank you? Thank you. --BatteryIncluded (talk) 19:56, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- Both pages were protected. No worries at all. I had to deal with Rcool35 (talk · contribs) before he was blocked indefinitely. His stubbornness and consistent IP-hopping gets tiring. — ξxplicit 02:13, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Creating a page
Hello,
I tried to create an article about a group on YouTube. I have tried creating it once before but it came up with a warning regarding autodeletion so I blanked the page. What information do I need to include in the article to make it eligible.
Thank you
JAGProduct (talk) 19:34, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi there, it's not necessarily a type of information that needs to be included. The subject must be notable enough to merit an article. If the YouTube group has received coverage from secondary reliable sources, it may be notable enough to have an article. — ξxplicit 19:41, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Languishing report at WP:RFPP
Could I get you to take a look at this? Reverting the socks and IPs is getting tiresome, and the report has gotten buried under a pile of processed reports so I don't think anyone is even looking at it anymore.—Kww(talk) 22:09, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
- All semi-protected for two months, except 30 Seconds to Mars (album). I don't spot much activity in that article from the block evader after the last protection wore off. — ξxplicit 22:17, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Image-class
I've replied to your comment at CfD. I wonder if perhaps you were a bot operator or whether you were interested in becoming one, because there seems to be consensus for this proposal but it will be a lot of tedious work to implement. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:39, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
- I'm clueless to when it comes to programming a bot, I'm afraid. Because the category is populated through a template, it may require a bot request, as one was done here, a similar situation where the category was produced by a template and was slightly more populated than Category:Image-Class articles currently is. As far as WikiProjects reserving the image-class, that seems like the more tedious task. What would be the best way to notify all of these WikiProjects of the transition from image-class to file-class? Each project can get notifications to its talk page, but that would require plenty of manual work or another bot request to leave notifications, and even then, interest would probably be low. — ξxplicit 19:54, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, just seen your reply. Informing every wikiproject seems a little excessive. It should be sufficient to post a blurb on Wikipedia:Article alerts/News before work starts, and a link on the edit summary made by the bot to a page which explains how the action may be overridden. Anyway let's wait for the CfD to be closed. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:49, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
First off I would like to thank you for deleting the image of the ROH World Television Championship. Next is the problem of this user in the section title Tnarocks. He has been repeatedly warned and temporarily blocked for constantly uploading images that are copyrighted that he takes credit for. Would permanently blocking Tnarocks the next course of action? Mr. C.C.Hey yo!I didn't do it! 07:48, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
- I'd probably go for two weeks for the next block; I do a three-strike kind of thing. Of course, that's after a final warning is issued, which should be given after the next improper upload. — ξxplicit 20:15, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
pictures
Hi there,
I'm the one trying to upload the pictures for DJ Jamad as well as for Floyd The Locsmif, Wes Felton ect. You are the one who has deleted them for the second time. Can you please let me know what the problem is? I'm the copyright holder and therefore should be able to use these pictures.
If you could please tell me what changes I should make, or what information I should add, I would appreciate it a lot.
Thanks already!
Dsgschwaeder (talk) 00:28, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi there, the reason the files you upload get deleted is because you indicated in the upload form that your image may only be used here on Wikipedia. Files that are licensed freely must be licensed to be used here on Wikipedia, as well as for commercial use (see here and here). Because the file were not licensed for commercial use, they were deleted under the speedy deletion criteria. If you hold the copyright to these images and would allow commercial use of the images, you can re-upload them under the licenses {{GFDL-self}}, {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}, {{PD-self}} or something similar. — ξxplicit 01:09, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for explaining!
Dsgschwaeder (talk) 03:16, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Will you please
Comment at the floowing FAC? Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Give It 2 Me/archive1. You did the GA review , now the article has progressed further. --Legolas (talk2me) 09:47, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Will give it a look soon. — ξxplicit 20:38, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
(Outdent)LOL. go and watch Gaga's "Telephone" video. That should give you a kick. --Legolas (talk2me) 09:24, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
N&O cat
Thanks for the notice. Maurreen (talk) 06:14, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
The album genre(s) of the album isn't just R&B and New Jack Swing, it also has hip hop soul. If you look at some of the singles from the album, some of them have hip hop soul. From Dbunkley6....talk.
- Regardless, you still need to cite a source to include the genres in the infobox. If you can verify additional genres of the album, it would avoid genre warring. Otherwise, don't attempt to add genres to begin with. — ξxplicit 20:18, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Cross-ndj (hieroglyph)
Regarding the article cross-ndj (hieroglyph), the Talk page was deleted. I assume it was just a vandalized page? I am now Doint the TalkPage-(for the first time)(I looked at my contributions, and never did the TalkPage for it), with the {AncientEgyptBanner}.....(from the SonoranDesert, ArizonaUSA)--....Mmcannis (talk) 19:18, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
- It was deleted because the person who created it requested deletion. In this case, that would be WildBot (talk · contribs). — ξxplicit 03:02, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Telephone (music video)
U online? Immediate full-protection of Telephone (music video). Another fan article created inspite of strong oppose from Talk:Telephone (song), which, is turning into a fan vs editors of WP war. Help with some administrative actions. --Legolas (talk2me) 03:36, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- Fully protected. There's definitely no consensus for the split at this time. — ξxplicit 03:44, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Deletions
Hello, could you delete the following files?
And delete the past revisions of these.
- File:When i look at you cover.jpg
- File:Kerli Tea Party music video.jpg
- File:Telephoneposter.jpg This file is unfree and unused but it probably shouldn't be deleted until the "Telephone" debate is over and if it rules against the creation of the article.
- File:If I Can Dream screenshot.jpg
Also, could you move these files so they agree with their MIME types?
Twinkle needs to add the date when tagging and I should have used PNG to begin with. Thanks so much! –Scarce ✉ 15:14, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- All done, except File:Kerli Tea Party music video.jpg. I'm getting a "The new file extension does not match its type" notice. — ξxplicit 21:04, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you! I uploaded the file as a PNG now so File:Kerli Tea Party music video.jpg can be deleted. –Scarce ✉ 22:56, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Protection bypass
The motivation for creating Telephone (video) after your protection of Telephone (music video) seems pretty obvious.—Kww(talk) 23:03, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
|
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:22, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Telephone (video) needs full protection
Hi, I noticed that you were the one who fully protected Telephone (music video) so that no one could create the page on there own, but now some new user created a page (without censuses) under the title "Telephone (video)", I was wondering if you could fully project the page so that it could redirect to the music video section on the songs article. Thanks, Crystal Clear x3 [talk] 23:48, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Selena
Hi, the page for Selena does not include her vast career. Where are the sections; "Stage", "Voice", "Influences", "Crossover Deal", "Selena Etc.", "Selena Museum", "Selena The Musical"? Even though some of these have their individual pages they need to be mentioned in this article. This article is not a good reliable page at all! So I'm here willing to partner with you so we can add these sections and more so people can understand Selena and not just a brief story about her. AJona1992 (talk) 19:32, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
French sales source
Hey Explicit, I have been referred to you by another editor. I seem to have stumbled upon a source and I'm not sure what to make of it's reliability. Here's the source and here's the more specific section, tell me if you think it's reliable enough be used for France sales in album pages. Thanks!--PeterGriffin Talk • Cont.
Meat-puppet action needed on talk:onion
Hey, Explicit, I need some meat-puppet action on the talk:onion. Could you protect the article and semi-protect the talk page? Thanks, as usual. 71.36.119.226 (talk) 00:28, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Lady Gaga Telephone Cover Discussion
It would be appreciated if you could add your opinion to the above discussion to try and resolve the situation and if you could please vote on this non-consensus binding survey. Official Telephone Cover Conflict Resolution.
Thanks Lil-unique1 (talk) 01:16, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Requested move
Hello, I was wondering if you could help me move two pages to more appropriate titles. I have requested the moves on the requested moves page, but the bot seems to be removing them without taking action.
- (Discuss) — I'm Back (song) → I'm Back - I recently created the page for the song, but I had to add the (song) part because the page I'm Back is a redirect to Ashley Tisdale and Guilty Pleasure (album), which is an non-noteable song which was nominated for deletion.
- (Discuss) — Young Jeezy → Jeezy - Young Jeezy removed the 'Young' from his name, confirmed by Def Jam.
So if you could take a look at them and tell me what you think, that would be great. SE KinG. User page. Talk. 16:22, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Between The Lines (STP song)
I got a problem and it concerns this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Between_the_Lines_(Stone_Temple_Pilots_song)
some dude for no reason removed the Alternative Songs chart peak from the page. is there any way u can fix this?David1287 (talk) 18:31, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
- Looking over the edit history, Keraunoscopia (talk · contribs) removed the Alternative Songs chart because of the Billboard charts guide, which states If a song has not charted on Rock Songs you may add any of the following, and goes on to list the Alternative Songs chart. Because the song in question has charted on the Rock Songs chart, the Alternative Songs chart is removed. Basically, the latter is a component chart, which should not be included in articles if a song has charted in the main chart. See the record charts guideline for further information. You two seem to edit warring over this, despite a discussion on the talk page. Please stop reverting each other, because both of you may end up being blocked for edit warring. I'll leave a warning over at Keraunoscopia's talk page; consider this your only warning as well. — ξxplicit 18:40, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Per the discussion, two people !voted to keep and one to delete. What was your rationale in discounting the majority opinion? — BQZip01 — talk 22:41, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
- As my deletion summary states, the file was deleted under the speedy criteria F8, as the file exists on Commons under File:Erie Intermodal Center.jpg. — ξxplicit 22:48, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
- Can you more clearly annotate that on the WP:PUF page. The impression given was that the result of the discussion was to remove the image from Wikipedia. Nothing could be further from the truth. — BQZip01 — talk 02:03, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
- Amended. — ξxplicit 03:39, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. — BQZip01 — talk 05:36, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
- Amended. — ξxplicit 03:39, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
- Can you more clearly annotate that on the WP:PUF page. The impression given was that the result of the discussion was to remove the image from Wikipedia. Nothing could be further from the truth. — BQZip01 — talk 02:03, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Delete this revision please
Hello. Can you delete this revision of my userpage please? Thank you. WJetChao (talk) 00:08, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Talkpage of deleted page
Hi. Could you delete this page too? As you U1'd this. Thanks. Rehman(+) 03:51, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
JLaine_turntables.jpg
Hey there,
I've seen you have deleted JLaine_turntables.jpg. But I have already send an email to permissions.en@wikipedia.org confirming that I own the copyright. That was on March 31st. So I guess that has just not been seen yet. Do you have the possibility to check that status? Cause I don't think I should upload the pic again, right? They will just "undelete" it once the permission email is being processed? Thanks for your help.
13:52, 7 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dsgschwaeder (talk • contribs)
- I personally can not check. You may want to shoot another email at them to double-check that they received the first one. Your file(s) will be undeleted if they can verify that you own the copyright of the images. — ξxplicit 22:03, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
I have emailed permissions@wikipedia.org several times giving permission for the four images that i uploaded. WHY ARE THEY CONTINUING TO DELETE THEM!!!!!????? Annoyed user. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominic2009 (talk • contribs) 22:26, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- I believe the OTRS permissions are starting to make their way. Moonriddengirl (talk · contribs) has restored three of your files—File:N3 - Eve of Tahiti.jpg, File:CF3 New Age English Rose.jpg and File:N3 - Eve of Tahiti.jpg. I think it's best to wait a few days as they begin to get processed. You may want to contact Moonriddengirl in a few days if all your files aren't 100% there. Regards. — ξxplicit 22:33, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Wheel of Fortune backdrops
Hi. You were apparently the admin who deleted this: [[8]]. May I ask how three votes to Keep and three votes to Delete is a consensus to delete? Thanks. JTRH (talk) 00:39, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- Mainly due to the weight of the arguments. As far as the keep arguments go, two out of the three didn't explain how this image meet the non-free content criteria policy. "[U]seful to show set history" didn't address what the nominator challenged, which is: can the subject be adequately conveyed by text without the use of non-free content? The nominator didn't think so, and neither did the two others in favor of deleting the file. Per policy, the delete votes directly addressed why the image is unnecessary; the keep votes didn't. — ξxplicit 00:54, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
about my warning
I have tried and tried to do everything right here. It's just I don't like the decision of removing the Alternative Songs chart peak from the Between The Lines page. So, I would like for a reversal of the decision so that it should stay in the page. I don't want to get in trouble for this. So I'm begging u. Please let it stay there. The Alternative Songs chart is a rock chart. For all I know, there are songs that peaked higher in Rock Songs than in Alternative, but that doesn't require the Alternative Songs chart to be removed from the songs' pages. Just think about this.David1287 (talk) 01:47, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- Well, an IP — whose edit history somewhat resembles yours — reverted Explicit's edit. It's obviously extremely important to you. Besides, I made my point, the consensus favored both me and the guidelines, and your intransigence is kind of annoying. Good luck with your future contributions. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 06:45, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- David1287 (talk · contribs) has been warned once again for edit warring. A nice swift, lengthier block with be applied should he continue his reverting, logged in or not. — ξxplicit 18:28, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
consensus
how do I gain consensus from the situation?David1287 (talk) 19:25, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- Discussion. Talk to the people. Express your views, counter the arguments of others, try to persuade them. Reverting edits simply because you want it your way will only lead to edit warring and possible blocks. — ξxplicit 19:28, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Raymond v Raymond
This poor thing keeps moving. I'll just point out that it has been released without a ".":
- http://www.swisscharts.com/showitem.asp?interpret=Usher&titel=Raymond+V+Raymond&cat=a
- http://www.billboard.com/#/album/usher/raymond-v-raymond/1310844
- http://www.musicline.de/de/product/886976388928///1884016
I can't find a market where it was released as "Raymond v. Raymond", although I agree that that is how I would have spelled it.—Kww(talk) 04:09, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Facepalm. My mistake. I found the redirect Raymond v. Raymond in CAT:SD requesting it to be deleted to make way for a page move, so I went ahead and moved it. Before moving it back, I'll contact the user, Dan56 (talk · contribs), who originally tagged the redirect for deletion so he can be aware of the situation. — ξxplicit 04:17, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
![[7]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Upload&wpDestFile=Vega_Strike_Logo.png){kind=link}
![[8]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_March_29#File:Wheelbackdrops.png){kind=link}
The album is shown w/the "." in text at usher's official website (top right box that says 'order now' and lists 'exclusive offer'), Metacritic and most of the sites that reviewed the album, Amazon.com CDuniverse, Overstock, Tower and other product sites, Billboard, news stories about the album's chart debut (MTV, EOnline. However, some other sites, including Billboard which includes the period on the album entry page but not on a news story, do not like digital music stores (iTunes, Rhapsody). This may be a misenterpretation of the album cover having no period in its graphic design. But Id trust the Usher official website as it directly deals with things about Usher. Dan56 (talk) 13:23, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, this certainly changes things around. After seeing this information, I think Dan is right here (or, "more correct", however you want to look at it). The lack of punctuation may well just be a stylization issue that was decided by the record company. If anything, a requested move should take place if anyone should dispute the use of the period. — ξxplicit 18:38, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Nima Behnoud
Hello, I have recently uploaded a picture of my Boss "Nima Behnoud" to his Biography and you have deleted it. We took this picture of him but I am very confused as what type of licensing or copyright i need to pick would this be {{GFDL-self}}?? and if it does where can I re upload that. You can see from my email address nicole.savoy@nimany.com that I work for nimany.com and Nima Behnoud is the main founder and a celebrated artist in new york city.
Second issue was the brief description of NIMANY, the clothing label that Mr Behnoud has started. Since the word NIMANY is being mentioned few times in his biography U wanted to point it to a brief description of what it is. That was deleted as well. I see other brand names on wiki can you please also tell me how I can resume that as well. I really appreciate this as I am very green on wiki.
Nicole —Preceding unsigned comment added by NicoleSavoy (talk • contribs) 01:11, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hi there. The file you uploaded, File:Nimabehnoud.jpg, was deleted because it lacked licensing information. If the photo was taken by you and you would like it to be used on Wikipedia, you can upload the file again and license it under the license you mentioned above, or any other free license you would prefer. However, if the image is copyrighted by your corporation and they would like to donate it, you should consider read our donating copyrighted materials guide.
- As far as the article NIMANY goes, that was deleted because the it appeared to have a promotional tone in the text, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. In order for a subject to merit an article here, said subject must be notable: it must have received significant coverage from reliable sources independent of the subject. Suitable sources would include publications such as magazines, books, etc, while unsuitable sources would include things such as the corporation's own website. — ξxplicit 01:38, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Keeping People from Willemstad, Netherlands Antilles
Hi Explicit, Can you explain your rationale for keeping and not re-listing Category:People from Willemstad, Netherlands Antilles. Last time I checked, one person cannot make consensus by themselves.--TM 11:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
- No, they can't, but as Vegaswikian (talk · contribs) pointed out, the category is part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme—in this case, it would be Category:People by capital, which is part of the larger sub-categorization scheme Category:People by city. Additionally, if articles are categorized under Category:People from Willemstad, Netherlands Antilles and Category:People from Curaçao, these subjects need to be removed from the latter; it doesn't call for deletion of the former. — ξxplicit 18:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
- Maybe it does and maybe it doesn't, but there was no discussion on the topic. I said it should be deleted, Vegaswikian said it shouldn't. It should have been relisted. Will you please do so?--TM 18:40, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
- Okay, I've relisted the discussion at today's CFD. — ξxplicit 18:56, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
- Great, appreciate your help.--TM 20:21, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
- Maybe it does and maybe it doesn't, but there was no discussion on the topic. I said it should be deleted, Vegaswikian said it shouldn't. It should have been relisted. Will you please do so?--TM 18:40, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Hungargunn bear itn mind
Hi there,
I just noticed that on the 14th you deleted the image Hungargunn bear itn mind 2010.jpg under the F7 Invalid fair-use claim on criteria for speedy deletion. As the original uploader, at no point was I given any warning about this and so I was unable to add a hangon tag onto it while I corrected the fair-use claim. As it stands I don't know why it was thought to be an invalid claim, and I'd like to know why this image was deleted - not so much because of this image but because I have other images uploaded on similar reasoning and I'd like to fix those claims before they too are removed. Thanks Miyagawa (talk) 17:01, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hey there. The file was tagged by SchuminWeb (talk · contribs) with {{di-replaceable fair use}}. Basically, the image portrayed something that can be retrieved by a free picture, or that can be described by text alone. — ξxplicit 19:59, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Your Question
Hi Explicit. I am sorry for the delay; I am working on your question while I do other work. I'll try to post my answer by this afternoon. Best, ceranthor 12:55, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Image deletion
You recently deleted File:SpywareProtect09block.PNG. Please explain how the given rationale was not good enough. — Supuhstar * § 03:24, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Its rationale wasn't good enough because it simply didn't have one. The file should have included a fair use rationale, explaining why it is permitted under the non-free content policy. The use of the {{Non-free use rationale}} template wouldn't have hurt. — ξxplicit 03:54, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Can you give an example of what it had, versus what it should have had?— Supuhstar * § 03:56, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- The file had a summary "The image given by SWP2009 when attempting to visit sites it's blocked." That's a good description, but hardly a fair use rationale. It should have had a rationale similar to the one provided for File:Adobe Illustrator CS4 Workspace.png. — ξxplicit 04:01, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- From what I remember, it had a good CC licence provided. Can I see exactly what was on the page before it was deleted?168.26.176.158 (talk) 06:22, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Oh... crap. I must have misread the license—it was tagged with {{free software screenshot}}. However, before I take any action, is there evidence to assert that the program was released under the free software license? Nothing in the related article provides any insight. — ξxplicit 06:32, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- It was a virus program, and therefore had no End User License. It was released to the public with absolutely no restrictions.168.26.176.158 (talk) 06:46, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Oh... crap. I must have misread the license—it was tagged with {{free software screenshot}}. However, before I take any action, is there evidence to assert that the program was released under the free software license? Nothing in the related article provides any insight. — ξxplicit 06:32, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- From what I remember, it had a good CC licence provided. Can I see exactly what was on the page before it was deleted?168.26.176.158 (talk) 06:22, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- The file had a summary "The image given by SWP2009 when attempting to visit sites it's blocked." That's a good description, but hardly a fair use rationale. It should have had a rationale similar to the one provided for File:Adobe Illustrator CS4 Workspace.png. — ξxplicit 04:01, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Can you give an example of what it had, versus what it should have had?— Supuhstar * § 03:56, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
← Okay, I've restored the file in good faith. Sorry about the trouble. — ξxplicit 06:51, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- No problem at all. Thank you for your time. 168.26.185.162 (talk) 16:02, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
| This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |