User talk:Fastily/Archive 1
Orphaned non-free media (Image:.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:WitchKingofAngmar400px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:10, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Grunty200px.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Grunty200px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Tigger200px.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Tigger200px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 09:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:GalacticEmpireEmbelem500px.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:GalacticEmpireEmbelem500px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:09, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Gruntylair600ppx.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Gruntylair600ppx.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:44, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Situation Ammended?
Hi I believe I have ammended the situation on the photograph
--ADMBAIRD (talk) 08:41, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Own work
Following images are my own work ..
Manoj nav (talk) 06:57, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
Image:Windows 7 graphical command shell.jpg
Is this right now? I tried following format used in Image:Build6801superbar.png Redekopmark (talk) 15:11, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
RE: Possibly unfree Image:GrandBelial'sKey.PNG
Well, basically, I have permission to use this image by the person who uploaded it. I mentioned it in the image's description. What more do I need to do to make the image legit? TheSickBehemoth (talk) 04:20, 26 November 2008 (UTC)TheSickBehemoth
YOUR Mistaken Objection
Just found this message on my talk page:
"Hello. Concerning your contribution, Image:Bermuda Crown 1964.jpg, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). As a copyright violation, Image:Bermuda Crown 1964.jpg appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Image:Bermuda Crown 1964.jpg has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.
If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:
If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Image:Bermuda Crown 1964.jpg and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions. If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Image:Bermuda Crown 1964.jpg with a link to where we can find that note. If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Image:Bermuda Crown 1964.jpg. However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you. Fastily (talk) 04:11, 26 November 2008 (UTC)"
Please note:
1) The photograph is a composite of both sides of a coin in my collection, in it's collectors mounting, and was created by myself.
2) The text I entered was entirely my own words, written straight from my head as I entered it.
Hence, your objection is unwarranted. Please withdraw it, and do not delete the image.
Aodhdubh (talk) 04:24, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Further to Above
For evidence, please note (in the photograph below) the above coin sitting on the keyboard of the laptop upon which I write this (along with a few other Bermudian coins, bank notes, and cap badges from my collection). Photograph taken minutes ago with my mobile 'phone camera, so pardon the quality.
1964 Bermuda Crown and other monies
Aodhdubh (talk) 04:54, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Further To Bermuda Crown Image
In reference to the reply to the above, which you made on my talk page, copied below:
Before I start, I'd just like to make a point that this is Wikipedia and not a place to accuse. As collaborators on the Wikipedia project, it is necessary to create an encouraging environment rather than a garrulous one you are attempting to create. Please do not use such brash language in the future. Thank you.
And now, to the issue of the Bermuda Coin images. You have licensed the images Bermuda Crown 1964.jpg under the Creative Commons and GNU licenses. Using these licenses mean that you have created the images yourself....completely and entirely. You created the image -yes, but not the coin. The image that you have uploaded depicts a coin which was copyrighted by a foreign nation. With the Creative Commons and GNU licenses, you are claiming that the coin of the foriegn nation was created by you and you now intend to share this 'work' in the public domain. Such constitues as a copyright infrigement and therefore your image is deleteable by (db-i9). Please read the page, Wikipedia:Non-free content, at the image section, to get a better idea of what this really means.
Rather than license your image under Creative Commons and GNU licenses, you should be licensing your image under the template {Non-free currency} and provide the appropriate fair use rationale. An example of the rationale used for foriegn currencies is seen in the page 3. If you can fix the licensing and add fair use rationale, I will remove the deletion templates. Thank you.Fastily (talk) 06:22, 26 November 2008
Well, thank you, and you might have written what have now, regarding copyright of the coins, rather than the image of the coin, the first time...what I read in your initial objection was an accusation by you that I had plagiarised the image, or the text verbatim (wasn't clear which was intended), from a printed source, or another website. If that is not, or no longer, your objection, but that the coin itself is a copyright, and that any photograph of it is therefore violating said copyright (are you certain? That seems a bit wide-sweeping a definition...but I'll follow up on the links you posted), then that seems a more reasonable objection, and less like an attack on my character. If you read my reply to your objection as an attack on your own person, or your character, it was certainly not meant that way, and you'll have my apologies for words that could have perhaps been chosen more carefully.
Aodhdubh (talk) 19:07, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Queries on Rationale
I note that a separate fair use rationale must be provided for each instance in which the image is used. Am I meant to write a rational on each page on which the image is displayed, and if so, where on the page? Or, am I meant to write to write a retionale on the actual image page, and somehow reference each other page on which it is used? Is there a format for writing a rationale, or is it enough simply to insert it as a block of text anywhere on whichever page? I cannot spot the rationale on the image page you provided as an example (of the Yuan notes), or on the encycolpedic page on which the image is displayed, but maybe I'm not looking in the right spot.
Aodhdubh (talk) 19:35, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Images you have tagged
I am inclined to believe the above user about the image of the coins based on his pic of the coin on his computer's keyboard. I tried to find other instances of the other image and only two weren't to the upload.wikimedia.org file. The first one, http://www.bermuda-online.org/money.htm is, imo, sufficiently disproved by the fact that the page was last updated today and the fact that the Internet Archive preserved page on January 18 where it clearly is not there. The other, http://www.answers.com/topic/bermuda, definitely indicates that the portion of the page using that pic is from Wikipedia. Based on this evidence, I am declining the speedy tags on those images. I would also like to request that you remove the other tag from the first image. You don't have to do that if you don't want to, but I think the evidence strongly implies that the uploader is telling the truth. Thingg⊕⊗ 19:36, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
- nvm the above. I'm not 100% sure if british crown copyright extends to bermuda's currency or not. *sigh* Thingg⊕⊗ 19:45, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
- Curious...followed your link [1] and noted they have used my uploaded image on that website...it never occured to me Bermuda.com would borrow images from Wikipedia. If you look at the serial number on the one pound note in that image c/7 953937, you'll recognise it is the same such note sitting on my keyboard (I think you will...that photo isn't very clear...).
Aodhdubh (talk) 20:35, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
- Seems my new license tag and rationales were sufficient for immediate deletion (of Image:Bermudian Pound Bank Notes.jpg ) by another contributor.
Aodhdubh (talk) 21:31, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Rationales
Actually, I think I figured the rationales out....just followed the links you gave 'til I got to the information.
I suspect the Crown copyright doesn't quite extend to Bermuda as the Bermuda Government has been largelly autonomous in just about every way for centuries, issuing it's own money since the 1600s, for example. I'm curious whether any copyrighted design is always non-free when captured in a photograph (I imagining a photograph of a street scene that captures shop signs, and a stack of newspapers with the front page visible, sitting by a news vendor), or if this is strictly for government copyrights, or, more specifically, for currency? I have a small booklet in my collection, Experiences of a Bermudian Numismatist in my collection. It was written , and, I assume, published by Ray C. P. Williams, and printed in Bermuda by Engravers Ltd. Despite numerous images of Bermuian bank notes, I cannot find any reference in it to the copyright of the notes' designs, or under what license the photographs are used. That may simply indicate the less-constrictive legal atmosphere surrounding such activities in Bermuda, by comparison to in the UK proper...the pamphlet also fails to identify the publisher, who holds copyright to it, or the date of publication, though I'm sure Bermudian law requires all published material to include the identity and address of the publisher, and the date of publication. That didn't stop the pamphlet being sold in Bermudian bookstores, where I procured my copy.
Aodhdubh (talk) 20:25, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Another Query
I'm also curious as to when a government's copyright on money designs expires...when the notes or coins cease to be legal tender? After 100 years? After the dissolution of the Government and the State? Never?
Aodhdubh (talk) 20:29, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Tapadh Leibh
Unfortunately, the other simarly-revised page has been deleted by another user, now :(
Aodhdubh (talk) 15:04, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Cheato150px.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Cheato150px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:17, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Loggo100px.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Loggo100px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:17, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Conga200px.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Conga200px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:18, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Gobicamel200px.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Gobicamel200px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:18, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Your rollback request
Hi! I regret that I must inform you that your request for the rollback permission has been denied. You can discover why by checking the archives at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Denied/December 2008#Fastily. SoxBot X (talk) 16:00, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Oracle Bones
i was merly mentioning the fact that oracle bones are part of chinese literature. they desrve a mention because they are the earlisest form of chinese writing.
Your request for rollback
After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
- Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
- Rollback can be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
- Rollback may be removed at any time.
If you no longer want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message on [[User talk:{{{1}}}|my talk page]] if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Happy editing! Tiptoety talk 02:34, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Lakehylia600ppx.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Lakehylia600ppx.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 07:11, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Strindberg
Why would user DionysosProteus will not let me add a new picture to the article August Strindberg? You also felt that the picture should stay. Why removing it?
I have left him a message but he was not respond and he reverted the picture again.
This was my message to him:The picture you reverted is a rather unusual picture about Strindberg. We have it at the Swedish Wikipedia too. I think the same like User:Fastily, the image should stay. There is room for that picture in the article. No, he is not a boy, but he is fairly young and is not identical to the next image, the next image is a dark portrait, while this one is a layed back bust. The standard picture about him is always the one with the hair pointing to the sky (the firts one). It is a bit boring to see always the same old picture everywhere. Why not a different one too? Regards Sólyomszem (talk) 12:50, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Sólyomszem (talk) 10:09, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks!
Sólyomszem (talk) 19:17, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Universe at War
Please undo your revision of my edit. The edit was a restoration information that was left out in a merge from a redirected article. Rather than simply reverting I would prefer that the edit be placed back with your blessings. Thanks. 76.71.91.230 (talk) 05:48, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Re: terrain park edit
It wasn't an advertisement, I'm not affiliated in any way with either of these groups. It's just a trend which is occuring, in which we see new areas springing up which are dedicated to just being a terrain park, rather than a ski resort. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.100.213.90 (talk) 01:39, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
terrain park edit
Re editited without links. 129.100.213.90 (talk) 01:45, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Cheato150px.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Cheato150px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:21, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Conga200px.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Conga200px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:23, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Gobicamel200px.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Gobicamel200px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:31, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Grunty150px.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Grunty150px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:31, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
joke edit?
The edit wasn't meant as a joke, as funny as it sounds it is actually serious. some people take it specifically to get more 'volume'. I know when people make edits sometimes people will put 'citation needed' so i figured out that you had the ref button set up on the edit page so I edited in an article that talked about clomid being used as PCT for steroid users that talked about the subject. i thought that way the people who edit the site would know that it wasn't meant as malicious or a joke. Some males in pornography take it to gain 'volume'. I had been reading about the subject so I thought that I would put it in as it was relevant......males using clomid and getting unintended effects of what the drug is designed to do. I thought it was interesting that it would affect males that way.
was the reference not clear enough? I can find another one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.161.13.71 (talk) 05:35, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Klungo150px.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Klungo150px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:36, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Loggo100px.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Loggo100px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:39, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
cont'd.
I read wikipedia a lot and know that everyone kind of makes sure people aren't putting nonsense into pages. I often times find myself reading pages, finding typos or incorrect punctuation and fixing it. i do it from diff. computers as I have diff. ones for home, work etc....
can anyone sign up for an account so they can log in and the changes that they make can be attributed to them? I'd like to do that, that way if someone reads something I put in and want to erase it they can look and see that I'm a registered user and not someone trying to cause problems.
Thanks for the help.
joseph —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.161.13.71 (talk) 05:39, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
That wasn't vandalism. That guy who tried to kill the american and georgian president was categorized as a vigilante. I removed that categorization as it is inaccurate. That is not vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.230.234.79 (talk) 07:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Georgii Gause edit
I deleted redundant information and revised external links to be concise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gavellis (talk • contribs) 07:44, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
there are a few dozen people who use this computer —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.230.234.79 (talk) 07:48, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
who the hell is zakk tyler and why would i edit that —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.1.60.249 (talk) 00:25, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Friendly note regarding talk page messages
Hello. As a recent editor to User talk:213.198.218.212, I wanted to leave a friendly reminder that as per WP:USER, editors may remove messages at will from their own talk pages. While we may prefer that comments be archived instead, policy does not prohibit users -including anonymous editors like this one- from deleting messages from their own talk pages. The only kinds of talk page messages that cannot be removed (as per WP:BLANKING) are declined unblock requests (but only while blocks are still in effect), confirmed sockpuppet notices, or IP header templates (for unregistered editors). These exceptions only exist in order to keep a user from potentially gaming the system. Thanks, Kralizec! (talk) 02:57, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Kirby600px.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Kirby600px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:28, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Blood Atonement
It appears the full update I made to the page didn't take -- I'll try it again. I found the page Blood Atonement to be very messy, containing reduplicated information and no clear structure at all. It also suffers from a common problem of pages associated with a particular sect -- the over use of religious titles and Mormon-specific jargon that can make it difficult for non-Mormons to understand.
Thanks, I created an account.
Hello, our paths crossed on the Clomid/clomidithene (sp???) page where I had made some changes. I thought I'd drop you a line and say hello and thanks for giving me the motivation to sign up for an account. I already have made some grammatical, spelling and punctuation changes that were bugging me on a page. Do you have any advice for someone just starting out with an account?
Thanks, joseph Obsessis (talk) 23:49, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
The sentence didn't make sense grammatically and the same info was presented a couple of sentences later. I only edit pages to add info or remove inaccurate info or grammer. Please go back and fix what you undid. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.243.15.145 (talk) 01:34, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Kirby600px.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Kirby600px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:27, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Hoax: Benedict allum
Hello, I noticed you undid my edits to Benedict allum. I think this page is a hoax/joke page that someone has made for their friend. My evidence: (1) google only has 5 hits for "Benedict allum"; (2) there are comments about "he did not go to a girls college"; (3) someone has been putting similar jokes at Girton College, Cambridge. I was in the process of proposing its deletion, when you reverted my edits. I will look back at this page if you reply to my comments. 87.113.79.206 (talk) 22:16, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply, no worries! I've put my reasons on the talk page, but I'm not able to formally complete the AFD process because I'm not logged in. Bye, 87.113.79.206 (talk) 22:41, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
theres no need for all that info its already written in the template. articles are not supposed to be a list of specifications. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkneon (talk • contribs) 22:46, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
DELETION?
why was W.D. Gann deleted when a personal page that belongs on myspace isn't?
why was the cycles page deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.91.169.43 (talk) 07:21, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
- See WP:USERPAGE. Garden. 09:49, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
I don't know why she doesn't respond to her own page, yet want to troll around attacking others. Trolling is when you weren't even trying to be helpful 75.91.169.43 (talk) 02:54, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
weird revert
Care to elaborate this? 219.79.30.145 (talk) 09:15, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Gracias!
Thanks for the barnstar! Yeah, arguments (especially with IPs) are usually just a big sinking pit of timewasting, so I try and close things up as soon as it becomes apparent nothing's going to come of it. Thanks for the recognition, and have a merry Christmas and a happy holiday season! Dayewalker (talk) 22:56, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Four Tildes to you too!
I love the stuff you've done to your page. Jaysus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.148.43.92 (talk) 07:59, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Bernard Madoff
Please explain why Mr. Madoff is no longer Jewish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.253.211.163 (talk) 19:40, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Woah, Fast.
But seriously, Us kids call it K-town, Or K-zer. Ask anyone at Mcnary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.21.5.9 (talk) 06:06, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Dear Fastily, i spent nearly 3 hours trying to edit this not very competent and messy article which requires throughout optimisation. And it will take much more time to finish the work i just started. As a holder of PhD in Neuroscience currently working in the area which includes the topic of this article I feel outraged by your unbased removal of my edits and giving me a warning. I work from two different computers and block-removed only content which i previously inserted from another PC. This is with respect to capacitance equation in myelin subsection. As i later found this would involve too much speculation to be present in encyclopaedia, i removed the insertion. I also did some editing in resting potential subsection which was also hastily reverted without reasonable consideration. If you cared to look carefully at my edits you would notice this. I ask to revert my edit as otherwise i do not feel neither inclination no motivation to dedicate my valueble time towards improvement of this online resourse. Thank you. Sincerely yours, Dr. Roman Frolov, MD, PhD in Neuroscience —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.154.90.64 (talk) 18:12, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image (File:MumboJumbo200px.jpg)
You've uploaded File:MumboJumbo200px.jpg, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:35, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
How did I spam?
I did not see a thing on that fur farm page about how animals are treated and put what had to be put instead of those lies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.185.54.42 (talk) 01:55, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Lloyds of London
I intend to reinstate my edit: The link goes to a page in reference to the Royal Air Force officer Sir Christopher Moran, rather than the tycoon/insurer. He is a distinguished officer who has no connection with Lloyds of London. To suggest that he was disgraced in the Henderson Syndicates/Moran Holdings scandal is frankly slanderous and brings Wikipedia in to disrepute. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.123.23.92 (talk) 22:09, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Fateprompic300px.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Fateprompic300px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:19, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Don't bother
The IP users there are hoppers or open proxies, and are inclined to ignore warnings anyhow. Just revert and ignore.
(I ask that you reply on my "Discussions" page, linked to in the second part of my signature; they cannot affect that page.) -Jéské Couriano (v^_^v) 05:23, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
That Rodney King edit was totally legit. He is not a celebrity —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.111.136.213 (talk) 05:53, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
changes to sports betting
Do you even read the changes you "patrol"? It was confusing to use two teams that share the same. I changed the names to a neutral and hypothetical Team A and Team B. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.173.138 (talk) 03:24, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
IMRO information
The Information that is continuously been amended/posted on our corporate page: Irish Music Rights Organisation is libelous and should be permanently removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.144.18.5 (talk) 08:01, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm so sorry. I want to do an individual article about Julia Chang and leave the link in Tekken series page. Thanks- (SweetAngelique (talk) 02:27, 23 January 2009 (UTC)). SweetAngelique 23 January 2009
Orphaned non-free media (File:KingDedede200px.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:KingDedede200px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Question...
Why did you revert my edits to the KCA 2009 page? I sourced the Nick Press site that shows The Rock as host, removed unnecessary material, and fixed assorted grammar errors. I don't see anything wrong with what I did. It had been reverted. Stitchon (talk) 23:00, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Edit on Wikipedia page: Spitting Image
The edit I made was in no way shape or form vandalism. I removed unnecessary content that was marketing a french Canadian show and replaced it with a simple show description.
If you take a look at the Spitting Image page, and look at the section that details shows that were inspired by it, you will see an unnecessary amount of detail put on to the CBC show: Dieu créa LaFlaque. I am a Political Science bachelor who has studied Political Satire, and not a vandal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.57.7.200 (talk) 04:16, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Why the hate against DeAngelo Hall?
You found a blogger who calls the guy names. I'm trying to make his page factual. It's absolutely unfair for you to be warning me. There is no way you can justify calling him "selfish and outspoken" in the section entitled "Professional Career." I'm changing it back again. Both of us know I am right - Wikipedia should not be used for name-calling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.138.172.176 (talk) 18:52, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
My Secret Page
User:Hi878/Right Secret Page Hi878 (talk) 16:20, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
question about revert of sandbox change
I was testing different things having to do with personal sandboxes and I noticed that when making a change while logged out it was reverted by your account. I was just wondering if that was a bot action or a user action that does that? please respond on my user talk page zephalis
Did you intend to eliminate the section on linguistics used in inchoate crimes? I'd like to find sources for those statements and place it back in. Bearian (talk) 14:59, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:KingDedede200px.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:KingDedede200px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:06, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
N.A.S.A.
I marked the page as you suggested but it was deleted anyway. It should be restored; the act is significant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ipeterson (talk • contribs) 01:19, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
My Secret Page
Hi878 (talk) 23:52, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
db-empty
The blanking of Blue canoe productions by TAgS87 was a clear case for replacing the blank page with {{db-empty}}. Threatening the user with a block is getting pretty close to newbie-biting in my opinion. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 04:12, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Blanking User talk:98.231.153.180
Perhaps it's not my place to go clearing a random IP's talk page, but if you review the contents which you've now restored, you will see a farcical witch-hunt that drove away a new user, complete with a sockpuppet investigation resolved with the byline "Comedy of Huggle errors". The page as it stands is nothing more than a monument to the overzealousness of our vandal-fighting forces, and the anonymous users they trample along the way. In the interest of moving forward (and not further antagonizing the previous user or any new users), please blank the page. Thanks. – 74 06:21, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
FAST AND FURIOUS
i did that,because some other user from Lowyat.net has changed some info in there..and for ur info,is all rubbish...they put car list that not even exist..even the actor also they changed so..sorry for any problem that i caused...tq —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.26.47.62 (talk) 07:54, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Edits to Cliff Baxter
Hi, sorry about the confusion, but I wasn't vandalizing the Cliff Baxter article. I just thought it would be better to summarize his suicide note rather than post it in its entirety, both to preserve word economy and because the note itself is obviously a very personal document. I know his daughter, and I do not think she'd appreciate seeing her father's suicide note on wikipedia. It's just common courtesy... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.30.90.101 (talk) 06:00, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Edits to Seven Pounds
Though it may seem my edit was vandalism, I was in the process of posting an interpretation into some of the film's themes as original material for wikipedia. If there is to be a better method of doing this, I am somewhat a novice to Wikipedia, and I would appreciate the chance to follow proper procedure.--64.114.135.25 (talk) 06:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not the place to publish original research (OR). It needs to be sourced from WP:V and WP:RS. -- Fyslee (talk) 07:55, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Fastily, I declined your copyvio speedy tage for this article since most of the edits haven't been copyvios, but I did find the url that one paragraph copied, and deleted that paragraph. The page has one tag left; you may want to add another. - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 21:35, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
sorry,i was just experiment how it changes
Jujus Canyon? I was pretty sure this was referring to Hells Canyon (of which there is an article on wikipedia). I was in no way trying to vandalize.
AfC
Thanks for your help at WP:AfC. Just a quick request to include but not to substitute the {{WPAFC}} template. For example, for a redirect page, just type
{{WPAFC|class=redirect}}
on the talk page. If you have any questions just ask, and keep up the good work! Martinmsgj 11:52, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Mickey Mouse.
Will you please block Boy2334? He just vandalized Mickey Mouse again. I reverted his edits, but he shouldn't be on the loose vandalizing pages. Why don't you give him the ol' banhammer? :) - Eugene Krabs (talk) 19:52, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Please be careful when reverting
In [2] you reverted vandalism back in to the article... Mr.Z-man 19:54, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Please do enumerate how my edits to Hamdani's page weren't 'neutral'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.30.235.62 (talk) 08:45, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Have tried to make a few things more neutral. Have removed that line prasing the Quaid-e-Azam which you found biased. Hope this is fine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.30.235.62 (talk) 08:59, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Vandalism on yasser latif hamdani page
Dear Fastily,
The vandalism being carried out against "yasser latif hamdani's" page is politically motivated. Yasser Latif Hamdani is not an Ahmadi. He has made it quite clear. And he does not believe that Jinnah wanted Pakistan to "embody Islamic principles". Instead he has passionately argued that Jinnah wanted Pakistan to be a secular state. The edits made by various sockpuppets are clearly motivated and should be removed. Egopearl (talk) 19:41, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Jerry Yang
Check the footnote that follows "Chinese American" in the lead sentence. It is an interview where Yang states that he is Chinese American. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 12:24, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know - An IP had claimed it wasn't vandalism so after a google search, it seemed that he was Taiwanese, however, now that you point out the footnote, I definitely agree that the IP's edit is vandalism. - Fastily (talk) 02:49, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Based on addition of references and new content, would you please reconsider your opinion? Thanks. --Ragib (talk) 18:40, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Edit
I was trying to get rid of a biased edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.113.188.191 (talk) 02:03, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Thank you
... for your help with the vandalism on my user pages. Astronaut (talk) 05:07, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
The request to block Gun in my pocket due to username issues has been declined. Unlike the other 2 accounts which you listed, the username itself does not seem to be a problem. Please note that reports about sockpuppetry should be made at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations, even if the main reason for suspecting sockpuppetry stems from the username. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:05, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Re:plainlinks
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Miss Nepal
About your revert on Miss Nepal, are you sure 90.195.181.221 's edits are incorrect? If you look at the revision history of Miss Nepal he's been making dozens of edits, and if that one is in incorrect that would mean all previous edits are in bad faith. What is your opinion on this? Antivenin 07:36, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thanks for that fix on my talk page. I had copied the template from another user and didn't even think to edit it. Best, TNXMan 22:09, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
WP:FILMS Welcome
Hey, welcome to WikiProject Films! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of films, awards, festivals, filmmaking, and film characters. If you haven't already, please add {{User WikiProject Films}} to your user page.
A few features that you might find helpful:
- Most of our important discussions about the project itself and its related articles take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
- The project has a monthly newsletter. The newsletter for February has been published. March's issue is currently in production; it will be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.
There is a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:
- Want to jump right into editing? The style guidelines show things you should include.
- Want to assist in some current backlogs within the project? Visit the Announcements template to see how you can help.
- Want to know how good our articles are? Our assessment department has rated the quality of every film article in Wikipedia. Check it out!
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Nehrams2020 (talk) 23:14, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Apparently not vandalism? Yeah, just an entire evening's worth of work. :P I'm glad you did revert it but I wonder how the edit history for that article looked anything like vandalism. Anyway, if you're interested in the RinkWorks article please do help it because it is up for deletion and I'm going to bed any time now. -- Kevin Saff (talk) 05:58, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
- Hi, I've declined your speedy deletion nomination of Scorpion Lrv as after a bit of salvage it seems clear to me that its a military vehicle (though the article could do with a bit of expansion). What do you think of it now? WereSpielChequers 09:58, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Non-free images
Hey, please check out here, #12 under the "Images" list. The IP was correct to remove them. It may be a good idea to offer an apology. --Bongwarrior (talk) 04:53, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
download's special barnstar
|
download's special barnstar | |
| Thanks for signing my guestbook! Reading small print carefully really is a skill more people should have. -download | sign! 18:45, 16 March 2009 (UTC) |
WP:FILMS Coordinator Election
I see you just marked this page as patrolled. This looks like a test to me - are you sure it's a proper page? - Pointillist (talk) 18:00, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
- Ignore my last. The creator has explained on User talk:Johnny83m. - Pointillist (talk) 18:26, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi Fastily, hope you don't mind but I've declined the speedy on this chap as the latest version of the article has him having played at international level - i.e. notability has been asserted. ϢereSpielChequers 18:21, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thanks for the backup! --jhanCRUSH 06:52, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
What the hell was that?
? bd2412 T 03:24, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Re: Mikey Batts
Hi Fastily. No, no don't worry, I sorted it all out, no problem. Thank you for the apology, it's very gracious of you, although it is quite unnecessary as we all make mistakes. Have a pleasant evening/night/morning. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 04:48, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Strasberg
Only to let you know, someone saw this helpful edit. Cheers, Gwen Gale (talk) 05:20, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
TheRedPenOfDoom (Again)
I noticed your commentary on the user talk page for "TheRedPenOfDoom" and that person's constant revisions and edits on various topics. I have noticed a great number of removals on the seemingly innocent Diner lingo page. For example; the listing of the slang "Jack Benny", slang for a bacon and cheese sandwich (named after the comic), included a reference to the entertainer. I added a metalink to the listing for Jack Benny. "TRPOD" saw fit to remove this, as well as the listing that the sandwich was named after the man. According to the history for that page this person made 18 (EIGHTEEN!) removals on 24 February 2009 alone, just for that page! Just thought you'd like to know. Unidyne (talk) 23:05, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
UPDATE: Thank you for your actions. Unidyne (talk) 18:48, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for reverting that vandalism to my user talk page. Much appreciated. DanielDeibler (talk) 02:42, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
New message
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Abbey Road on the River
Hi:
I curious why you rolled back changes on the above page on 29mar09. It looks like you removed the names Pete Santora and Morgan Zimmer.
I don't know who the right names were so I put ??? in the blanks hoping someone would fill them in.
Someone did and I was happy.
You removed the names. Do you know that these names are not correct?
-robfromcincinnati —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robfromcincinnati (talk • contribs) 14:03, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Northrup R. Knox
Why did you revert the edits to Northrup R. Knox?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:31, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
RE:Angel Locsin
OK, noted. It's just that this Gerald Gonzalez guy exhausted me and my mates' patience; I know how he whines whenever I complain regarding his monkey business. Blake Gripling (talk) 05:22, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject Films March 2009 Newsletter
The March 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:06, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Bubble tea!
-download | sign! has given you a bubble tea! Bubble teas promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a bubble tea, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy drinking!
Spread the bubbliness of bubble teas by adding {{subst:bubble tea}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!
Re: Portapotty
I'm not sure what to make of that. — neuro(talk)(review) 06:37, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
- It's just what I always wanted!
–Juliancolton | Talk 13:31, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
A little too late for hanging chads...
Sorry, Fastily, but I've reverted your vote here. I'm afraid you are a just a tad too late for the election -- it closed on March 28 and that's an archived page now. No more hanging chads. Of course, you'll get another shot at it in about six months. Cheers. — CactusWriter | needles 07:45, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Do not accuse me of vandalism. I take that very seriously. Please REVIEW what you are reverting in the future. Very Old School Goth (talk) 00:36, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Rockland
I do not understand why you felt it necessary to revert my edit. Considering Rockland is my hometown I think I know about the schools there. How could it be unconstructive if it is a valid fact about Rockland’s education system? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfry3 (talk • contribs) 00:52, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Wikiproject Novels
Fasilty -- I must've hit the wrong button, for which my apologies. I'm a member of Wikiproject Novels and they asked us to add our names to the list of active members on the project page. Thanks Zoidbergmd (talk) 01:07, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Not in the slightest, Fastily; it took about twenty more seconds. And thanks for all the great work you do and have done with Wiki. Zoidbergmd (talk) 07:55, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
RFA
Hello. In this RFA, [3], you left this comment under the support section. I fixed it accordingly not knowing if it was a support v!ote, or a comment. If it was a comment, it was not indented. I just wanted to let you know, so that if it was not a v!ote, you can change it. Thanks. America69 (talk) 01:23, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
- I am sorry about that mistake. I had just woken up, and being a little tired, must have mistaken that. Sorry about that mistake. Thanks. America69 (talk) 15:25, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
That IP is keeping you busy rv my page. I appreciate your efforts. Tiderolls 01:23, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you!
|
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
| Thank you for your vandalism reverting! Every article I look at that has vandalism has already been reverted! Marshall T. Williams (talk) 01:31, 5 April 2009 (UTC) |
- I wish someone would give one to me. --Marshall T. Williams (talk) 23:36, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
|
User:Marshall Williams2 has given you the finger! Giving the finger promotes WikiHate and hopefully this one has made your day worse. Spread the WikiHate by giving the finger to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! --Marshall T. Williams (talk) 23:39, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
::So this is why I'm giving you this! Hee hee hee. |
Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts
I would strongly encourage you to not revert any edits from other users at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts. The more one lets a user leave edits there that are inappropriate, the more rope one gives them to hang themselves. --Boston (talk) 19:09, 5 April 2009 (UTC)--Boston (talk) 19:09, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
The edit to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaspar_Yanga is intended to update the reference url that is no longer accessible and thus is not of much use to a would be reader. An archived version of the original url was provided as a result. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikesoft (talk • contribs) 21:21, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
I've re-added the archived url of the original article, the original url does show that it was permanently shutdown on Oct. 31, 2008 as seen here: [4] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikesoft (talk • contribs) 21:30, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
I removed the F7 speedy tag, as the image appears to be a logo, was tagged as such. Disputed fair use {{dfu}} could be used if the FuR is disputed, or send it to Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Thanks Skier Dude (talk) 23:24, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
RFA thanks
| My RFA passed today at 61/5/4. Thanks for participating in my RFA. I appreciate all the comments I received and will endeavor to justify the trust the WP community has placed in me. Have a nice day. :-) AdjustShift (talk) 20:53, 11 April 2009 (UTC) | 
|
Vandalism?
I noticed that you reverted this edit and called it vandalism on the user's page. I think that this information was at least added in good faith, and perhaps something that should have stayed in the article. it may have been a bit poorly worded, but I don't think the intent was malicious. KJS77 02:51, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
attempted de-orphaning
So in what way was the attempt at de-orphaning Galactic Odyssey unconstructive? I looked through the wiki pages that were candidates, I googled the book and tried to find other leads, I tried searching for pages mentioning the main character Billy Danger, and came up with nothing. So, in order to let others know that I'd worked on it and couldn't come up with any way of providing more links, I put the att tag in the orphan template, and noted that I'd tried in the edit summary. Where did I go wrong? Agathman (talk) 02:52, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Sending you a message, by clicking the link where you've said "please send me a message", is "unconstructive"?
Hello? Have you set up an automated response so that you respond to any message saying it's "unconstructive?" I'm confused. Oh, sorry, forgot to sign. Agathman (talk) 02:56, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Vandalism
I wouldn't call this edit vandalism. He was doing what I wanted him to do, which would make it acceptable on Wikipedia. The edit did not just get rid of the speedy, but fixed the article correctly. He may not have handled it properly. but he is new. Thanks! Ŵïllî§ï$2? (Talk!/Sign) 02:56, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
RE: The Last Emperor
there. a better edit summary :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by RuthlessOne (talk • contribs) 03:17, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
I tried explaining the whole public domain thing to him but he doesn't quite get it. I tried helping him but to no avail. Momusufan (talk) 03:33, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Corey Taylor page
If you want a page full of unsourced info to stand with your name on it, be my guest. I'll keep trying to keep Wiki an encyclopedia with my own efforts.Portia327 (talk) 03:34, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Vicini
Why did you reverted the edits I was doing. That pages has no links or external sources, and I was adding them. It has a tag placed that says that it is an orphan and to help improve it. I as doing so. I was correcting some gramatical errors, not (spelling). --Juliaaltagracia (talk) 03:36, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
revert
I added a reference to Irresistible force paradox article, and it got reverted by you within seconds and I got some sort of automated warning on my talk page from you. What is that about? Can't I add youtube videos as source? TheFreeloader (talk) 03:44, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Tupolev Tu-95
Tupolev Tu-95 edit I performed was removing a computer generagted image of what they claim is the Tupolev Tu-95. I removed it for several reasons. 1) It is a computer generated image, not an actual photo. 2) It is a poor representation of a Tupolev Tu-95 aircraft, and though only airplane geeks would notice, I thought that was the point of having people edit wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Helloaday (talk • contribs) 03:51, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Candidate for Speedy Deletion
Your comment was listed as "unconstructive" on a page I recommended for speedy deletion, Lil Henchmen. What exactly does that mean? I proposed the article for speedy deletion that was reverted several times. I'm curious, did you even review the page? I believe that the edit summary provided the necessary information as the page in question seem to be under dispute. JustAKnowItAll (talk) 04:00, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Huggle Reverts
Hi, you may need to slow down and do closer inspections of the edits you are reverting :) Unomi (talk) 04:54, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Your recents reverts
The edits and reverts you are making appeared to be unconstructives. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edits are constructives, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to readAGF. Thank you. --Juliaaltagracia (talk) 05:05, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Using Huggle
Hi, Fastily! I should inform you that there is a thread at WP:AN/I regarding one of your huggle reverts. I assume the revert itself was a mistake, but I suggest you be more careful when using this tool. As it says, "Huggle is a tool for dealing with vandalism. Its nature requires that it is capable of editing pages quickly, and of making many edits in a short space of time. Such features should be used with caution." And also, "Responsibility for edits rests with the owner of the account with which they are made. "Use of an automated tool" is not an excuse." Please use huggle only for clear cases of vandalism and other unconstructive edits, and do not use it for anything you are unsure of. Make sure an edit needs to be reverted before you hit the revert button. Assume good faith when it seems appropriate. In such cases, reverting should be done manually and huggle should not be used. Cheers. Chamal talk 05:47, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Happy Easter!
.jpg)
On behalf of the Kindness campaign, I just wanted to wish my fellow Wikipedians a Happy Easter! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 06:45, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Questionable Revert
I do not see how my addition was 'unconstructive' or irrelevant.
How far apart is 'VINCERE VEL MORI - "To conquer or die"' and '“VINCE AUT MORIRE” (Conquer or Die)'?
Especially, when concurrent similar information is given.
I believe you are mistaken in your change.
If you feel the format of providing backing information is technically incorrect, I suggest you change only that portion.
It appears, by looking at your messages, that you are overzealous with reverts. Perhaps, a bit more caution?
Thank you, I appreciate your attention.
Nantucketnoon (talk) 09:02, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Nantucketnoon (talk) 09:12, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Nantucketnoon (talk) 21:49, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Reconsideration
I appreciate your reconsideration of my edits to Corey Taylor. Portia327 (talk) 18:33, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi Fastily, thanks for the feedback, these are images I had on my harddrive which I know are hp-promotional material. However since the url´s change mostly weekly on the webpages it will probably be hard to find the original source, but I will give it a try. --Atxbyea (talk) 00:30, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
RfA
Hi, Fastily. It's not a big deal, but comments like this are somewhat unnecessary. In general, it's probably best to ignore such opposes, and let the bureaucrats deal with it. Regards, –Juliancolton | Talk 13:11, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
- Nah, there's really no need. Just something to keep in mind. :) –Juliancolton | Talk 20:07, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
RfA Thankspam
| Thanks to everyone who took the time and trouble to take part in my RfA whether support, oppose or neutral. All comments are valued and will be considered carefully in the coming weeks. Feel free to add more advice on my talk page if you think I need it. SpinningSpark 22:32, 16 April 2009 (UTC) In case you're wondering, the image is a smiley, just a little more aesthetic, but not as serious as the Mona Lisa |
|
Thoughts plz
Hi Fastily, I've started a thread at WT:RFA#CSD tagging which would really benefit from the views of CSD taggers such as yourself. ϢereSpielChequers 11:30, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Why Were My Edits Undone?
My edits on Groomer Has It which you reverted on April 18th were clearly constructive. Why were they reverted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chastayo (talk • contribs) 01:34, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Why Were My Edits Also Undone?
I don't know why you reverted my edits to Jeffrey Hoffman's page. I was adding updated information about his sefvice on the faculty at MIT, taken from his MIT homepage (and prperly cited with a reference to that homepage). I also added a summary of his astronaut service to the opening of the entry, in response to someone's insertion of a "too short" marker at the top of the entry. I've just spent an hour trying to correct the lack of information in this entry, and you've just removed everything I added for no apparent reason. Why??? (All of the information I added is easily verified from the provided citations, either the official NASA biography (citation 1) or the MIT bio (citation 4). This is obviously useful and important information. I have known Jeff for 15 years, and I am a writer for the MIT News Office. So what's the problem here?) Davidlchandler (talk) 01:56, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Cricket photo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cricket900ppx.jpg The cricket in this photo appears to be covered with some kind of reddish dust. Or perhaps this is its natural coloring? Pendragon39 (talk) 20:18, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you!
Since you took some time out to correspond to me directly, I wanted to thank you with similar directness for your kindness and support on my RfA - the former more than the latter. It's gone through, so if you need an admin-person for anything, by all means give me a call any time! - Vianello (Talk) 02:59, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that you left a message to IP user 207.180.139.114 said that his editing was unconstructive. However, I found his editing is constructive because he updated newest result of US Go Open by adding 2008 winner Myungwan Kim. Please check here for all the results of 2008 US Go Open. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nonantum (talk • contribs) 15:45, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
TfD nomination of Template:911ct supporters
Template:911ct supporters has been nominated for deletion by Ice Cold Beer. As this TfD nomination includes objections to the same list of people that is currently in use in Template:911ct, I am inviting you to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. (I am sending this message to you as a current or former editor of Alex Jones (radio host), following the guideline on multiple messages.) Regards — Cs32en 11:27, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject Films April 2009 Newsletter
The April 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 07:43, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Can you help me with Wikipedia?
Hi, my name is Himasha. I'm still new to Wikipedia. Can you help me with editing and creating articles? Himasha Wijesurendra (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:25, 14 May 2009 (UTC).
RE: Re: Can you help me with Wikipedia?
Is there a way in Wikipedia to create & edit articles without viewing its source? - I mean in web designing we can use a software like Dreamweaver instead of typing its source in a text document & saving as an HTML. Is there a way in Wikipedia to create & edit articles simply as using dreamweaver in creating a web page?--Himasha Wijesurendra (talk) 09:30, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Thank You.--Himasha Wijesurendra (talk) 06:34, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
File:N. M. Price - Sir Walter Scott - Guy Mannering - At the Kaim of Derncleugh original scan.png
Hello,
you asked to delete File:N. M. Price - Sir Walter Scott - Guy Mannering - At the Kaim of Derncleugh original scan.png however it looks meerly huge and started down loading OK. Have you confirmed that the full resolution is a dud? It is too large for WP to produce a thumbnail. There is a sepcial note requesting that it not be deleted. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:26, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
RE: Green Guestbook
Thank you for your help with my guestbook. Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk | Sign 10:23, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
The image downloads fine. Unfortunately,Wikipedia cannot thumbnail PNG images over 12 megapixels, however, if anyone wants to re-edit the original scan, they would need to work from the PNG, not the JPEG. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 13:23, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for the feedback
|
Unfortunately, my RFA was closed today with a final tally of 75½/38/10. Though it didn't succeed, I wanted to thank you for your participation in it. I intend to review the support, oppose, and neutral !votes and see what I can do to address those concerns. Special thanks go to Schmidt, MICHAEL Q., TomStar81, and henrik for their co-nominations and support. — BQZip01 — talk 20:15, 15 May 2009 (UTC) |
you do realize...
that it is an image of me, and that i am under contract with the company that made the image, right?? and that i made the screen capture, correct?? you realize there is a reason that they send me the dvds, right? IsraelXKV8R (talk) 03:10, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- thanx for the rm. peace. IsraelXKV8R (talk) 03:17, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Reply
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
suzumebachi٭secret 00:53, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
I fixed File:HAYSusd261logo11.jpg
I added the appropriate tags and category to Image:HAYSusd261logo11.jpg -- Eastmain (talk) 03:49, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
26 Sqn Badge.jpg
Hi I've added a fair use rationale for the image. Hope its now in order. Regards. Desaxe (talk) 22:16, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Re: Adminship
Sure, I'll look through your contributions and provide a few suggestions. Regards, –Juliancolton | Talk 04:27, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
Hey, thanks for the barnstar its greatly appreciated. Salavat (talk) 04:29, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 01:58, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks ... I'm still trying to learn the warning messages better so I do appreciate the tips! BobKawanaka (talk) 22:25, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
BattlefieldBritain.jpg
Thanks for helping me with the link to the Wikipedia:Non-free_use_rationale_guideline page. I'm very new to wikipedia and I'm finding it difficult to understand all of the things I need to add etc. Once i've added the information you have requested would you be prepared to check the tag and advise me of any mistakes?
Thanks.
Dave Of Stoft (talk) 08:39, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Battlefield Britain image
Thanks for your help. I copied the Wikipedia Template (which is for as book) and re-edited it. I guess I missed one of the book references. I don't suppose you can remove the speedy deletion tag now? Dave Of Stoft (talk) 11:03, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello and thanks for your messages regarding the tags for the pictures on our site. I am the photographer/owner of the images and became confused from all of the information (which seems contradictory) about tags for license and permission. Can you advise me on the appropriate tags as the owner of the photos. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by BTRUIIU (talk • contribs) 20:36, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject Films May 2009 Newsletter
The May 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 23:24, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for the support
I would like to thank you for coming out and participating in my Request for Adminship, which closed unsuccessfully at (48/8/6) based on my withdrawal. I withdrew because in my opinion I need to focus on problems with my content contributions before I can proceed with expanding my responsibilities. Overall I feel that the RfA has improved me as an editor and in turn some articles which in my eyes is successful. Thank you again for your support. Cheers and happy editing.--kelapstick (talk) 18:06, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- I forgot to mention, I appreciated your updating the counter my contributions, however the two edits was intentional on my part. It was in part because I do not feel that someone's edit count is proportional to their value to the project (something I see you do as well), and because I find it amusing. I appreciate the effort but I have switched it back. Thanks again! --kelapstick (talk) 21:19, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
RfA thanks
|
Thank you for participating in my RfA, which succeeded with 56 in support, 12 in opposition and 3 neutral votes. I am truly honored by the trust that the community has placed in me. Whether you supported me, opposed me, or if you only posted questions or commented om my RfA, I thank you for your input and I will be looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas :). If you ever need anything please feel free to ask me and I would be happy to help you :). All the Best, Mifter (talk) |
Mifter (talk) 23:40, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of SMX (computer language)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article SMX (computer language), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:
- No sources given to establish notability.
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Cybercobra (talk) 09:09, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Your note
Thanks, I normally do, but I had a kitten in my left arm and was having problems typing. :) Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 20:40, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Not a problem. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 20:45, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Some shameless thankspam!
frequency response function
Hiya,
I've processed Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects#Redirect request: frequency response function; I've marked it as declined, but see my reasoning in the box. I've also explained that to the user in User talk:62.147.36.43#frequency response function. Hopefully I've done a good thing and I'm not treading on your toes? Cheers, Chzz ► 15:12, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi Mr. Fastily, thank you for your message. I'm new to the uploading thing, could you tell me what is the proper tag for Players' pics? all pictures are taken from FIFA website. Thanks in advance. Mussav (talk) 02:22, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Re: Thanks for your help now I understood the rules. It seems I can't do anything about it since it's hard to contact FIFA and it may take a very long time to get the answer from them. you can delete the pictures. I just have one last question, can I upload the pictures to Flickr just like these pictures (eg: File:Adriano saopaulo.jpg and File:C Ronaldo.jpg)? and if I can what is the proper tag for those pictures. Thanks again. Mussav (talk) 03:38, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
I've got the Premission
I spoke to one of iraqsp.net owners and I asked him to give me the premission to upload their pictures to wikipedia. they accepted and gave me the premission. Then I asked him to e-mail wikipedia by thie e-mail. permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Is what I did was okay? Mussav (talk) 18:12, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- I just spoke with him again and he told me that he sent the approval to upload their pictures on wikipedia. So can I upload thier pictures? Mussav (talk) 18:17, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- I'm sorry for troubling you but I made this File:Nashat Akram.jpg, is this okay? Mussav (talk) 18:41, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Dateline File
I may need help with that. I don't really know what to put.Pburns11 (talk) 20:23, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- That's fine if it doesn't work. I'll put the old one back up. Pburns11 (talk) 01:48, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Kooks Image
Hi, you placed a tag about the copyright use of an image of the Kooks I uploaded. Just to explain, I took the image off Wikipedia commons and re-uploaded it.
I'm basically new to wikipedia so I not sure about how to clarify the image is free use, as all on wikipedia commons are. Is there any way I can cite Commons as the source.
I've made an attempt on the image desciption page but I'm not sure if it's acceptable.
Sorry to bother you and I'd appreciate any help,
Thanks --RavensFists (talk) 19:10, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
My Picture
I apologize for using two licenses. I wasn't sure since this is my first time uploading an image. Thank you for the information and I will make due changes. Marx01 (talk) 05:17, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
The intelligence, or lack thereof, of bots
Hi, Fastily. Perhaps your experience with bots has been better than mine, but I believe they're not only retarded, but persistently and agressively so. I've seen them needlessly delete countless images... Acceptable Fair Use and even Public Domain that were properly labeled, but the bot couldn't read whatever particular format was used. And nobody-- especially the bot-owner-- seems to care when they do. That's why I put multiple formats in my image descriptions... Anyway, I've got these images on my watchlist, so if some bumbling, self-important jackass of a bot tries to delete one, I'll catch it. :) Cheers! Dekkappai (talk) 20:23, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've got rants splattered all over Wikipedia, and not just for bot-use :) Editing here is a fun and educational hobby, but a frustrating one at times... Happy editing! Dekkappai (talk) 21:03, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi Fastily -- what do I need to do to put the Zubis Rises picture up?
Zubis picture
Hi Fastily -- somebody named ImageBot removed the Zubis picture. What should I do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Critic11 (talk • contribs) 13:46, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
HI -- the author sent me the .jpg for me to use after I asked him/her; they have the copyright but said it was okay to put it up. So what do I do to tag it? I looked at the copyright page but I wasn't sure what to do!
I -- am new to this. Give me an email I can I forward the email I got from her to you?
----- Original Message ----- From: Kellyann Zuzulo <zuzulok@hotmail.com> Date: Thursday, June 25, 2009 5:43 pm Subject: RE: bookcover jpeg To: Hollis Robbins <hrobbins@jhu.edu> > You have my permission to put this cover of A GENIE IN THE HOUSE OF > SAUD up on Wikipedia. > > K. F. Zuzulo > > www.zubisrises.com > > www.kfzuzulo.com >
Future Eyes
Thanks for explaining that I had uploaded the File:Sheila Walsh-Future Eyes 500.jpg image and it was in danger of being deleted. Too bad you didn't explain how to add the required information and haven't complained to the owners of the site that when uploading album art work, from the provided drop down menu, that additional information should be requested. Otherwise, otherwise legitimate material will be removed. These are the barriers that make entry into updating Wikipedia nearly impossible for the technically adept. I believe that I have added sufficient information that it won't make it to the speedy delete list. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:53, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Image copyright
Hi Fastily,
I have spoken to the original owner of the photos File:Anahita-Xerxes.jpg and File:Shir o Khorshid.jpg that I have uploaded recently and he granted me the full permission. His name is Dr. Nasser Engheta and his website is: http://nasserengheta.com/ketab-shirokhorshid.htm and his phone number is +1 661 254 8757. These files are all over Internet but he is particularly contented for adding his photos that are coming from his books to Wikipedia.
Cheers. Cyrusace —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyrusace (talk • contribs) 00:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Image Description
I have removed the picture since the picture is already available on Wikipedia. Thanks for your concern. Nefirious (talk) 03:58, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject Films June 2009 Newsletter
The June 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 08:28, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Image copyright (Aina)
Hi Fastily,
Thank you for notifying me about the picture. I found the original site, and it allows it to be distributed under a Creative Commons license. I have corrected it. Thank You!
Cheers Fellowedmonton —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fellowedmonton (talk • contribs) 16:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Copyright on pictures I've uploaded
I am having difficulty figuring out how to add copyright info. I took a picture myself and uploaded it, so I have no real copyright. What should I do?
Added the hangon criteria
Please refer to [[5]] and let me know if that's enough or if you need anything else. Cheers. Krupo (talk) 05:13, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
File:Kevinrivers.jpg
Hi Fastly,
I've deleted the old image and placed a new one under the same profile Kevin Rivers. This image was created by Kevin Rivers and under the CC license. Please let me know if everything else checks out OK. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xandus (talk • contribs) 01:03, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations
After your successful request I have added the admin rights to your account. Spend some more time on the administrators' reading list especially if you take on a task you're not as familiar with. Be conservative with the tools, particularly blocking, as it's usually better to learn to de-escalate a situation than to inflame it with blocks, etc. Keep up the good work, stay conscientious, and I'm sure you'll do well. - Taxman Talk 01:20, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
- Congrats! –Juliancolton | Talk 01:36, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
- More congrats!--Wehwalt (talk) 01:55, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
- ¡sʇɐɹƃuoɔ Plastikspork (talk) 02:45, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Re: Questions
Hey, i answered your questions on my talk page. Salavat (talk) 05:03, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
WVTP
Hi there! I just noticed that WVTP is a redirect to itself, probably not what you intended :) Also, there's probably not much point in using class=redirect in Template:Afc talk as you did at User talk:69.48.57.61 because "bringing the article to the next level" does not really make sense for redirects! Finally, would you please consider unprotecting your talk page so that unregistered users can contact you? This is especially important as you work with lots of anons in AfC. Cheers, — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:06, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Reply
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 04:44, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Edit conflicts...
aren't fun. I try making a redirect; Fastily does it. I move on and try and close the RFC; Fastily does it. Lame. Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 00:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Happy Bastille Day!
Dear fellow Wikipedian, on behalf of the Kindness campaign, I just want to wish you a Happy Bastille Day, whether you are French, Republican or not! :) Happy Editing! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 22:14, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
lol yeah it seems I learn fast ! ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Utod15 (talk • contribs) 01:26, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 02:17, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Yet again
...you beat me to the punch. I was just about to ask you to take a look at the FfD, but it seems you were already there. Thanks. Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 04:37, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
- I've removed the gallery from the article, and closed the discussion. Thanks for helping out. Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 06:56, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Reversion on Canada's role in the invasion of Afghanistan
Hi Fastily,
You just reverted a series of edits I made to Canada's role in the invasion of Afghanistan. With all due respect, I believe you may have been mistaken. If you would please take a closer look at my 3 edits that you reverted, I placed text that is a straight copy-and-paste from a Canadian government website in quotation marks and italics to make it clear that those are quotes. I also explained the reasons for doing this on the discussion page of the article (including WP:COPY). I had also correctly updated the tally of casualties for the latest casualty reported today. That too was lost by your revert. Sincerely 76.69.229.162 (talk) 21:17, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick restore! Cheers 76.69.229.162 (talk) 21:25, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks a bundle
for rescuing my user page! Favonian (talk) 21:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm Confused
I thought that Wikipedia was free for everyone to edit and enjoy, and that anyone could contribute. I have fished for gar and they do in fact taste like chicken, it is a serious entry that needs to be included for people who might want to eat gar but aren't sure what it tastes like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MisterMonkey (talk • contribs) 21:44, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
In regards to BC Highway 6 edit...
This edit was based on the page format and style of BC Highway 3A, which has 2 segments as well. Highway 6 also has 2 segments, which are connected, but distinct. Would recommend, and request that the page be reverted back to the edited version. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.157.119.55 (talk) 22:14, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
why was my edit reverted?
My edit was clearly constructive. These two are well known for their resemblance to each other.--24.218.164.106 (talk) 22:19, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
- I am well aware of the no original research policy. I have seen this resemblance mentioned on dozens of websites.--24.218.164.106 (talk) 22:24, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
F-16 edit changes
Thanks Buck Claborn (talk) 22:46, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks (signing comment)
Thanks, I didn't realize that with the tildes. Will note that in the future. Take care, --stephanie —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephkru (talk • contribs) 22:56, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi - you've reverted some changes to cord blood, and left an "unconstructive changes" message on an IP user's talk page. While the IP user was wrong in some of the edits, some of them were perfectly correct (e.g. the status of the duke university study) or lacking a source. I think it was unnecessary to put this on their talk page, as they clearly were editing in good faith. I'm going to put back in one of the edits (Duke) and the correct version of another (estimates of own use of cord blood).VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 00:55, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Isn't the license fair use? –Juliancolton | Talk 17:52, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
- Ah. :) –Juliancolton | Talk 17:59, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
- Still not sure the tag is accurate. The original image may or may not be public domain. We don't know when it was created. Taylor died in 1928, so the portrait could have been done after 1923. Also, some of the portraits were done posthumously (e.g. Christopher Greenup died in 1818, but the Kentucky Historical Society says his portrait wasn't painted until 1907.) That's why I went with fair use vs. public domain. Isn't the current copyright tag incompatible with fair use? Acdixon (talk • contribs • count) 18:11, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
- Hmmm...now that I look at it, yes it would be. Paintings in the US need to have been at least 70 years old to be in the public domain. Perhaps some more research is needed before it can be determined whether to use the {{pd-art}} tag or {{Non-free 2D art}}. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:16, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
- Still not sure the tag is accurate. The original image may or may not be public domain. We don't know when it was created. Taylor died in 1928, so the portrait could have been done after 1923. Also, some of the portraits were done posthumously (e.g. Christopher Greenup died in 1818, but the Kentucky Historical Society says his portrait wasn't painted until 1907.) That's why I went with fair use vs. public domain. Isn't the current copyright tag incompatible with fair use? Acdixon (talk • contribs • count) 18:11, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
File:Wicked-1- (2).jpg
Hey there! If you look on the picture's page you will see that I have updated its information. Will that be enough? I am new and am still a little confused on some guidelines. Thank you. Broadwayfan15 (talk) 22:05, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
- Hey thanks. Everything looks good now. I really appreciate the help. Broadwayfan15 (talk) 23:37, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
o_0
DAMN! You're fast! I just finished adding a FUR to the image using a wikipedia add-on gadget.. KMFDM FAN (talk!) 23:33, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Sfefcu.gif
I have added the source information as requested. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paraplegicemu (talk • contribs) 01:04, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
File copyright problem with File:Corporate Office.JPG
Hi
It is okay that you deleted File:Corporate Office.JPG. The same image with all the necessary copyright information was uploaded just after that. There were some network issues during the upload of the deleted file. Thanks! -- Sreejith Kumar (talk) 07:34, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Invitation to provide further input on desysop proposal
As someone who commented either for or against proposals here, I would like to invite you to comment further on the desysop process proposal and suggest amendments before I move the proposal into projectspace for wider scrutiny and a discussion on adoption. The other ideas proposed on the page were rejected, and if you are uninterested in commenting on the desysop proposal I understand of course. Thanks! → ROUX ₪ 04:31, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Images review request
You seem to know about the use of images on here. So I wonder if you could take a look at 2004 World Series at some point, as I'm hoping to make it a FAC, but I want to be certain there are no copyright problems first. BUC (talk) 11:25, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback. I have looked for a smaller version on the WS logo but I can't find one. BUC (talk) 13:35, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
disclaiming my own comments?
Hello, I noticed your little note in one of my RfA comments. Is this something that I should do myself in future, until I've built up a history, or is it something that I should leave to other editors to add? I note that you're busy and might not answer quickly, so I'll add a small note myself to any further comments I make at RfA. Just to make things clear: I am note complaining about the note, or you adding the note. I think it's a good idea. Kind Regards, NotAnIP83:149:66:11 (talk) 12:14, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. It seems that it'd be useful for me to i)add the note myself, and ii)not bold any comments and iii)not worry too much if any comments I make are discounted (unless I present clear links) until I build up a history. That's ok, it seems reasonable. Kind regards! NotAnIP83:149:66:11 (talk) 20:57, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Fyi regarding FfD
You might be interested in my comment here.--Rockfang (talk) 21:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Edit to Natural bodybuilding
Be careful on edits like this [6]. I know reverting content blanking from IPs is almost always reverting vandalism, but in this case the IP was removing vandalism and you re-added it. Just a heads up. --Yankees76 (talk) 21:57, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Boeing PMTD
Just to ask, how is the picture “Boeing PMTD.jpg” an invalid non-free use? It was a picture that was released by Boeing for publicity of the PMTD, and it was not replicable with a free image because the PMTD is an experimental aircraft. So, I don’t really understand how that is not non-free promotional material. Enryū6473 Talk 18:35, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- Ok, thank you for clearing that up. I know it looks like a regular remote control plane, but the PMTD (which stands for Persistent Munition Technology Demonstrator) is a plane designed to test new technology for UAVs. So it is only in use by Boeing . I have a hunch that there is only one, but I’m not sure.
|
The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar | |
| For helping to clear up the copyright status of the image Boeing PMTD.jpg. Enryū6473 Talk 01:36, 24 July 2009 (UTC) |
Question About Non-Free Use
I'm fairly ignorant when it comes to image use in Wikipedia, so forgive me, but I can't find an answer, so I'll ask you, cause you tagged the image I uploaded as in need of a license, so I assume you'll know an answer =P. The image is from WikiSky's SDSS mode, meaning it's imaged by the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. The license agreement for image use of SDSS images is found here (http://www.sdss.org/gallery/usage_policy.html). I assume, as a result, that the image is free to use on Wikipedia, so long as credit is given to SDSS and a link issued on the page? What template and license would I use as a result? I also read elsewhere that non-commercial images still get treated as non-free images here on Wiki? If that's true in this context, what would I do to make it legal to keep the image on Wikipedia? Fair use policy by keeping it only as a low-res illustration...? --Dark dude (talk) 00:20, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
File:Vojdan krvava svadba.jpg
Hi. I want to ask you something about one picture. The file (File:Vojdan krvava svadba.jpg) was nominated to be deleted but you have put a tag that it does not fulfil the requirements for such action. I have provided a description why it is uploaded and where it is used and why, so now can I remove the tag for possible deletion or not? Thanks in advance.--MacedonianBoy (talk) 16:45, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
- Hi again. I have changed the description template, you can check it if it is OK. Thanks and best regards,--MacedonianBoy (talk) 09:42, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
216.41.250.143
This user is a sock of indef blocked User:BenH. The user has vandalized several pages. A quick look in the contribs will show this. How is this not vandalism? - NeutralHomer • Talk • 23:48, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
- Not a problem. :) Thanks for taking a second look. Take Care and Have a Good Weekend...NeutralHomer • Talk • 02:22, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Silkworms and Silkmoths
Hi, I'm curious to know where you bought your silkworms and moths from. Was it online or did you purchase them in another country or did you find them outside somewhere? Did these silkworms and moths come from china, japan, india, or korea? Feel free to email me at...
email: mbynw@hotmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.230.80.10 (talk) 07:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Adding copyright tag, I think its formatted correcty but would appreciate some help on this.
Hi I am new to wikipedia and have just added copyright tags as follows
Why revert the changed redirect for T bag? It's more appropriate for it to redirect to tea bag than to teabagging. Not sure why you called this unconstructive. 90.204.226.123 (talk) 18:50, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Licensing:
{{Cc-by-sa-3.0}}
Please advise if I have added the tag correctly and if its format and wording are OK.
Thanks.
Rovington (talk)rovingtonRovington (talk)
Did you mean to strike the word "tentative" because you actually underlined it. As written ("Tentative Regretful, but very Strong Oppose") it doesn't make much sense. Also you may want to strike the open to changing part if that is no longer applicable. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:37, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
edit on page xboard
just updated the link to the homepage of xboard (it moved to the official gnu pages)... but then I got a message that you reverted it... may I ask why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.3.132.211 (talk) 20:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello - I'm new here, well not really new to wikipedia, but new to becoming involved - just wanted to suggest that Analo44 is probably a sock puppet of oropos. Thx! Remingtonhill1 (talk) 23:20, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Unblock request
Hi Fastily, and thanks for taking a look at User:Michael H 34's unblock request. As the reporting editor (also the administrator "with unclean hands"- which are in fact sparkling clean, since I have never used or threatened any adminly tools in this matter!) I obviously think he was fairly blocked for edit warring; however, I see you declined his unblock based on the fact that he had clearly broken 3RR, which I don't think he has (recently). I'm not sure if you misread the dates, or meant to say that he had clearly been EWing, but I just thought I would bring it to your attention to make sure he gets a fair hearing, and/or to try and avoid future confusion for all concerned. --Slp1 (talk) 23:52, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments, and I do agree that there has been edit warring going on! I was just a bit worried about the specific mention of clearly violating 3RR in the decline, and wondered whether it would confuse and cause questions; but it doesn't seem to have, and the block has expired, so not to worry.--Slp1 (talk) 01:50, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Why are you reverting my edits on George Gordon Meade Easby and Chair of Death?--119.73.4.0 (talk) 18:50, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Forza 3 Screenshot
I got the image from (http://uk.gamespot.com/images/0/1/?path=2009/207/Audi273_screen.jpg&caption=Van%2BDusen%2527s%2BAudi%2BR8%2BV10.&blog=1&cvr=ORl)
I really dont understand what the problem is with the image, it is only a screenshot from a video game.
As i am new to Wikipedia could you please enlighten me thankyou.
--Troggy (talk) 18:53, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
User talk:67.242.56.62
Ah, what luck. This user (who you reverted about two hours ago) is a long-time abuser, blocked twice before for exactly the kind of edit you reverted. In fact, he has a standing indef block on User:Spooky873, so he's genre warring AND evading a ban. Can you deal with him? (If you're away when this arrives, it may already be dealt with.) --King ♣ Talk 20:25, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
rm of unsourced information
Hi Fastily, do you care to comment on this edit? In WP:V I read "Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, or the material may be removed," and so it seems to me that a vandalism 1 warning isn't exactly justified. Drmies (talk) 22:09, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
- Sure thing. Thanks for keeping an eye out. I may go in and remove the entire list--it's really not up to snuff, and I wonder if the article would survive AfD. Thanks for your note, Drmies (talk) 00:59, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
List of characters from Total Drama Island
Hey there. I don't think it was intentional, but I just wanted to give you a heads up that on this edit you put back an unsourced rumor that we have been removing from the page constantly, and then you issued an unjustified warning to the IP user that removed it. HarlandQPitt (talk) 22:38, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Nosleep's RfA
Hi! You said in the discussion section that the candidate's answers to 6b and 6c were both half wrong (your wording - I would have probably said half right). Could you enlighten me what's wrong with them? I'm still trying to make up my mind, and apart from uploading a couple I haven't really worked with files at all. Thanks, Jafeluv (talk) 15:35, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks for the explanation. If someone specifically mentions PUF as an area they'd be working in when they get the tools, I guess they can expect people scrutinizing their knowledge on image policy. I agree that it's not really necessary to post that in the RfA itself – if someone wants details, nothing's stopping them for asking. By the way, I see that 6b was asked in your own RfA as well, and I believe a number of others, so it's not like the right answers are not out there... :) Jafeluv (talk) 09:24, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
at this files deletion discussion, it said that the consensus was Delete, but it doesnt seem to be deleted. does this make sense? i see you were the person working on this. i suspect theres an explanation for this, but i dont know it. please help me understand.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 21:06, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
RfA
Hey Fastily, hope everything's well with you. I just wanted to ask you about this, if you don't mind. I'm sure you understand that RfA can be an extremely stressful experience. From what I've seen, changing your vote to "very strong oppose" is demoralizing to the candidate. Bureaucrats weigh the strength of an oppose by the arguments it advances, rather than by the bold-face !vote, so it really doesn't contribute any more value to the discussion. Just something to consider. Cheers, –Juliancolton | Talk 02:48, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for understanding. :) –Juliancolton | Talk 04:02, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Not a major issue but I suspect you used the wrong block template on the above page as you've put the block time as indefinite but the template says "Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. " which is contradictory. Doubt it's a major issue as I suspect the user is unlikely to be interested in properly editing wikipedia but it does look weird. Not being an adminstator I don't know what template to replace it with. Dpmuk (talk) 11:33, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Objection
If the page PCCOE comes under G11 then why nt the pages like COEP,MIT PUNE? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.98.31.130 (talk) 19:00, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
copyright error
Hello, thanks for pointing that out, fixed it as soon as realised. I think I was being a bit dozy! Regards, Hayalperest (Hayalperest (talk) 21:27, 30 July 2009 (UTC))
User:Than I have ever known
Wow, you're quick! Thanks for the quick action, I'll make sure that the articles he created still have the CSD noms on them. Much appreciated! Frmatt (talk) 06:35, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
PlanGuru deletion
Hi, Can you please explain to me why the PlanGuru article was deleted? I don't see how the article is any different from all of the other business software articles I have read. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dennyp22 (talk • contribs) 17:53, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Métaux Précieux SA Métalor : hangon
Métaux Précieux SA Métalor Hangon
Firstly I would like to stress out that I am neither personally nor family-wise, nor in any other way connected with the company, neither financially nor in any other possible way.
I have been lately doing my best, mainly on E and F wiki, to give a much clearer and thourough knowledge of the watch industry, in particular the Swiss Watch Industry. Having spent all my managerial career within the industry, I feel that it is necessary that the relaating articles give more knowledge to the people interested in, as has been the case up to now.
I had planned to continue constructing the article with much more technical knowledge of what involves the making of precious metal watch cases, etc.,
I do not feel that this page can be constructed as an advertisement for a company that does business only with manufacturers, who have the knowledge and can decide to place their orders wherever they please (mind you there are not so many refining companies in the field world wide.
At your disposal for further talks.
In any case, my trying to contribute to wikipedia might be somewhat more worthy than a quick deletion. Appreciating your kind cooperation. claude (talk) 23:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Regarding the above article you just deleted, I just remembered I was concerned that the images on the page might violate the copyright policy. Some of them are on the building's web site. At the moment I don't know how the licensing of images is suppose to work so if you can deal with this or let me know where to post my concerns, I'd appreciate it. --Sophitessa (talk) 23:47, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Cades29
I'm not saying the block wasn't justified. But it had been almost a half hour since the warning with no new edits ... I was about to mark it as such, and then you blocked. Could you at least consider looking at how recent the vandalism is, and whether it continued past the final warning, next time? Daniel Case (talk) 04:10, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Yup ... at that point, there are two paths they can go by, but there's still time to change the road they're on. Daniel Case (talk) 04:17, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Frye
Please notice that I was making a spelling correction. Phallogocentrism is the correct spelling of the term; hence please notice where the link is directing the reader. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.56.70.254 (talk) 04:29, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Columbine High School Page
Wikepedoa list the killers as alumni even though the school does not consider them alumni....I was told that the definition of alumni is anyone who attened ..not just graduated..an institution....i disagree with that as it takes no account into the accepted usage of the term in our society..but if the arguement is that Harris and Kleibold are listed because the went there..well then you must allow the victims to be listed as well....they also attended the school and are indeed even acknowledged as alumni ....unlike the killers.....so why would that be unconstructive —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.246.33.135 (talk) 04:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Vandalism
Please explain how adding the names of other notable alumni is vandalism?
Is there a good reason you chopped my addition, of what is probably Thom Jones's first published story, to his entry?
If you need a sourced citation, querying for that might've been more to the point. Or simply looking at a copy of the March, 1973 issue of F&SF, with the story and a headnote giving Jones's age (then 27) and noting his degrees from UW and U Iowa.
144.198.14.106 (talk) 04:43, 1 August 2009 (UTC)Todd Mason, FoxBrick@gmail.com
LedBeatles52596
The one edit between the final warning and the block does not appear to me to be vandalism, and indeed the user has just filed an unblock request. Ought we to consider this? Daniel Case (talk) 04:44, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I think so.
On a side note, I really hate to say this but judging by all the comments here within the last hour or so maybe you should put the tools away for the night? Daniel Case (talk) 04:51, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
"Unconstructive" edits to the SSC Aero Talk page
could you elaborate as to why my additions(albeit, late) are 'unconstructive'? the arguement is that there isn't any video featuring both a visual of the car and of a "GPS tachometer" to 'prove' that the Aero really went as fast as it did, and my edit is arguing that there isn't a video of this kind for former fastest production cars such as the Koenigsegg CCR, McLaren F1, Jaguar XJ220, Bugatti EB110, etc. the arguement is also that the SSC Ultimate Aero TT wasn't ran under "credible circumstances", a term which has only been discussed on wikipedia and has yet to be defined. also the Bugatti Veyron has only made speed runs in one direction, while the two largest timing associations, FIA and SCTA require that a record run be made in both directions, the second within one hour of the first. this is to account for possible road/track slope, head/tail wind, etc., and is the same rule that Guinness uses when they certify a speed record for any given vehicle. i brought this up once before and it was ignored, so i am bringing it to light again.
does this prove that my additions were constructive? would you prefer that i start a new paragraph before adding them? i don't really understand what i'm doing 'wrong' here, especially since this concerns a discussion on a talk page.Ry Trapp0 (talk) 04:46, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
unconstructive edits to Central Union High School Page
Hello
I was wondering if you could explain what you mean by unconstructive edits. I know i'm new to editing on wikipedia but I thought i greatly improved the page from what it was already (just two sentences). if it was because of a lack of references, it is a small school so there are hardly any websites with info about it so i used my own knowledge of the topic to edit the page. I'm open to criticism.
thank you, Spacenut525 (talk) 04:57, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
LNNew.gif Possibly Unfree File Dispute
Hi, I am responding to the Possibly Unfree File Dispute listed on the Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 July 31 page. The file in question, LNNew.gif, is of my creation as is file Helmet3A.gif which is currently being used to represent Lake Norman High School on its Wikipedia page uploaded by me on May 18th, 2007. Lake Norman Athletics Director Steve Rankin and Lake Norman Head Football Coach Scott Sherrill hired me to design a new school athletic logo in 2005, which is Helmet3A.gif. I was given permission to use this logo in any fashion to help promote the School's athletics program, especially football. The file in question, LNNew.gif, is an updated version of Helmet3A.gif provided to Lake Norman Head Football Coach Scott Sherrill, which is currently being used by the football program to help promote the upcoming 2009 football season. As with file Helmet3A.gif, I have permission from Scott Sherrill and the athletics department to use file LNNew.gif in any way fashion to promote the school's athletics program considering I am the creator of the design and a former assistant of Scott Sherrill. I hope this solves the dispute and allows wikipedia to keep the logo on Lake Norman's High School Page. Thank you
-Rialward —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rialward (talk • contribs) 23:47, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject Films July 2009 Newsletter
The July 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:55, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Inclusion of Non-free use rationale for Strategicom_logo.jpg
Hi Fastily,
1. Thank you for the heads-up on the necessity to include a Non-free use rationale for Strategicom_logo.jpg. This has been done accordingly. Do let me know if there is anything else needed.
Cheers.
XNicklex (talk) 04:30, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Fastily,
- 1. I have uploaded a newer version of this file. Appreciate if you could share with me how to remove the older file.
- Thanks.
Katawa Shoujo
Hi, Why did you revert me? --84.16.208.220 (talk) 04:45, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Sorry!
Wasn't sure if it was going through, on an old computer w/ slow internet. On a roll now. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amysimon666 (talk • contribs) 04:45, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for understanding!
Keep up the good work! Amysimon666 (talk) 06:04, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
RCAF photo, Spring 1964 001.jpg
Hello Fastily, I'm new to contributing and editing. The photo mentioned above is not licenced to the RCAF. It was a promotional photo that actually appeared in several Canadian newspapers in 1964. F.L. Winterburn was in the military and to promote a new invention required the blessing of the Airforce. They capitallized on this by having him in uniform for the photos. It looked good for the Airforce, but the invention and production of the world's first CD ignition was a civilion endeavor. I must have goofed somehow with the licensing portion of the upload to Wilimedia commons, and I don't know how to correct that. Could you add the picture for me or instruct me on how to do it. I'm finding the process a little difficult. Thanks, Ignitionman. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ignitionman (talk • contribs) 13:53, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
if page PCCOE comes under G11 then why not COEP or MIT Pune —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.98.25.33 (talk) 17:46, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
PlanGuru
Please go look at SAP Strategic Enterprise Management in wikipedia. How does it differ from the PlanGuru article?? There is no difference. You are deleting my articles unfairly. I am going to take this up with the other admins. If you can explain to me the difference from the SAP article then I will stop my investigation... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dennyp22 (talk • contribs) 17:50, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
- Please read WP:OTHERSTUFF. Articles for deletion are judged on their own merit, not in comparison to others, so your threats of an investigation are entirely moot. Your article has been removed multiple times, on the grounds that it is written in a completely blatant advertising tone. As Fastily has made clear, the next time the article is uploaded, you will be banned. --King ♣ Talk 18:02, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
RCAF photo, Spring 1964 001.jpgThe
Thank-you Fastily. I think what happened is that I didn't use a copy and paste of the title for the picture the first few times and just typed it in as I had already been using the copy and paste to get the format right so I could enter the data. This time I copied and pasted both in and it worked without having to try and upload the image again. Anyway, I think it worked and thank-you for the help and the prompt reply, Ignitionman —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ignitionman (talk • contribs) 19:34, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar thanks
It was just a friendly suggestion. Glad you took it, I guess — better to call it a night than wind up on AN/I over something you're too fuzzy to remember.
It always amuses me every time I get a barnstar, that it's almost always one I haven't gotten yet (I've gotten a couple of repeat ones, like the RickK and the Working Man's, but those are so common that almost everyone with my edit count has gotten them at least once. Assuming they accept barnstars). Daniel Case (talk) 03:04, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure if this was an automated response or not, for a lack of fair use rationale for this file, but the reason is, there is no fair-use rationale. I am trying to get the file speedy deleted per WP:FAIR#2, WP:FAIR#3a, WP:FAIR#5, WP:FAIR#7, and WP:FAIR#8. I was the one who uploaded the file, but didn't know that it was a bootleg album from a bootleg site. There has been a discussion at Files for deletion. As an administrator, do you think you could speedy delete the file for me? PopMusicBuff talk 04:14, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Done -FASTILY (TALK) 04:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
- Many thanks! PopMusicBuff talk 04:24, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Guidance needed about image copyrights
kindly guide me on how can I upload images of living persons which are available on news websites, news blogs. I cannot find that image on google images with freeuse tags. What do I do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarmadhassan (talk • contribs) 10:42, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Redirecting, New Articles
Hi--thanks for your help in "The Library of Greek Mythology" article. I saw your message--how do I go about creating a redirect on my own in the future?
Thanks!
--Jp07 (talk) 04:36, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
While I should have got the redirect right in the first place, a ten second search would have fixed the problem, rather than an outright deletion. -- Mattinbgn\talk 05:14, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
help with image
You told me to fix the description for Image:unusual you cover.jpg from album cover to fair use rationale. idk how to do that again. i'll try. i need help tho. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahoskinson 95 (talk • contribs) 05:14, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Chris Martin Image
I got your message. I grabbed the needed info from the picture I cropped it from. I think that covers it, but let me know if I did it wrong. Thanks. Deserted Cities (talk) 05:25, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
how to ask user to be careful with editing?
fastily is there any code which i can place on those user's talk page which are found to be making too many mistakes while contributing to an article. I mean, mistakes like repeating whole sections, references etc? something which says, dear user, we appreciate your contributions but you are making silly mistakes :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarmadhassan (talk • contribs) 00:31, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
Fort Bridger photograph
I am still learning how to add to Wikipedia so please excuse my mistakes.
You left me a message regarding the photograph of Fort Bridger that I uploaded [File:FortBridger 1858.jpg].
This image is from the Library of Congress and is therefore within the public domain. It was made by an Army photographer in 1858. Am I mistaken?
ephriam —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ephriam3 (talk • contribs) 05:40, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
Not quite sure why you removed the tag there- the fact it is claimed GFDL does not mean that there is a source. J Milburn (talk) 10:06, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
Funeral of Pope John Paul II
Hi, i've seen that you reverted the edit that i made on the "Liturgy of the Eucharist" on Pope John Paul II's Funeral article. The change i made was meant to be a "softenner" of the phrase: "(when the priest says "This is my body" and "This is my blood") ". As Roman Catholic, i think that this phrase may induce followers of other religions or other non-catholics (atheits, etc)to believe in an inaccurate report of the cerimony. When the author said "the priest says" it might indicate to non-followers that the priest is reennacting Jesus' sharing of the last bread and wine to the appostles in the Last Supper. Thus, it is necessary to rewrite this passage, so non-catholics could understand better this part of the cerimony, and don't take our religion on bad accounts. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.34.118.174 (talk)
Marionettes
The edit I made about Bert appearing as marionette wasn't intended to be vandalism, but unfortunately I don't know how to source it as it's something I've seen in videos but never written down anywhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.0.83.207 (talk) 04:58, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
I don´t know why my edits are considered unconstructive, I´ve the commons cat and the coat of arms, please check again. I´ll revert your changes, hope it´s ok. Elmschrat (talk) 10:07, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Only half right
I just happened to notice your remark on my RFA that my answers to your questions were 'only half right.' Well, how am I to learn without further instruction? ;) Nosleep break my slumber 03:07, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Michael Howard Studios
Hello,
I noticed that the Michael Howard Studios page was taken down. Please help me to understand what caused this and how to repost it correctly. The page was created very similar to a template on Stella Adler ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stella_Adler_Conservatory ) and was not meant to be an advertisement but an informational page devoted to the studio. The studio is the longest running private acting studio in the country, thus I believe it deserves to have a wiki page.
If you have any thoughts or recommendations for me, please let me know. It is important to me to get the page back up and running, but I want to do it within the correct guidelines.
Thank you so much in advance.
Justin Daniel —Preceding unsigned comment added by Justindanielnyc (talk • contribs) 21:49, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
A Warning I Received
Fastily, you are wrong about the warning you've sent me. I am not vandalizing Wikipedia, and it's inappropriate to accuse me of this behavior when it is not true, just to justify the warning. So, if you could see that I am not vandalizing, and recant the warning, that would be great. 71.12.0.105 (talk) 01:51, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, I would like to comment. The tip you received is misleading. I actually had not violated the three revert rule, and I was removing the ref in question because it wasn't acceptable for the reason that it's webpage did not show up for me and with the same informatin as it did for other users. I mentioned this to the user "antiuser," (although after he had already tipped you off about me) and he/she understood and proceeded to put up another ref that did show up for me as it did for him. So, can the warning be removed? 71.12.0.105 (talk) 02:04, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, thank you very much. 71.12.0.105 (talk) 02:14, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
what the hell man? im just adding the summery to the plot page of Mercury Man and you keep on deleteing it cause that page hase no plot written on it. (talk)
August 2009
I saw in my talk page a warning about vandalism the article Greek Basketball Cup. And I wonder why, as:
The article says that the first Greek Cup took place in the year 1966 and also says that Aris B.C. and AEK B.C. won the 1966 and 1969 cups, using a Catalan Basketpedya source. That one and only (unreliable for me) source is a source, but I already put seven different official and independent sources proving that this never happened:
- Official Greek Basketball Federation Site (in Greek) doesn't say something like that.
- Aris B.C. official site (in English) doesn't say something like that.
- AEK B.C. Official site (in Greek) doesn't say something like that. Also:
- The-Sports.org (in English) doesn't say something like that.
- Contra.gr (in Greek) doesn't say something like that.
- Sport.gr (in Greek) doesn't say something like that.
- Superbasket.gr (in Greek) doesn't say something like that.
And I'm wondering:
- Why the one and only source is accepted and those seven different official and independent sources (except the Official Greek Basketball Federation Site who says different things!) are not accepted in the article?
- Why all the rest editions of Wikipedia (Greek, French, Spanish, Italian, German, Finnish) don't say those things?
- Who's the real vandal here? Dimitrissss (talk) 10:11, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you Fastily for the understanding. I don't want to discuss for the moment with the user:Wiki Greek Basketball. I only want from him or anyone else, just not to pull off my official and independent sources I've already add in the article Greek Basketball Cup. Thanks again. Dimitrissss (talk) 17:51, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Nielsen Book
Hi My name is Huma, I work for Nielsen Book, it seems you have deleted our last entry and the reason in the deletion box is "advertising". We would like to have the meaning of our products and services to the industry on this site for reference. I will therefore revisit the copy and adapt it. Would it be useful to send it to you for review before uploading it again? Many Thanks Huma Huma.Ashraf@nielsen.com Nielsen Book (talk) 10:04, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi I recently submitted a page for Chauvet lighting which was deleted for being too advertorial. Is there any way I can get the coded page back? I want to try and re submit the article with a more neutral point of view. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Haitiansensati0n2 (talk • contribs) 13:59, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Licensing Questions
I am writing an informational article. The article is titled "Red Star, White Star by SPI, Inc.". Red Star, White Star (hereafter, RSWS) is/was a tabletop wargame produced by Simulations Publications, Inc. in the 1970s. A separate Wikipedia article on SPI does not mention the game title RSWS. I want to supply that information either through a separate article or by editing the SPI article to include it. I wanted to include an illustration of the playing pieces that I found on the Internet. The picture is nothing more than a few of the playing pieces arranged and photographed (close-up for detail) on the mapsheet included with the game. I haven't the slightest idea how that would be licensed or by who. Does this disqualify it for use in the article?
The deletion log lists you as the editor that killed the picture. It was titled "RSWS_Counters.jpg". If the picture is a no-go then I will merely drop the idea or just edit/amend the SPI article and not use the picture.
Best...
--Jeffrey D. Fisher, MCP, DCSE (talk) 19:01, 14 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfisher944 (talk • contribs) 18:54, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- We're always in the market for new articles, but bear in mind the following policies: Notability, No Original Research, and Conflict of Interest. --King Öomie 19:00, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Note
Deekieweekieblob is an obvious sockpuppet of the banned User:Pioneercourthouse. He created this sleeper account on August 8th, waited a week, made a few useless edits (all of which have been reverted) and then jumped to try to "test" on a Pioneer Courthouse page - where he was stopped by the filter. Please reblock and take away his right to edit his talk page. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 07:35, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- Oops, you already got it. Thank you! The above detail is just to point out that the guy followed the usual M.O., including cries of innocence. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 07:39, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
{{hangon}}
Reason: This is intended to be a biography for Jim Diamond aka Mega Genius for which I have recived permission from to be his offical biographer. I would be happy to revise the biography so that it does not reflect (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion) by deleting website links changing the title to Jim Diamond instead of Mega Genius and sections of the biography. However his work is one of his personal accomplishments to be included in his biography.Deadalus821 (talk) 19:20, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
happyface_wallpaper.png
Hello. I believe you nominated the image I uploaded, happyface_wallpaper.png, for deletion. Honestly, I'm not sure where Wikipedia's policy would stand on that image. The original images was taken by a NASA satellite, the happy face was added by an anonymous user at 4chan.org, and finally, I made some small edits before uploading it. 8bit (talk) 21:32, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
Will this suffice?:
8bit (talk) 06:56, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Please restore the above article. As I see it, the article is not entirely promotional, and van be fixed by a little normal editing. I know I could just restore and fix it myself, but I like to ask first. DGG ( talk ) 01:36, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
King Öomie 13:25, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Carlisle United 2-1 Plymouth Argyle (1999)
You deleted the above page yesterday, but the relating AFD remains open, can you do the honours. --Jpeeling (talk) 17:32, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Anthony field pic
A friend gave me that pic yesterday and seid I could upload it to wikki --Jena (talk) 17:45, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
India Expo Centre
u deleated the page " India Expo Centre". U said its advertising but when all other convention centres can have a page here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_convention_and_exhibition_centers)then how can mine be an advertising? I request you to restore the page.
Reverting my edit
Hi, I'm not sure why my edits to Joey Henderson were been deemed unconstructive, I corrected several spelling and grammatical errors with the article. I know I'm just an "IP" but it was useful and improving to the article. :( 121.73.100.30 (talk) 01:53, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
- I concur, Fastily might have been a little quick on the huggle finger. Falcon8765 (talk) 01:53, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
AN/I complaint
Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Unusual_reversions_by_Fastily. Thanks, 24.224.194.249 (talk) 02:12, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
- Indeed, reviewing your last few dozen Huggle reversions, I have spotted a LOT of misidentified vandalism tagging you have done. While a few of these were possibly worthy of reverting, it isn't always because of vandalism, and one should avoid leaving templated warnings to talk pages for good faith edits. I think you may need to take a break from Huggle for a bit, as it appears you are experiencing an unacceptable number of false-positives in your vandalism reverting. See the ANI discussion for more. --Jayron32 02:20, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your help on the Ravenna High School (Ohio) article. The anonymous editor has repeatedly re-added the same entry. Because I received a very angry and hateful response from Mr. Webb himself via Facebook shortly after the article on him was deleted a few days ago, it wouldn't surprise me if the anonymous editor is Mr. Webb himself or his manager User:Channing2003 who was responsible for creating the article which ended up being deleted twice (Brent A. Webb). The Ravenna High School article may need a protection or the anonymous editor blocked. Thanks for any help! --JonRidinger (talk) 02:24, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Ghost Bike
I don't understand why citing another city outside of the U.S. is nconstructive but having three cities within the U.S. is suitable. Because of this precedent, it would make sense to simply reduce the the final paragraph to: "There have been similar projects in dozens of other cities worldwide.[11]" as the previous two paragraphs explain the original intention.
Furthermore, the statement that you redacted was an example of a ghost bike that has remained a lasting memorial on a street whereas the previous examples were removed after a few months. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.239.45.171 (talk) 03:40, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:MumboJumbo200px.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:MumboJumbo200px.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 08:12, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Paramount Group Article Deleted
Gooday,
Wonder if you can assist me. I see that my article recently published on the Paramount Group was deleted from Wikipedia.
I ask that it be reinstated simply because this is a major player in South African history and political history. I am willing to change the content and write it on a more subjective notice, this was not my intention to create a "promotional" page for the company.
I'm doing a thesis on this company and I will be writing a good couple of articles about this company, their involvment in communities, introducing massive global news in terms of "products" they've developer e.g. MIG fighter jets, and their specs and what they're used for.
Armoured vehicles etc etc... I would very much like your assistance here.
Thank You steven —Preceding unsigned comment added by Southwiki (talk • contribs) 10:31, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi there. I created this page a month or two back. You speedied it, but as far as I can tell, it was never tagged to allow a chance for improvement, nor was I notified as the creator of the fact that there was a problem. You tagged it as a G11, which seems inapplicable, at least as of the last time I saw the article. I'm guessing that this was all a mix-up resulting from your Huggle bender. Whatever the case may be, I'd like to see the page restored so someone else can take a look. Thanks. — Bdb484 (talk) 10:54, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the note. Would you mind userfying the deleted page to User:Bdb484/Melt Bar And Grilled so the edit history can be preserved? Thanks. — Bdb484 (talk) 00:10, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Pranashakty Image
Could you please tell me if you how u found the image The Cosmic Connection possible unfree? Thanks SRJ —Preceding unsigned comment added by PNSKTY (talk • contribs) 11:42, 18 August 2009 (UTC) —--PNSKTY (talk) 11:46, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
The cosmic connection image
Hi! Could you please tell me how you decided that this image was not free? Thanks SRJ —Preceding unsigned comment added by PNSKTY (talk • contribs) 11:44, 18 August 2009 (UTC) --PNSKTY (talk) 11:47, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
New page added
Hi,
Please can you check. You deleted my last page on Paramount Group. I've added a new page on a vehicle from my thesis which forms part of Paramount Group.
I realised once I did my thesis I couldn't get information on Paramount Group.
Please check this one out and let me know. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marauder_(Mine_Protected_Vehicle) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Southwiki (talk • contribs) 12:00, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Deleted COLLABOR8 Article
Hi Fastily,
This is Sean de B, author of the COLLABOR8 article which you seem to have deleted as advertising. This piece is solely designed to inform interested parties of the existance of this EU Interreg programme and is in no way designed to sell or attempt to sell any product. The COLLABOR8 programme is NOT involved in the sale of any product or service and does not, or ever will seek to charge or otherwise gain financial reward from any member of the public or any business involved in the project. On the contrary, the project will provide funding for items such as training programmes etc to be undertaken by individuals with a view to fullfilling the objectives of the project - encourage sustainable, quality tourism related businesses based on a sense of place in the 9 partner areas. As a first time user of Wikipedia, I would be very grateful if you can provide me with some guidance as to how to reconstruct this article in order to fully comply with the site requirements.SeandeB (talk) 13:13, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
- First, this is an encyclopedia. It doesn't exist to provide information about goods and services to interested parties.
- Second, from the language you're using, I take it you're involved with COLLABOR8, and you should be made aware of Wikipedia's policy on Conflict of Interest.
- And third, the following policies must be met for inclusion:
- The subject must be Notable
- The article must be Sourced Reliably
- The article must be written from a Neutral Point of View
- The article must not be based on Original Research, or unsourced claims.
- Keep in mind that to establish notability, you'll need to find several third-party sources that talk about the subject. The programme's own webpage cannot be used for this purpose. --King Öomie 13:35, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Perpetual Data Delete
Hi
New here so please take it easy. I was creating a page for a product I am involved in so can see a conflict of interest and respect that, however I do assume that this is also easy to overcome, honesty etc. works.
The page was tagged with delete, validity etc. etc.
I started to update the page and try and remove references (it was pretty much cut and paste of some company info) when I realised the advertising look of the information. I did however want to detail what Perpetual Data is as it seems to have caught the attention of a good few folks and is technology that is very advanced in many ways and hopefully for the good.
Although it seems like conflict of interest I hold over 80% of the shares in the business that has raised over $1M in funding and these shares are to be donated to a foundation, so not self interest. Anyway it can all be easily solved I feel. This is another article I want to do and it's how to create open products and businesses for the good of all, even when having to use patents to protect small startups in the first place (I am not a patent fan when there used to stifle innovation).
So anyway I altered a lot of stuff yesterday and today went to crack away at making it more neutral and based on facts (a lot cannot be verified unless I link to patents or the likes as it is a very new technology). I went to add more info this morning and the page was deleted under me. Arghh !!
What I did not do was touch any of the tags I believe you added to the page as I was unsure how this worked, I would not have thought and auto delete was in place (I see I can add a hold on type tag now though). I did ask for help in the talk page of the article on reading your tags but this appears gone as well.
So intro is a tough one I think as it was many hours of work to update and bring it closer in line with Wikipedia and do so without upsetting folks by changing tags et.
I would appreciate if you could undelete it or give me a chance to get some help from some of you dudes to get it right in the first place.
Thanks a lot David Irvine (talk) 19:50, 18 August 2009 (UTC) PS Dont worry about feelings to much I have been on slashdot for many years so you can be to the point if yer busy, dignity goes a long way though :-)
Ohhps I should have said, what is the best way to achieve this I can write it and have others improve on it or wait till somebody who is not affiliated writes something etc. I would appreciate your advice on this.
- You can reference my response in the thread right above this one =D
- As for undeletion, Fastily can place a copy of the article in your userspace if you want to work on it. Keep in mind that articles posted by people with a known conflict of interest are held to higher scrutiny. --King Öomie 20:19, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Cheers for that, it is helpful. I understand the conflict of interest and would like to be able to handle it as I am sure that an impartial text from inventors etc. of certain things must have credence and if I can talk impartially about something I am involved in then it would help me personally to archive more in life actually. I am happy to give it a go and suffer the wrath of wikipedia editors which I hear can be pretty harsh and curt, but as long as it's logical I won't mind. I would appreciate some assistance with the editing though and to that end can you tell me if that's possible in an 'i would like to post but ..' area or is it a case of going public with the page when I think it is ready and speedily try and react to any complaints. I do not know of anyone that understands our tech (even our developers have problmes with the whole picture and there very very good) but I am sure there will be if they get a chance to read about it, lots is open source and I belive true cloud computing (no servers, log into your own data which does not actually exist, kinda thing, if that sounds impossible then perhaps an article is needed, and maybe not the one I am trying to do here) David Irvine (talk) 23:38, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
The Cosmic connection Image
Hi Fastily, I developed the original image in photoshop and has made it available for free to many friends. I have not restricted the use of the image vide any copy right. I cropped this image myself to suit an application. Hope this makes things clear. Thanks --PNSKTY (talk) 04:27, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for your participation in my recent RfA. I will do my very best not to betray the confidence you have shown me. If you ever have any questions or suggestions about my conduct as an administrator or as an editor please don't hesitate to contact me. Once again, thanks. ·Maunus·ƛ· 13:07, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Re: Paramount Group Article Deleted
Thank you for replying to me. I am going through all the writing guidelines and I'll hopefully have a better version and correct method of writing up by tomorrow.
I'll send the article through to you to check it that's ok with you.
Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Southwiki (talk • contribs) 07:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Speedy Deletion
Surely it is up for speedy deletion otherwise how do I contest it without the holdonREVUpminster (talk) 08:03, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply, but it was deleted by an editor who has deleted images all over the place and his talk page is full of disputes and in my talks with him it comes down to his opinion verses mine as to if the image complements the text.REVUpminster (talk) 22:52, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
- After another chat he agreed to arbitration. at least other people can comment on it and not left to his or my opinion which I believe if taken to the extreme could decimate every film and TV article. Thanks anywayREVUpminster (talk) 06:28, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Deletion of Pranashakty page
This is with reference to the quoted "22:39, 17 August 2009 Fastily (talk | contribs) deleted "Pranashakty" (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion) "
It would be very kind of you if you could advise me, how did the Pranashakty page look like an ad or a promotion? As a new user, my first attempt into creating a page on the concept of pranashakty, the power of cosmic breath was not good and was deleted by another admin. I realised the problem and had put in considerable efforts to make it neutral and this current form you had deleted was that attempt. I am doing some research on ancient Siddhar arts (Wiki does have siddhar pages)and sourced the info from ancinet texts and had to rely on many blogs and very few available web sites of currently practicing siddars to create some understandable material. The translation of these texts are going on in my project and is very hard to do so. It is my effort to bring to light this ancient practice and seek your help in doing so. Thanks --PNSKTY (talk) 10:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
"Foreigner" photos!
I personally own all of the singles whose pictures I have uploaded to the site. I am a former Radio Journalist with private contacts to a prominent, former member of the band, and I have received permission from said person to upload these photos to help remind people of his major contributions to the history of the band. I would hope that would suffice as far as the rights go. If not, please, inform me on what I can do to alleviate any further fear on your part. I am also still new at this editing bit, so please, be kind. Thank YOU, kindly! FuturePrimitive666 aka Rick. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FuturePrimitive666 (talk • contribs) 06:38, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image (File:Car and Driver Cover March 2007.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Car and Driver Cover March 2007.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is 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).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 11:13, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Block question
Regarding your block of User talk:MR KennedyDX, could you throw a few diffs in there. I don't see the edits that warrented the indef block when I look at his editing history. Could you help me see it, so I can decline his unblock request? Thanks! --Jayron32 01:58, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I looked at both of those, but I am just not seeing the set of events that led up to it being an indef block. Some difs of the really egregious stuff would be helpful, because I just don't see it. I see a few debates on his own talk page, but I don't see anything I would call vandalism or gross incivility. I am not saying I agree with his position on any of this, but I don't see how a discussion on his own talk page could qualify for an indef, based on what is there now. --Jayron32 02:08, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
- Here are two instances where he refractored another user's talk page comments [8][9], and here is a disruptive edit where he basically performed a copy-and-paste job to my talk page with a warning that made no sense [10]. And if you read this discussion, it's filled with his personal attacks and soapboxing. Artichoker[talk] 02:11, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Deni malkoc
Why did you remove my block request? The user's only edits have been vandalism and he should be blocked. Are you gonna block him? If not, I will report him again the next time he vandalizes. TJ Spyke 02:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Deleting a song sample
When you delete a song sample could you remove it from articles please?--Rockfang (talk) 03:20, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to bug you again
I've undid this edit of yours. The wording of {{di-no permission}} implies the image is sourced. The image is not. I've added {{di-no source}} instead.--Rockfang (talk) 05:27, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Saw pictures
Thanks for the heads up. Is there any particular reason why they need to be deleted? Also, why should all of them be deleted and not just one or two of the lesser important ones? GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 06:26, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
deletion question about hd ez lock
hello, you deleted my article about hd EZ lock. I posted on the article's talk page (which has since been deleted) asking for someone to help me with the appropriate changes. I also spent a lot of time trying to make sure the article was neutral and cited expert outside sources to support that this is a valid issue and a legitimate product.
I notice there are tons of articles that are product specific (vudu, playstation, xbox, etc) and I'm not sure what more I can do to include this without coming across as an advertisement.
This is my first experience here, and it's been frustrating because it seems that people are quick to delete but not willing to provide any specific points, just mentioning wikepedia article numbers and terms. I asked several times for any help, suggestions, etc and received none.
I'm not sure what I can do, but I ask that you help me out and consider reinstating my article.
Thank you!
Please leave comments on my user page, thank you
thank you...
Hello Fastily,
Thank you for your reply regarding hd ez lock. I understand, but I was hoping for a little bit of more specific assistance :(
Well, I'm not sure how else I can describe the product...it seems anything less would be very vague and no one would understand what it does.
But, I guess I'll just chalk this up to a learning experience and walk away with only my time lost.
Thank you and take care...have a good weekend. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tatbes (talk • contribs) 22:26, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
I understand...thank you for the suggestion, I have asked for help and we'll see how it goes.--Tatbes (talk) 22:40, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
New Pioneer Food Co-op
Thank you for your reply, I'll try to rewrite it differently Matthewcsteele (talk) 19:02, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Hey Fastily, I know you don't do comparisons, but I'm sure you'll get a kick out of this one: Mountain_Equipment_Co-op
The Suburbs (web series)
(Deletion log); 04:03 . . Fastily (talk | contribs) deleted "The Suburbs (web series)" (G7: One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page)
Hi Fastily, I had been watching The Suburbs (web series), as an example of a pretty dubious article, but which strangely seemed to have good quality secondary sources. I though that it was not single authored, ie not G7-able. What was the nature of the request for deletion, and was it realyl a single authored article? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:39, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Phalcon IL76.jpg
This image was obtained from a news website which is a public domain. 06:02, 24 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mittal.fdk (talk • contribs)
Deletion of my entry on LogMyTask
Fastily,
Please consider undeleting my entry on LogMyTask. I understand that post needs to be updated for being encyclopedic and I'll do so. The article is still in development mode. As I fell short of time I stopped at where it is & thought of updating it today. To my bewilderment it was deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chiragpinjar (talk • contribs) 06:56, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi, just sayin' but I don't think this is such a good idea to transfer files that are pending deletion on Commons. If you do that, you might end up having a perfectly valid file here deleted on Commons due to other interpretation of the Image policy (and people unable to find it here). Please be more careful in the future ;) (well, that file would have been deleted here to due to its copyright status anyway). My rule for F8 is to check that there is no deletion discussion on Commons and that there are no foreseeable copyright problems before deleting. -- Luk talk 08:28, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
- Cheers! Always glad to see someone else tackling that backlog :P -- Luk talk 06:46, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Would you?
Can you delete my 2 uploaded images in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CCleaner.png ? I didn't want them anymore. I'm not admin but you're. Tuanese 08:17, 25 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuanese (talk • contribs)
Undated AfC submissions
I've recently started doing it myself, and I figure I'd spread the word. In the future, try and use {{tl|WPAFC|class=redirect|ts={{subst:CURRENTTIMESTAMP|reviewer=Fastily}} on the AfC submissions, like so. Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 22:32, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
- Note: the tl| bit is not included. I don't know why it's adding it. Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 22:34, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
- Cool. :) Without it, the submissions are dumped into the Category:Undated AfC submissions backlog. Currently, User:Earwig has a bot running through it, but always better to avoid the problem in the first place. Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 23:01, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
Hi, thanks for granting me rollback privileges. Have a great day (or night)! Tgv8925 (talk) 00:31, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
why did you delete information for "the big picture" magazine
You have information many publications listed on Wikipedia. Why would you delete the information on The Big Picture?
We are a national business-to-business publication covering the wide-format graphics market. The information I posted was objective and informative and was being added to as I could get to it.
Please explain.
thank you, Greg Sharpless Editor/Associate Publisher gregory.sharpless@stmediagroup.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Big_Picture_magazine —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.203.156.41 (talk) 11:03, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
WP:AFC/R backlog
You don't seem to be active now, but you may come around before it's all; it's looking like it will take a while. Any chance you could help out a bit when you're around? If so, just start at the bottom, and move (as I'll be at the top, moving down). Thanks. Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 17:45, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
- Not a problem, and thank you for helping out. If you're active on IRC, you should come hang out in #wikipedia-en-afc connect; that's where most of the griping over the backlog was. :P As for that last bit, feel free to go at it; I'm working on other things, so AFC/R is all yours. Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 22:49, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Drmies
Hi Fastily. Regarding this edit, I think WP:DTTR applies. It so happens that Drmies is one of the rare editors who is slow to take offense and actually does assume good faith. But next time, you might want to check the editor's history and write a handwritten note for someone with this length and volume of contribution. Bongomatic 03:13, 27 August 2009 (UTC) Should you wish to reply, please do so here. I will watch this page for a few days, so no {{talkback}} or other comment on my talk page is required.
- In case it's not obvious, I think you were 100% right to point out the need to subst! Bongomatic 03:15, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks a lot!
Hey Fastily, after your comment on my talk about substituting, some other "hip" editor forced me, almost at gunpoint, to start using Twinkle, so I did. Thanks. So now I subst automatically (apparently), but I also got all these options, all these powerful tools--is that really what you wanted? I'm already a loose cannon! I can drop a user warning here on your page at the touch of a button! Don't make me prove it... Thanks for the advice, of course. Drmies (talk) 15:45, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 04:11, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Hello! I am not sure what the request was, but please note that it survived a consensus discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Suburbs (web series) and so should we not go more by the consensus reached by multiple editors rather than one of the writers? Best, --A NobodyMy talk 20:51, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
This is a note to let you know I undid a speedy deletion of yours form about a week ago. The article The Suburbs (web series) was for speedy as g7 after the main author blanked the page. I don't view your deletion as obviously wrong, but I have undone it for three reasons: (in no particular order)
- It isn't clear that the main author is the only substantive author. An IP contributed a large percentage of the content. That IP could be the same person, but it isn't necessarily the case
- The article has been sent to AfD and resulted in keep
- I believe the blanking was an act of frustration not a true desire to have the page removed. The article in question had been created, speedy deleted, recreated with improvements, tagged for speedy again but survived, and later sent to AfD. After each tagging the primary author had sent a good deal of time trying to improve the article. Then another user comes along & PROD tags it. The primary author then blanks the page. I estimate he spent well over 20 hours working on the article only to be told 4 separate times that his work wasn't welcome. These 4 deletion attempts plus some fly-by vandalism drove him to the breaking point and he blanked the page in frustration
- Other users have expressed interest in having the article restored
In light of these factors, hopefully my restoration is acceptable to you. If you have any comments or questions about this feel free to reply here. Thanks, ThaddeusB (talk) 03:49, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject Films August 2009 Newsletter
The August 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:48, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Happy Labor Day!
Dear colleague, I just want to wish you a happy, hopefully, extended holiday weekend and nice end to summer! Your friend, --A NobodyMy talk 03:23, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Stacking Window Manager
Hello. Please can you clarify what was wrong with the additional window managers that I added to the list of stacking window managers?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stacking_window_manager?diff=308595391
Mark. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Markhobley (talk • contribs) 12:48, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
WP:FILM September Election Voting
The September 2009 project coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators from a pool of candidates to serve for the next six months; members can still nominate themselves if interested. Please vote here by September 28! This message has been sent as you are registered as an active member of the project. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:45, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
RfA Questions
Hi, I have answered your questions as submitted per RfA for myself. Sincere regards, Pr3st0n (talk) 07:20, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject Films September 2009 Newsletter
The September 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:30, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to let you know that I just undeleted Bannerman High School which you deleted as an attack page. The article was just in a vandalized state, so I reverted to an earlier good version. -- Ed (Edgar181) 00:18, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
polaraudio.ogg
If you could Fastily, please delete File:polaraudio.ogg
It is an audio version of an article that no longer exists, and it is VERY out of date.
thank you, User99671 (talk) 17:33, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks again!,
User99671 (talk) 21:27, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Ronan Keating
Oh? Not constructive? You didn't read what you reverted to, did you? Why didn't you improve upon my friendly suggestion instead? You don't like the English language, it seems. --87.78.37.55 (talk) 21:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, just realised you're on Huggle: Of course you don't like language and actual editing. Good thing that's not a prerequisite to be an admin. --87.78.37.55 (talk) 21:36, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
[11] OR? O... RLY? Ok, I'll play along. Should I cite an English grammar schoolbook? --87.78.37.55 (talk) 21:45, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
- Vandalism?? My edit happened with the sole intention of drawing the attention of someone knowledgeable on Keating; it happened with the good-faithed intention of improving the article. So, it's of course nothing like OR. And it is nothing like vandalism, which, last time I checked, consists of deliberate attempt[s] to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. I am far removed from any such intentions, as would be clear to anyone capable of admitting to their own misjudgement. --87.78.37.55 (talk) 21:57, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
I just want to point out that citing WP:OR in this case is a tad ridiculous ;-) Xavexgoem (talk) 23:35, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
I checked this IP users contribs and found that he randomly changed dates on about 58 articles. I went ahead and did a full rollback on the latest contributions. Keep an eye on him for me thanks. --Sidonuke (talk :: contribs) 22:49, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
vandalism?
Hello, you left a message on my talk page stating that I committed vandalism on a wikipedia article. Could you please tell me which article, and which edit of mine was objectionable?
Thanks! I am signing with four tildes: bostonbrahmin 23:19, 12 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bostonbrahmin20 (talk • contribs)
Thank you
Thank you so much, Fastily. I am very grateful that I can be trusted. - I intend on using Rollback only for Vandalism. Once again, Thank you very much. Rttam (talk) 00:08, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Removing Stale WP:AIV report.
Hi Fastily. With this edit, you said you were removing a “stale report.” But, you also removed a report on an IP vandal that I had only filed one minute prior to your removing it, and the IP editor is continuing to vandalize. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 06:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
warning to Mehrrunnissa
Hi, Thanks for such a prompt action! Would it be possible to revert it back before Mehrrunissa started the vandalism and when the administrators semi-locked it? The user has written that 10 million people (10% of Indian population) has been cannibalized!! Apart from the absence of any citation, the sheer absurdity of this statement should speak for itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Salwa_Judum&action=history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naxalite http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_(Maoist)
Thanks again, Vinter-light (talk) 06:55, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
restoring pages
I sincerely appreciate your prompt action.
Vinter-light (talk) 07:14, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Missed link of Mehrrunnissa's vandalism
I am really sorry to bother you again, but seems like I should have separated the links with space, as you have missed this one -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salwa_Judum
I also suspect that Keysvolume is same as Mehrrunnissa, as they did same kind of edits on two of the pages, almost at the same time - but I have asked for a checkuser and would wait for that.
Regards, Vinter-light (talk) 07:25, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
I think you killed a map, here ;). Be careful when CSDing files on commons. -- Luk talk 08:39, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
- No worries, you're not the first and that image has been annoying me for months (showing up on my bot as "image that should be orphaned manually")... At least I have uploaded it back to commons with it's "normal" name, I'll let the commons admins sort it all out :) -- Luk talk 07:18, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
This user has posted an unblock request, but didn't get it right; I have just fixed it for him, and would (rather doubtfully) suggest giving him another chance. Shortly before you blocked him, he posted on his user page what I might call a pre-emptive my-little-brother-did-it defence and said he was keen to contribute, and I told him "If nobody vandalises from your account again, you'll be all right, but the first time it happens again you will be blocked, and blaming someone else won't help." His few edits thereafter were not helpful but were probably in good faith. The reason I'm unenthusiastic about letting him loose is because I doubt whether he is really capable of making useful contributions - I think he's probably very young - and I really don't want to nursemaid him. I'll let you (or whoever looks at the unblock request) decide. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:31, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 06:16, 15 October 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I apologize. Irbisgreif (talk) 06:16, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 07:57, 15 October 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
SchuminWeb (Talk) 07:57, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
respected sirs /madam
i had written my original aricles under tha name of maria riizvi
the thoughts were entirely mine i had even deleted the links and would like to know why it was not accepted thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maria rizvi (talk • contribs) 08:03, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
RE:RE:
I do apoligize, for what happend i know you made a mistake and i was wrong to over react to all of this. I am sorry i call you a liar and i mean that. I also do apoligize for removing the comment until the case was resolved. I have spoken to admins in the chatroom and they got the case cleared.
Cheers,
--Dwayneflanders ☺ 04:04, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
for the quick block work here - but I realized after gave a level-4IM that he had created all those dozen or so articles before his first warning... so while they all do need to be deleted for G11 and G12, I wouldn't be opposed to them being unblocked if they request it... just my softer side showing through on this fine Friday. 7 06:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Keysvolume is reverting admin made changes on semi protected pages
user -Keysvolume[1] is making reverts of admin made changes, one of them done by you, on - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Naxalite&action=history - here he made changes after you reverted vandalism done by one user Mehrrunnissa, who is currently blocked and is being investigated for using sockpuppets.
This user is also vandalizing my talk page, indicating that I am a sockpuppet, which he knows is untrue, as I have been cleared off being a sockpuppet. I asked him to stop, and warned that I would report him for vandalism, he did not stop. He also has gone ahead to make reverts of another admin made changes on page - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Salwa_Judum&action=history - here he reverted to his own version after Someguy121 did the same as above.
Please note, both these pages are under semi-protection and were vandalised by Mehrrunnissa, who being blocked cannot undo the changes. Keysvolume is now doing it instead. He is defying community rules of addressing the issue in the talk page instead of reverting a semi protected page. I also found out that these two users are under investigation for being sockpuppets.
Thanks, Oftenhurry (talk) 20:15, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
- Good Morning. Please note that you have been deceived by USer:Oftenhurry into blanking content from Neofascism and religion that I placed based on WP:Notable commentary.User:Oftenhurry has been placing far-left content on numerous Naxalite-related articles based on claims made by an Unreliable Source that is known for making anti-Semitic claims and perorations (see my post [12] for details, as well as this post by Jeff G [13]). I am a long-established editor with many edits to my name. Please avoid editing on behalf of sock puppets in future, thanks and cheers.Keysvolume (talk) 06:40, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
- Also, please explain to me which wikipedia policy allows the promotion of the conspiracy theory that the ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Pandits is a "lie concocted by the Indian government" (compare your edits [14] to the article Kashmiri Pandits).Keysvolume (talk) 06:50, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
- Fastily, I am really sorry to have this silly altercation over in your talk page, but this user Keysvolume has been making bogus claims and lying left and right. Please let me expose him point by point. You can undo this later, if you like. Thanks for your help.
Claim 1 by Keysvolume - .User:Oftenhurry has been placing far-left content on numerous Naxalite-related articles based on claims made by an Unreliable Source numerous Naxalite-related articles? Please prove. The only one that is Naxalite related that I edited is the Salwa Judum page. One is numerous? Lie 1 Claim 2 by Keysvolume - deceived by USer:Oftenhurry into blanking content from Neofascism and religion that I placed based on WP:Notable huh? what neofascism and religion have I entered and where? Lie 2 Claim 3 by Keysvolume - based on claims made by an Unreliable Source that is known for making anti-Semitic claims and perorations Please prove. The links you gave to JeffG's page are written by completely different people - it is not by Ramchandra Guha. You think nobody would check the references so you can put any mumbo jumbo and people would buy it. Lie 3 Claim 4 by Keysvolume - Please avoid editing on behalf of sock puppets in future Prove that I am a sockpuppet. You asked for investigation, I was cleared, if you still keep calling me a sockpuppet, you are a liar.
You are a liar the 4th time in a paragraph of 5 sentences. That shows your editing history and I am becoming more and more clear about where wikipedia stands with such "long established" editors. I for one surely would not base any of my research on Wiki ever again. I will advice others too to do the same citing these examples. Oftenhurry (talk) 14:45, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Keysvolume - vandalising again!!
This is getting out of hand and beyond any appearance of civility. User Keysvolume - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Keysvolume is reverting back on his talk page warning issued by you and is putting sockpuppetry charge on my page, when he has been repeatedly told that I have been cleared off any charge. He has done this on my page three times. No amount of warning and reasoning is working. What am I supposed to do? Why isn't he being blocked for slandering others when his charges have been proved to be wrong. Thank you for your help! Oftenhurry (talk) 17:48, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
TJ Coletti
Hello, I received a message from you that the photo on this entry cannot be verified for copyright issues. This picture was taken by an immediate family member. There are no copyright issues with this picture. Please let me know if there are further issues. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dolbyvet (talk • contribs) 03:54, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
RfA
Perhaps you could semi-protect the RfA page? That might solve the problem. Equazcion (talk) 07:07, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Deletion review for Endgame (2007 film)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Endgame (2007 film). Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. I'm making the nomination on behalf of a new editor, because I'm not sure it still meets G11. Please comment at the DRV— Arthur Rubin (talk) 17:57, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
File:TannadicePark-1923.jpg
Another editor tagged an old British photo acquired from an archive, File:TannadicePark-1923.jpg, for speedy deletion and you deleted it. I suspect that the image had fallen into the public domain and the archive therefore had no right to claim copyright on it. But if the photographer of the 1923 photograph was known and still alive in 1934, copyright would still exist. -- Eastmain (talk) 21:14, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Help Please?
I noticed you deleted one of my articles. I am new and I'm sorry if I violated any terms with that article. I o have a question though. Recently I created an article under my own name/the person im writing about, but I am having trouble uploading or putting in pictures. How can I add in pictures? I wish to use external sources, they are under my copyright, no problems in that area. Thank you.
JackJack Willow (talk) 22:12, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jack Willow (talk • contribs) 22:22, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Well...
Around the same time you warned Sdgdsfsdg (talk · contribs), I blocked him. Instead of an edit conflict, I guess this would be called an "admin action conflict." Oh well... Willking1979 (talk) 22:38, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
File copyright problem with File:Franz von Liszt, February 21, 1915, NYT.pdf
Hi. This was publishes in 1915 by the New York Times - its in the Public domain. I edited it. But cannot fix the rest - can you help? Thanks. --Ludvikus (talk) 23:16, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
File:Franz von Liszt, February 21, 1915, NYT.pdf
Hi. This was publishes in 1915 by the New York Times - its in the Public domain. I edited it. But cannot fix the rest - can you help? Thanks. --Ludvikus (talk) 23:17, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Moving a Page
I have already read on how to move a page, and I believe that my account is not yet auto confirmed. I also read that an adminstrator can move a page, would it be to much to ask for your assistance in doing this? Please?Jack W. 00:25, 18 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jack Willow (talk • contribs) 00:16, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
My F7 candidates from earlier
File:White-tiger-ranger.jpg is not not a TV screenshot. Also, a bunch of the other images were missing tags (which you added the other deletion tag for). I also see that JDC808 (talk · contribs) has a history of uploading images without copyright tags.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:13, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
|
|
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
| I, Jeff G., hereby award Fastily with The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for outstanding achievement in countering vandalism. — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 05:54, 16 October 2009 (UTC) |
- You're welcome. Would you mind popping over to User talk:Jeff G.#AIV_report and rendering your opinion there? — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 23:56, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
I really must protest your indef block of Gracefaithme. A block may be justified, but indef for what is essentially a false report is excessive. If you look at the edits to Carolyn Joyce Carty, you'll notice that most of them are clumsy attempts to improve the article. This edit can hardly be called vandalism as it only removed redlinks. Likewise this edit is his/her attempt to change a reference that s/he added. And unfortunately, Jeff G. has a history of labeling stuff vandalism that isn't and filing false reports. I should know - I've been a victim of his overzealousness. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 06:50, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
rollback request
hi. i have added my reply at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback#User:Ciphers and i am still waiting for your reply. I don't think any other admin will approve or disapprove until you cite your reply there. best --Ciphers (talk) 08:52, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks.
Thanks for blocking NegroSalsa, man. Really appreciate your stopping that vandal. :-) Daniel Benfield (talk) 12:51, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Sorry
I no longer need a page to be moved, I'll continue to work on it in my workspace. Thanks anyways.
Keep forgetting to sign sorry.
--Jack W. 21:29, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for reminding me about the file page. I had been in a hurry and had decided to edit the page afterwards. Please see the file page again and tell me if still there is something wrong. Thank you.
TayyabSaeed (talk) 10:00, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Crittenton Women's Union
Hi, Fastily,
I'm attempting to re-create a page that was taken down for Crittenton Women's Union. The reason cited for its deletion is "G11. Unambiguous advertising or promotion." How can I create a new page that follows your guidelines?
Thanks Liveworkthrive (talk) 15:32, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Surge Arrestor 716 Connector.jpg
I may be blind, but why did you put the {{pui}} tag on this picture, the copyright seems self made according to the picture explanation and the copyright status is listed ccsa and GFDL. 70.29.80.207 (talk) 20:22, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
- See this Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 October 19#File:Surge Arrestor 716 Connector.jpg. Due to the quality and angle of the shot, the image appears to be non-free or from an advertisement (neither of which can be licensed under GFDL or any cc license). If you can prove you are the copyright holder, please note that here. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:01, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Delta II Mobile-QWERTY Keypad Matrix
Not sure why this entry was deleted. The entry is not unlike similar entries, such as Frogpad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Usability1 (talk • contribs) 02:46, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Ashford.com
Ashford.com is a 12 year old company not a .com start-up, they are one of the oldest online retailers and as a result I feel they are justified to exist as a Wikipedia entry. The fact that Amazon was one of the first companies to invest in them and the fact they were among the very first companies to participate in Microsoft's eWallet technology I feel meets notability standards. They have been publicly traded and are one of the largest online watch retailers in the world by total sales distributing watches to Costco, Sam's Club and a variety other large retailers.
Nowhere am I linking to a discussion,
one is a cnet article: http://www.zdnetasia.com/news/hardware/0,39042972,13022432,00.htm
the other is a press release: http://www.gsicommerce.com/index.php/en/article/628/
As for the Chevy-volt and Giggle, those entries were spaced about a year apart and have no impact on this content, I am not sure why you are alluding to them. Furthermore, I am not clear on why you are acting in such a negative capacity rather than providing suggestions as to how to improve the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seyoda (talk • contribs) 02:51, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
I have done my best to strip out any kind of "promotional" or spamlike content. My highlighting of larger business deals are meant to satisfy the notability requirement, I think they may have been misconstrued as promotional.
Here is the updated content, please let me know if you feel I have addressed your concerns. Thanks Seyoda (talk) 03:26, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
{{Infobox Website | name = Ashford.com |company_logo = [[Image:Ashfordlogo.gif|370px]] | url = http://www.ashford.com | commercial = Yes | type = [[Online shopping]] | language = English | owner = [[Luxi Group, LLC]] | launch date = 1997 | current status = Active}} '''Ashford.com''' is an online retailer of luxury watches and luxury goods. They are among the oldest online retailers with an initial launch in January of 1997. == References == {{reflist|1}}
Thanks for your guidance on this Fastily I'll make sure and abide moving forward. Also for some reason File:Ashfordlogo.gif is not loading in the infobox, if you can advise me as to why it would be greatly appreciated.Seyoda (talk) 05:28, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
quicksmart logo
Hi Fastily,
I think I may have put the wrong information on an image (Quicksmartlogo.png) I uploaded that you have questioned. But, I am a newbie and I can't figure out how to change the information or how to fix the problem.
I was going to delete the image, but I see that isn't a simple process. I understand this now as images are considered as openly usable when placed on wikipedia, just as text content is.
The image is a copyrighted image, but I have been given permission by the owners to use it in wikipedia to go with the article I am working on. In fact, the owners really want it to be used in the article. Am I able to put it in the article without going against wikipedia rules? If so, what do I need to say when I upload it so that it is clear I have permission? Also, what do I do about the existing image? Can I alter it's information so that it is accurate, or do I need to put a new one up? If the latter, how do I get rid of the old one?
I would very much appreciate your help with this. I have searched around quite a bit on wikipedia since your talk message, and I am still having trouble figuring all of this out.
Thanks,
Radlingt (talk) 04:47, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
About the Allen-Party.jpg
Okay, thank you. I will try my best to contact the owner. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Borderings (talk • contribs) 06:07, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
It's my pleasure, but thanks! --King Öomie 13:53, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Hardware
hi, i created an image at File:Hardware band photo.jpg and you made it so i need to put in copyright information. i don't see how i do this, can you please help me out? thank you. Aisha9152 (talk) 16:02, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
thanks for your help! Aisha9152 (talk) 15:24, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Fastily,
During new page patrol i came across the above mentioned page, and it looks as if it has been copy-pasted from a different source. Searched reveal no copyvio so i suspect it might be a copy of the now deleted article Crittenton Women's Union. Seeing that you were the admin deleting that particular article, would you happen to know if the new article is an identical copy of the previously deleted page? If so, it should probably go trough the G11 route again.
Thanks in advance, Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 17:53, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
RFA spam
| Thank you for participating in WP:Requests for adminship/Kww 3 | |
|---|---|
| |
| Sometimes, being turned back at the door isn't such a bad thing | |
75.170.195.109
I understand the user hasn't edited since the last warning, but we have three back-to-back-to-back blocks and the same vandalism over and over. This user is clearly not going to stop just because he gets a free pass this one time. It requires a block. The user has also be vandalizing other pages today, so the vandalism is spreading. A block would contain it. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 01:05, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- Excellent...many thanks on that :) - NeutralHomer • Talk • 01:21, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 02:09, 22 October 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
King Öomie 02:09, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of O.G. Mudbone
I don't think the ruling was fair because I am only a fan of him. I am not in any way affiliated with his website. I also barely got any time to make my case before the delete happened. Could use some clarification here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davisman123 (talk • contribs) 03:23, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Go ahead and delete File:2001MontageNew.jpg;
THis file was supplanted and superseded by another, for which rationale etc has been supplied, and is now an orphan without an article. Please go ahead and delete.--WickerGuy (talk) 06:20, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Speedy deletion decline
Can you expand on your speedy deletion decline of Category:Museums established in 1840? How is it exempt from WP:CSD#C1? 70.150.94.194 (talk) 15:09, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
- If you are too busy to respond, I'd be happy to bring this to WP:AN/I instead. 70.150.94.194 (talk) 18:23, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
- That sort of sounds like a threat. --King Öomie 18:26, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
- I'd just like an explaination, and it appears as if he is too busy to give one even though he has made hundreds of edits since my first request. Is AN/I not the place to request such an explaination in absence of a response from the declining admin? I'd be happy to go elsewhere if there is a more appropriate venue. 70.150.94.194 (talk) 18:39, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
- It sounded like a threat, in fact, because AN/I is generally for incidents involving edit warring or misconduct, as opposed to requesting a second opinion on a speedy. If you make a genuine attempt to contact a closing admin (which you have), it's not considered forum shopping to ask again from someone else. Post a request for a third opinion, or post the category to CFD. --King Öomie 18:48, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
- [15] -FASTILY (TALK) 22:28, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
- Let me get this straight- The creator of a category creates a hidden note within the category, making up a reason for why they want the category to not be deleted, even though the reason has completely no relation to any Wikipedia rule, and in fact goes directly against a Wikipedia policy, that being WP:CSD#C1. They repeated the same reason for why they want this kept on the talk page. As you will see from my edits [16] [17] [18] I made it abundantly clear that their given reason is invalid, which have yet to be responded to. Did you miss my repeated, uncontested reasons why this category is not exempt from C1? Did you simply take the creator's "note" as fact without having any policy to back up their claim? Please re-evaluate this, and if you decide it still isn't speedy deletable, I will seek a third opinion. 70.150.94.194 (talk) 15:09, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- [15] -FASTILY (TALK) 22:28, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
- It sounded like a threat, in fact, because AN/I is generally for incidents involving edit warring or misconduct, as opposed to requesting a second opinion on a speedy. If you make a genuine attempt to contact a closing admin (which you have), it's not considered forum shopping to ask again from someone else. Post a request for a third opinion, or post the category to CFD. --King Öomie 18:48, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
- I'd just like an explaination, and it appears as if he is too busy to give one even though he has made hundreds of edits since my first request. Is AN/I not the place to request such an explaination in absence of a response from the declining admin? I'd be happy to go elsewhere if there is a more appropriate venue. 70.150.94.194 (talk) 18:39, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
- That sort of sounds like a threat. --King Öomie 18:26, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
When I go about trying to convince someone I'm correct, badgering and ridicule aren't high on my list of suggested tactics. --King Öomie 14:28, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- To avoid further disagreement, I have created an article on the Goya Museum under this category. I hope this will satisfy all concerned. While rules are important, common sense is too, IMHO. — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 17:38, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
I'll bite
I understand there is a trick in your question 12 at Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/TParis00ap, but I'm not seeing it. I've seen advice exactly like that offered, so I'd like to understand the trick.--SPhilbrickT 16:56, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- I don't see it as a trick. If you had to use one sentence to sum up our non-free image criteria, maybe "No, if a person is living, there is still an opportunity to get a free image" would be alright, but you aren't limited to a one sentence response at RfA. Our actual criteria do allow for common sense exemptions. IMO, the question (which is a long time staple of RfA I might add) is designed to generate a thoughtful response. You can see my own response to essentially the same question at my RfA if you want. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:17, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
RE: RE: O.G. Mudbone speedy deletion
I would like an opportunity to re-write my article to sound less like an advertisement, or at least let me get my source code back so I can keep it for my reference. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davisman123 (talk • contribs) 03:24, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Regarding images i uploaded
Hi i have given the copyright status and purpose i am using it. poster i have used is used for identification in the context of critical commentary of the work for which it serves as cover art. It makes a significant contribution to the user's understanding of the article and to help the user quickly identify the work and know they have found what they are looking for.The resulation is low than original. It can't be reproduced. Sunnu308 (talk) 07:28, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
- Noting that this image is a poster, could you perhaps consider giving an external ink as your source? -FASTILYsock (TALK) 04:29, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
This poster can be obtained from the distributor. Sunnu308 (talk) 09:01, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
- Could you provide a specific http/https web address perhaps? -FASTILYsock (TALK) 20:14, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
No i scanned from posters in scanner and uploaded,cheak out resolution.Not from any website.I have audio video shop where i get posters.Sunnu308 (talk) 01:13, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
- Alright then, I believe you. I've removed the no source tag from File:Ghilli308.jpg -FASTILYsock (TALK) 07:47, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
The file I uploaded
I'm sorry, I did mention the source bellow the File:mantra_puthi.jpg. The source is http://media.photobucket.com/image/Mayong%20Central%20Museum%20and%20Emporium/nikoo_28/Mayong_52747_2_12042006_0512060380_.jpg --Xeteli (talk) 03:53, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
- If you think some other license tag will be appropriate for the file and can prevent its deletion, your help is expected.--Xeteli (talk) 03:55, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, used the wrong tag. I've made the fix -FASTILYsock (TALK) 04:27, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
- Frankly/Honestly speaking, I'm not so experienced enough to handle this problem. The file still have a threat to be deteted. Could you plz help to rescue it? --Xeteli (talk) 06:17, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I'm not going to lie, it seems like free versions of an image like this could be taken. You note that this is an image from the Mayong Central Museum and Emporium, a point of interest which is open to the public. Since that appears to be the case, the image is not compliant with Wikipedia non-free content ctriteria #1. If you can obtain a free version, I'll be happy to help you but, well, as far as I can see, it doesn't look like there is a way to save this image form deletion. Sorry, FASTILYsock (TALK) 06:26, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
- Frankly/Honestly speaking, I'm not so experienced enough to handle this problem. The file still have a threat to be deteted. Could you plz help to rescue it? --Xeteli (talk) 06:17, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, used the wrong tag. I've made the fix -FASTILYsock (TALK) 04:27, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
Eknath Easwaran courtesy of the Blue Mountain Center of Meditation.jpg
Hi, I received a message (I think it was from you?) when I uploaded the above pic and inserted it into the Eknath Easwaran article. This is the first time I've loaded a pic, and I didn;t understand the explanation on wikipedia for how to add the copyright so I wrote in answer to the messaage - but maybe you didn't receive it? The picture is publicly available on www.easwaran.org/media where it says that it may be copied freely as long as there is a credit line to the copyright owner Blue Mountain Center of Meditation. This is what I said on the pic when I loaded it. But the copyright stuff... the copyright owner is clear, and the pic is "free" i.e. no cost, but cannot be freely copied UNLESS there is a credit line.... so does that make it "not free"? Any help you can give me would be appreciated!!! Thank you DuncanCraig1949 (talk) 18:35, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
Appropriate use of logo
Because of your interest in images, and my lack of expertise, I'd like to make sure I'm doing something right.
I just wrote an article Women's Basketball Coaches Association, and I just uploaded a copy of their logo. I think I understand that our policy is to allow logos in limited situations when they are low resolution. As the logo is the WBCA logo, and the article is about the organization, I think one prong is easily covered.
As for low-resolution, I'm not so sure. I copied the logo from the WBCA site into Paint. I saved it as a .PNG file. The original file was 343 x 375 and 27 k. I opened the file in Irfanview, resized it to 200 x 219. I noticed an image quality option on the save menu, so I dropped the image quality to 29%. Frankly, it's not obvious that did anything, perhaps because it is a logo with solid colors.
I'm very anxious to make sure I comply with the rules, so can you let me know if I've taken the right steps to reduce the resolution appropriately, and if not, how I should proceed (keeping in mind that I only have three tools, Paint, Irfanview, and the ability to beg for help from experts - oh I have Inkscape, but I don't think that will help.) The file is here File:Wbca Logo.PNG --SPhilbrickT 00:26, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
- Hi SPhilbrick. I can see no major issues with File:Wbca Logo.PNG. The resolution is fine, and the fair use rationale and licensing tag look good. IMO, I'd recommend using an external link as the source, but "WBCA website" will do the job. Cheers, FASTILYsock (TALK) 07:57, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks, I did change to use a link - my first time using that template, and I wasn't quite sure what was needed. (You know, for a person on a wikibreak, you sure do get a lot accomplished.)--SPhilbrickT 12:09, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
- Heh thanks. I'm around anyways so minus well. =P Cheers, FASTILYsock (TALK) 20:46, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks, I did change to use a link - my first time using that template, and I wasn't quite sure what was needed. (You know, for a person on a wikibreak, you sure do get a lot accomplished.)--SPhilbrickT 12:09, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Impostering your userid?
Dear Fastily, Please check my talk page, you'd see a message apparently from you, saying I have been blocked indefinitely for use of multiple id's. This was really surprising to me, I followed the page and I saw that someone,- Keysvolume (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Keysvolume) who has been vandalizing certain pages, that has been restored by me and others had bought a sockpuppet charge against me. I was cleared, as it showed no connection. This made me even more surprised at that block - I checked the edit history of my talk page and found an user with ip address (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:59.92.243.49&action=edit&redlink=1) have left that message. I think this same user has been vandalising exactly those pages that the above mentioned user was doing earlier, till he was blocked temporarily. Please take a look at my talk page, and it would be clear to you.
Also, a previously blocked page - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Salwa_Judum&action=history, was edited by someone after a detailed point by point and in-depth discussion in the talk page. These unregistered users are vandalising and reverting without any discussion in the talk page. Could this page be put back to a sem-protect status?
Thank you very much, Vinter-light (talk) 15:42, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, I realized that you are on break (or not? :-)), so I asked the assistance of another administrator. Vinter-light (talk) 04:16, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Re:Eknath Easwaran courtesy of the Blue Mountain Center of Meditation.jpg
Thank you very much for your help on this. I'm NOT the copyright owner of this image - copyright is owned by the Blue Mountain Center but the image is on their website www.easwaran.org/media and is available to copy and reproduce (but not modify) free of charge with a credit line to the copyright owner. That's why (while waiting for your reply) I looked some more and figured out that I ought to use the non-free fair-use categorization - which seems to fit to me? Am I correct using that?
If so, then hopefully the copyright tag I have inserted now is the correct one:
{{Non-free promotional}}—for publicity photographs of people or events, such as headshots or posed shots, from a press kit
Would you agree with that? And if so would you please let me know if there are any other corrections I should make, and remove the deletion notice?
Thanks again for your kind help on this DuncanCraig1949 (talk) 14:11, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for your suggestions & help on this. Hopefully the page is now OK. Best wishes DuncanCraig1949 (talk) 07:26, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Ampalang Society.jpg upload and copright
Thank you for your notice and I have requested copyright permission from the artist. Kiwibaro (talk) 19:12, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Dave Colburn
Hey I noticed you tagged the image and it may be deleted fairly soon. For TV character images, what it the best way to attain one? We just deal with screenshots really and put in the correct info.. and I know all of those help pages are there, but I'd rather you to explain it if you could, as i can understand alot better from an admin because you know most things. Raintheone (talk) 21:17, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Raintheone. That was my bad - didn't add the proper deletion tag. What I meant to add was a {{nsd}} tag, noting that the image needs a more specific source. If you could provide a external link or state "screen capture" (only if you took the picture yourself) as the source, that would be great. Regards, FASTILYsock (TALK) 21:34, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Did I forget to thank you? ..
|
|
Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed nearly unanimously with 174 in support, 2 in opposition and 1 neutral votes. Special thanks goes to RegentsPark, Samir and John Carter for their kind nomination and support. I am truly honored by the trust and confidence that the community has placed in me. I thank you for your kind inputs and I will be sincerely looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas ( including my english ;) ). If you ever need anything please feel free to ask me and I would be happy to help you :). Have a great day ! -- Tinu Cherian - 04:29, 28 October 2009 (UTC) |
unconstructive edits or what-have-you
The reason I changed the page to say "November 25, 2009 - Thanksgiving Eve" instead of "November 25, 2009 - Thanksgiving" is because November 25, 2009 is Thanksgiving Eve, not Thanksgiving. Is that not a reasonable edit? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.175.120.141 (talk) 01:01, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
By the way, this is the page/section: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SR-71_(band)#Reunion_.282009.E2.80.93present.29 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.175.120.141 (talk) 01:05, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Zip Guns link in cassandra's dream article
What is the problem with creating the link to improvised firearms for the term 'zip gun' in the plot section of Cassandra's Dream? A search for zip gun redirects to improvised firearms. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.163.62.46 (talk) 01:12, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
- Ah - My bad. I have restored your edit. Thanks for letting me know. -FASTILYsock (TALK) 01:26, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
User talk:74.160.132.223 requesting unblock
Hello Fastily. You are probably the only person who can answer his question, since his only significant edit was oversighted and I don't know whose block he might be evading. EdJohnston (talk) 03:09, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I came across the same unblock request. Also, since it was a week ago; there is a possibility that the person who committed the singular edit is not the same person requesting the unblock today. Any additional input into this matter would be helpful. --Jayron32 05:26, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
- See my reply on EdJohnston's page. -FASTILYsock (TALK) 05:28, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
- Regarding your reply to EdJohnston; what is the nature of JarAxle's IP hopping? Are they likely dynamically assigned IPs OR are they open proxies? If he is using a large number of IPs, such three month blocks are unlikely to stop him from doing anything, but they will likely stop legitimate users who get assigned the IP at a later time. Do you have any additional input to change my analysis of this? Either these are open proxies OR they are dynamically assigned, and if they are dynamic IPs, then the existing block serves no purpose as there is little to no chance that our Grawpy friend would ever use it again... --Jayron32 05:34, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
- Well said Jayron. I shall leave it at your discretion to unblock 74.160.132.223 then. If you do...just to be safe, I'd recommend monitoring the edits made from 74.160.132.223. Regards, FASTILYsock (TALK) 05:41, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
- Will do. Jaraxle/Grawp is so instantly recognizable in his editing pattern that if this is him (which I doubt, he doesn't bother with unblock requests, except as a direct attempt to crash browsers or otherwise mess with people through the unblock request itself), that as soon as it goes all grawpy again, there'll be 20 other admins blocking it instantly. I'll unblock and hope for the best. Cheers! --Jayron32 05:52, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
- Well said Jayron. I shall leave it at your discretion to unblock 74.160.132.223 then. If you do...just to be safe, I'd recommend monitoring the edits made from 74.160.132.223. Regards, FASTILYsock (TALK) 05:41, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
- Regarding your reply to EdJohnston; what is the nature of JarAxle's IP hopping? Are they likely dynamically assigned IPs OR are they open proxies? If he is using a large number of IPs, such three month blocks are unlikely to stop him from doing anything, but they will likely stop legitimate users who get assigned the IP at a later time. Do you have any additional input to change my analysis of this? Either these are open proxies OR they are dynamically assigned, and if they are dynamic IPs, then the existing block serves no purpose as there is little to no chance that our Grawpy friend would ever use it again... --Jayron32 05:34, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
- See my reply on EdJohnston's page. -FASTILYsock (TALK) 05:28, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm not vandalizing
I'm not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.110.233.241 (talk) 05:04, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
George Perez article
Why did you revert my edits to the George Perez article? I added references, cleaned up the bibliography, and fixed some of the stilted grammar. If the number of edits seemed excessive it is because my wi-fi connection can get kinda wobbly and I lose contact. Hence the need to save my changes more often than may otherwise be necessary. Mtminchi08 (talk) 05:09, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Mtminchi08. Ah. Well, if that's the case, my bad. I have restored your edits. Thanks for letting me know. -FASTILYsock (TALK) 05:16, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Just trying to figure out what exactly was wrong with User:38.126.225.6's edit here. Q T C 05:14, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
- Hi OverlordQ. I had perceived the edits to be vandalism at first glance but, looking them over again, that is clearly not the case. I've restored the edits and struck out the message on 38.126.225.6's talk page. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILYsock (TALK) 05:20, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Changes to U-17 world cup page
I undid your "undo" of my changes to the U-17 world cup page. I'm not sure why you felt my revision needed to be undone. I'd be happy to discuss.
LarryJeff (talk) 05:29, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
- Hi LarryJeff. I reverted your edits because per official Wikipedia policy, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. You may add updates as they occur in real life, but not beforehand. I strongly recommend you revert yourself for now and update the page later when the results, not predictions/possible outcomes, of U-17 become available. -FASTILYsock (TALK) 05:39, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. I don't believe the "crystal ball" policy applies here as there is nothing unverifiable or speculative. These scenarios are informative to a fan of the game as far as knowing what each team has at stake in their upcoming matches. Secondly, if this does fall under the crystal ball policy, then your revision did not do enough to clean up the article--you simply reverted to an earlier (and inaccurate) version of the same type of information. And the same type of qualifying scenarios are included in articles about other ongoing FIFA tournaments.
LarryJeff (talk) 05:58, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Forgive me if I'm missing something, but is the 34.252 user only replacing "power metal" with "black metal"? If that's the case I don't think that's outright vandalism, and while I'd never complain about a reversal or two, I don't think it should escalate this far; perhaps a warn to go to the talk page. If I'm off base here tell me what I didn't see. Thanks. Shadowjams (talk) 05:31, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
- If I'm not mistaken, "black" is being used in a derogatory fashion here; I'd recommend reverting those edits. It appears this is the fourth time someone has done that today, each one of those edits from a different IP address. -FASTILYsock (TALK) 05:35, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
- Ok, I see the multiple IPs now. With one exception they're all from Arkansas. Thanks for letting me know. I'll watch those IPs for the immediate future. Shadowjams (talk) 05:38, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
The Image Cynthia Childs & Khristal Jones.jpeg
Hello Fastily,
I have seen your comments on the usertalk page. The image is not a pirated copy. It is the image of the owners of the web blog www.urbanfrugalchic.com. They asked me to upload it along with an article about the web blog. I am their assistant doing the work, and it was the owners themselves who sent me the images. So Please don't delete it.
Vijayan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vijinfrugal (talk • contribs) 13:27, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Your Twinkle
Hello, I was wondering about your Twinkle and why it put a speedy deletion warning on my talk page, concerning another talk page which I even didn't touch in the first place. Something seems to be wrong there. De728631 (talk) 20:22, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
- Mkay, well, that's just plain weird. Please disregard that message. -FASTILYsock (TALK) 21:17, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
WLNS "vandalism"
Just to let you know, I was not vandalising the page on WLNS-TV 6 from Lansing, MI. I was simply adding some additional info on the station's history i.e. past newscast titles and slogans. I'm a native Lansingite and have literally grown up watching WLNS, so I know what I'm talking about.
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.147.171.206 (talk) 04:07, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Happy Halloween!
As Halloween is my favorite holiday, I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Halloween! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 15:56, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Reply
Hi there, I have replied to your comment on Copyrighting on my Talk Page. Many thanks, Kai Tatsu (talk) 22:11, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
- Hi there, I have replied to your comment on Copyrighting on my Talk Page once more. Many thanks, Kai Tatsu (talk) 22:55, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
--dan
i love you and wikipedia thank you for making it a nice enviroment for my kids to play on —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.71.248.242 (talk) 11:53, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Picture Deletion - DEE IVA
Why are you tagging my image for deletion? It is of myself and i own the copyright. Deeiva (talk) 21:33, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
- It is listed for deletion because you need to add a license tag. See WP:ICT/All for a list of tags. -FASTILYsock (TALK) 22:05, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Coaching
If you’re not too busy in real life, I would be interesting in your Admin coaching program and since I am planning to upload dozens of more photos, I need to know how to tell if a photo is a copyvio or not. Regards Dr.Szlachedzki (talk) 05:25, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
aqualung logo information
I changed the license info to GPL, it said |Lisence=GPL}}) initially, and i tried to change it to "license", but to no avail. Information still says its a non-free image, implying non-free use. Bauksitt (talk) 07:17, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
CONTENT REMOVAL/PAGE DELETION
I am removing all content from the page I created, 'Dee Iva'. I do not wish to share it with Wikipedia any longer. Hopefully that will please you. If I am unable to remove it then I would like you to erase all references and images from this website immediately.
Yours sincerely Deeiva (talk) 10:39, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Oops
You tagged File:Halt hier grenze 800px.jpg for deletion claiming that File:Halt hier grenze 100px.jpg was of higher resolution! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 04:30, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
WP:FILMS October Newsletter
The October 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. The newsletter includes details on the current membership roll call to readd your name from the inactive list to the active list. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:58, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
FFD
Are you using some kind of script to post those to FFD? Many of them are public domain and pretty encyclopedic. Gigs (talk) 01:02, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
- So what's going to happen to the ones that end without comment? I know in other XfD forums those would be relisted. I've been going through them and commenting on the ones that I think you tagged mistakenly, but the vast majority of them are not worth moving to commons and I agree with deletion. Should I go through and mark those with a delete !vote or what? Gigs (talk) 00:32, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
File:EduardStreltsovUSSR.jpg
I've provided a rationale and removed the tag accordingly.
Ta, – Cliftonianthe orangey bit 23:22, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
- Alright. Looks good. Cheers, FASTILYsock (TALK) 23:40, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Korine Tap
Just added a fair-use rationale for "Korine Tap.jpg" Do you think the rationale I wrote meets the requirement? Endlessmug (talk) 23:39, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Endlessmug. The rationale you wrote looks pretty good. I've added it to the fair use rationale description template on File:Korine Tap.jpg. But if you could provide a specific external link for the source, it'd be even better. -FASTILYsock (TALK) 23:44, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
- Gotcha. Added the specific URL. Endlessmug (talk) 23:52, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
File:EduardStreltsov2.jpg
Decided not to use this picture in the article, any chance you could delete it for me?
Cheers, – Cliftonianthe orangey bit 10:53, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
- Er, you deleted the wrong one... I wanted the file "File:EduardStreltsov2.jpg" deleted... Thanks anyway – Cliftonianthe orangey bit 12:14, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
- Oops. My bad. Restored File:EduardStreltsovUSSR.jpg and deleted File:EduardStreltsov2.jpg. Please don't hesitate to let me know if I did that wrong again. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 20:40, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
- Er, you deleted the wrong one... I wanted the file "File:EduardStreltsov2.jpg" deleted... Thanks anyway – Cliftonianthe orangey bit 12:14, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Fastily,
you made a Speedy deletion request on Oct the 25th for Imperial Knight Eberhard (Bernhar) Buob (Booe). I think all the necessary facts are here in the page and would so love for you to remove this deletion tag. I will be adding more info on this as time goes on which will only add to the needs of facts. Please remove this tag and feel free to email me or talk with me on any part of this page. Ron —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rvbooe (talk • contribs) 16:28, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Re: RFA
Would it perhaps be ok to postpone my response to about this time next week, because this week coming ive now got exams which i definatly have to study for. Oh and thanks for the nomination i will definately consider it. Salavat (talk) 04:00, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
MoonHoaxBat
Hello, Fastily. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is MoonHoaxBat. Thank you. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 08:27, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Supercat Fast Ferry Corporation (SFFC) Advert tag
Hi, I wrote the article Supercat Fast Ferry Corporation (SFFC). I tried my best to rephrase many of the lines that seemed to advertise. Please judge it again, and see if the tag you placed can be lifted already. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nowell 1011 (talk • contribs) 12:09, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Please see noticeboard.
- Please see my appeal at the noticeboard. I was known as MoonHoaxBat, but for abusing (i.e. appealing) on my talk page, I had no way to find out how to appeal to ArbCom. I would appreciate it if you could see the noticeboard. I am notifying you because I am not trying to slip something past the community.--FredUnavailable (talk) 18:13, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
St. Catherine's Page
Hi,
Our page was put up for 'speedy deletion', I protested it and you said that it is not up for deletion. For some reason, the page has not been reverted back... Danielwje (talk) 18:51, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
- Indeed. I did say that it was not up for deletion. But it seems that User:Toon05 has deleted the page instead. Perhaps you may wish to ask them for the reasoning behind the delete. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:54, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. I find this very confusing when all I am trying to do is create a page.
--Danielwje (talk) 19:00, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
A question for you
Hi there,
You commented on my first RFA, and cited a lack of experience as your reason for opposing. The time since my last RFA is coming up on 3 months, which seemed to be the general timeframe that people wanted me to wait. I'm coming to you now to ask you if it would be possible for you to take another look at my edits, and see what other advice you might give to me (both in editing style, location, and experience in general). I would greatly appreciate the time that you take to do this, and I ask that you not "sugarcoat" your reply. Tell me honestly what you think is my best course of action as an editor.
Regards, MacMedtalkstalk 01:18, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
- Simple. Don't do what I do and you should be fine. :lol: --Malleus Fatuorum 01:36, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
- (holy crap you're enthusiastic) For sure, definitely talk to KoH. Most people who regular RfA want at least 3000 edits and 6 months between RfAs (unfortunately...). I will probably support since you're really, really enthusiastic, and doing some pretty good work. One thing that stands out to me is that you don't have very many contributions in admin-related areas since your last RfA. Try new page patrolling and participating more in AfDs (which reminds me, I need to get back on AfD work too...). I'll reply with more later, as I currently have history homework to do...--Unionhawk Talk E-mail Review 01:57, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Well, new page patrolling, which Unionhawk proposed, is certainly an area where one can make many mistakes, so it would fit the bill of my first comment in your RfA. However, I disagree with the classification of any particular area as "admin-related". All of Wikipedia is admin-related. That said, Unionhawk's advice is probably good: It's just human for voters to expect a candidate to be good in what they do themselves, and there seems to be a preponderance of voters these days in the area of new page patrolling. My own preference, though, would be if you could show experience as a mediator. — Sebastian 03:53, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Note: I replied to the above before I realized that the page was transcluded. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's very unusual. I would have preferred a short message asking me to reply on this page, which would have been more transparent. — Sebastian 04:03, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
I personally do not care how long candidates wait before a rerun, but I always like to play it safe when actually running for something or nominating someone for something. The general wisdom seems to be to wait 6 months if the first RfA failed in uncontroversial circumstances. Now again, if you ran now, you would be more likely than not to pass, but waiting three more months will make your chances even better. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:03, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
- Heh - I thought my page was popular until I saw the above from Sebastian about the transclusion :) I'll have a look and get back to you. Pedro : Chat 07:43, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
- I'll be honest MacMed, I would consider opposing you just for using a talk page template like this. Wikipedia can be a confusing place, and it is very important that we admins not communicate in overly elaborate or clever ways. This template is pretty cool, but not something that an admin should use. This is the type of intangible that any RfA candidate needs to be cognizant off when asking for suggestions. That said, the most important thing to take away from my comment is not that you should change your behavior simply to pass an RfA. Rather, you should ask if said change in behavior is something worth doing just to become an RfA. If you like working here in one way, and the admin responsibilities would prevent you from enjoying the project in that manner, is the mop actually something you want? Hiberniantears (talk) 03:18, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
- In an honest reply, I figured it would be easier to watch just one page instead of the 6 talks. However, hindsight is 20/20, and per Sebastian's comment above I would likely follow his advice in the future and simply leave a link to this page. This isn't a big part of what I do on Wikipedia, and I don't think it would decrease my enjoyment to change a simple thing like a talk page message. Thanks for your opinion though. Regards, MacMedtalkstalk 03:28, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
- At least you got to figure that out with a group of pretty experienced editors, rather than a group of newbies. If you're going to do something like this, where you want input from a bunch of editors, I would post a link to a discussion thread (like this) to the talk pages of the editors, rather than transcluding it.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail Review 03:36, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
- In an honest reply, I figured it would be easier to watch just one page instead of the 6 talks. However, hindsight is 20/20, and per Sebastian's comment above I would likely follow his advice in the future and simply leave a link to this page. This isn't a big part of what I do on Wikipedia, and I don't think it would decrease my enjoyment to change a simple thing like a talk page message. Thanks for your opinion though. Regards, MacMedtalkstalk 03:28, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Re:Supercat Fast Ferry Corporation (SFFC) Advert tag
You wrote me: --------- Hi Nowell 1011. Well, I took a look at Supercat Fast Ferry Corporation (SFFC) and, well, although improved, it still seems to have some spam/advertising-like qualities (e.g. Supercat Fast Ferry Corporation (SFFC)#Destinations, Supercat Fast Ferry Corporation (SFFC)#Fleet). I'd suggest reading Wikipedia policy WP:ADS and guidelines WP:MOS. These should give you a better idea about how to write articles. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 20:44, 8 November 2009 (UTC)--------------------
May I ask how my "Destinations" and "Fleet" differ from those airline companies that also have those section? Example: SuperFerry Destinations, Philippine Airlines Fleet —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nowell 1011 (talk • contribs) 01:28, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
re: your message
Hi Fastily, I've left a reply to your message on my talk page -- Marek.69 talk 05:28, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Ruslan Sirota.jpg
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
09:43, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Re:Supercat Fast Ferry Corporation (SFFC) Advert tag
Ok, thank you very much. Does this mean the article will soon be deleted? If not re-written ASAP? I hope not, as the topic is really beneficial to Filipinos who's interested with Philippine Ships. But I should say, there is really no intention of advertising. Its just that the history of the fleet is also important. Oh well I will try my best to revise it. I know i'm not very credible to question your judgement as I am not scholar in nature. Thanks for reviewing... Can I ask when the "new article" tag will be removed? --Nowell 1011 (talk) 13:41, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
WP:FILMS' Tag & Assess Drive and Roll Call
Em009
I followed up on the AIV report on Em009 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Based on the lack of productive edits and the repeated creation of vandalistic pages (see the deleted contribs), I thought a block was warranted. I wasn't certain if you intended to decline the request, so I thought I'd come here and explain. Let me know if you disagree.--Kubigula (talk) 05:56, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
You're a nice guy!
Thanks for the encouraging message on my talk page, you made me smile! :) --85.131.22.173 (talk) 09:55, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
OTRS
Hi, thank you so much for helping out with the image. How long does it usually take until a member with OTRS access reads the e-mail and sorts out the copyright issue? Hearfourmewesique (talk) 16:20, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
We blocked the same guy...
Sorry bout that, I think we were doing the same thing, at the same time! Regards, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 20:02, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Fasty,
Hi Fasty,
I dont understand the warning. I don't think it meets the definition of vandalism. I was asking a bonafde question of an antagonist on wiki. Thanks Regisfugit (talk) 04:44, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
How come Twinkle didn't notify me on my talk page about the CSD nom for this image? You might look over some of your other noms to be sure that people were properly notified. I'm sure you keep very busy with hunting down copyvios, etc. but if you notice someone like me with thousands of contributions and a member for many years, it might be nice to drop me a note anyway. I rarely upload to en.wiki (I prefer totally free use images rather than messing around with fair use ones), and the missing template was simply an oversight. In this particular case, I was already correcting another case of copyvio and uploaded this smaller image to replace a large one that was bogusly tagged as "own work". I already had added the FUR and other details, and I wasn't aware that the FUR didn't include or infer the copyright notice. Anyway, I added it now and removed the CSD notice. I hope that was okay to do and that the image wasn't under discussion somewhere. I didn't see any notice about that. Thanks. —Willscrlt ( “Talk” ) 07:17, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
File:IM000007.JPG and File:IM000470.JPG
Yes, go ahead and delete these. When I moved all of my photos to Commons a few years ago, I apparently forgot to add delete-duplicate tags to these two. Bms4880 (talk) 14:25, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
just curious
why would listing a book by the author be unconstructive? The transltor really was a zoologist by trade, if that's the issue. 198.179.227.59 (talk) 02:47, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
removing bad redirects
thanks for your message. i am confused. this page is being redirected to something that does not describe the article. what am i supposed to do?Booyah! (talk) 02:59, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Question
Hey, is there a more efficient method of leaving warnings on people's talk page? Maybe some sort of automated message? -Reconsider the static (talk) 03:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
I noticed you had struck your warning on IP 68.84.89.141's talk in regards to their edits to this article. Did I err by leaving a warning there? If there is something I am not taking into account here, please let me know. I will strike my warning as well if need be. Thanks Tiderolls 03:16, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
TXTXTXTXTX7
Hard to be certain with a name like that, isn't it? I nearly reverted that without looking myself. HalfShadow 03:22, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Possible deletion of Outdoorcourtyard.jpg and Japanesegardenpno.jpg from Pompano Beach High School
These are my personal photographs and I don't think it is necessary to copyright my work. For the pictures I wanted to have an intellectual copyright, I chose that option. My username is DJRazma.
Thank you. DJRazma (talk) 07:17, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Photo copyrights
If I took the photo myself, how do I include "copyright information"? Do I need to cite myself with the use of my actual name? DJRazma (talk) 07:18, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Completed
Thanks, I figured it out and added copyright tags and descriptions. DJRazma (talk) 07:35, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Invitation to participate in SecurePoll feedback and workshop
As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.
For the Arbitration Committee,
Risker (talk) 08:08, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
copyright tags
I have added copyright tags to these two image files: House maududi.jpg Grave maududi.jpg
Is it okay now? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhaur (talk • contribs) 09:44, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
222jpg=
Why did you delete my picture 222jpg from Dulnain Bridge? It's been up for years and no-one's had a problem with it. You have nothing to do with this page, and I don't want to be rude, but you seem to me to be a pretty sad person, just randomly deleting users' image for no reason.
- Wikipedia:CSD#Files. Also, psychoanalyzing admins generally isn't the best way to get them to acquiesce to your requests. --King Öomie 19:39, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi. You've speedy-deleted the article about CeBIT, world's largest information technology trade fair, for "unambiguous advertising or promotion". It should have existed since at least early 2004 (that's when its interlanguage link was added to the german article) and should have had about 21 interlanguage links (again according to the german article). Just recently it has been rated "Mid-Class" for Wikipedia 1.0. I've just quickread a userspace page that I believe to be a copy of it, and yes, there are some parts that could be removed or rewritten, but are you sure it wasn't a mistake to speedy-delete the whole article about such an important topic? --YMS (talk) 19:31, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- I find it absolutely hilarious that a request to undelete a G11 actually begins with brochure-worthy praise and testimony. --King Öomie 19:37, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- I was aware of that. Two things: 1. Of course, in an article, such kind of statement would have to be cited. In this short discussion page notice it was just meant as a quick hint for the importance of the topic. (Anyway, half a million attendees each year - can you offer more?) 2. This was not a request to undelete, I was asking if the deletion was a mistake. --YMS (talk) 19:45, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- I'd assume it wasn't a mistake. He'd have to have opened the delete page, entered a category, and hit "submit", all accidentally. --King Öomie 19:47, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- It is hard to accidently a whole page.--SKATER Speak. 19:50, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Really, the hard part is figuring out what to do in that circumstance. And looking at the userspace draft you linked, the article was absolutely a BLATANT advertisement- it looks like a brochure. It doesn't matter how notable the subject is- if the article is crap, out it goes. And that article was an ad to its core. More than two thirds of it would have to be completely removed, and the rest rewritten. --King Öomie 19:52, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- It is hard to accidently a whole page.--SKATER Speak. 19:50, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- I'd assume it wasn't a mistake. He'd have to have opened the delete page, entered a category, and hit "submit", all accidentally. --King Öomie 19:47, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- I was aware of that. Two things: 1. Of course, in an article, such kind of statement would have to be cited. In this short discussion page notice it was just meant as a quick hint for the importance of the topic. (Anyway, half a million attendees each year - can you offer more?) 2. This was not a request to undelete, I was asking if the deletion was a mistake. --YMS (talk) 19:45, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I see why you blocked Moin.nabi (talk · contribs) but I am concerned maybe he was just terribly confused on how to do something. The article he kept moving was one he initiated. Maybe he was trying to make copies? Anyway, please keep a lookout on his talk page. Or maybe even unblock to try to engage him a little. Weird situation. Thanks. Wknight94 talk 22:48, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Ffd nominations
Hi Fastily....."Low quality, unencyclopedic, orphaned, use not stated" ? Often you are correct but you are using this on images where the use is stated (there is descriptive material on the image page), on images that are used on user pages (sometimes of semi-active users) and where the image is of high quality. I appreciate the work you're doing here but more care with your reasoning would be much better. Happy nominating - Peripitus (Talk) 02:15, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Got your message
about user 190.10.0.121. I didn't want to blank the ANI myself... Anyway, I thought the user's talk page full of warnings was sufficient evidence that they understood Wiki policy on the matter, and I remember reading somewhere that a warning is not a prerequisite for a block, but I'll remember to include a warning next time. AzureFury (talk | contribs) 05:10, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
For this aesthetic tweak. Looks much better. See ya 'round Tiderolls 05:23, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Please see User talk:myself488#Soyuz Poisk Launch Image. --myself488 (talk) 09:05, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Did I act appropriately
Hi. I've been doing simple copy edits on Wikipedia for years and only recently have registered and begun other edits. Should I have done anything differently on my report of vandalism on Wikipedia:Witchcraft that you so speedily took care of? Thanks for your attention. Poncirus (talk) 03:38, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
71.192.98.65
I noticed that you warned and noted the warning on 71.192.98.65 (talk · contribs). That IP has already been warned twice [19][20] by the reporting editor. The AIV report was also stale because the edits had occurred hours before the AIV report. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:25, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
To Make A Dragon Move?
Dear Fastily, I am a professor at a small liberal-arts college, and I had students design wiki pages concerning illness narratives, the topic of our class. Two students worked on a poem, "To Make a Dragon Move"; it was deleted under the auspices of being "promotional material." Could you please explain this to me?? I made sure that their stuff was encyclopedic, but we could have edited it if given ample time? It would mean a lot to my students, for whom this is their very first time publishing, if they could have more explanation. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beresrogers (talk • contribs) 20:33, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Exact title was To Make a Dragon Move. -- Mentifisto 16:09, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Re: RFA (again)
Ok im ready for my initiation. Whats my first task, drink a gallon of milk? :). Thanks for the nomination too, Salavat (talk) 16:44, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
- I answered the questions, probly not as long as your responses but then im not great at that kind of stuff. Salavat (talk) 04:10, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Fastily, by the way, you misspelled Salavat at one point in the nom. -- Mentifisto 16:09, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Figured I'd throw my bit in here too :) " CSD/deletion taggings (without any use of any use of automated tools)". Just thought I'd let you know you said it twice. Regards, MacMedtalkstalk 01:53, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
- Augh!!! Not again :( Fixed. Thanks for catching that MacMed. -FASTILY (TALK) 04:12, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Peter LaBarbera
The article on Mr. LaBarbera was clearly not unambiguous advertising. Since the article had already gone through a long dispute on its notability you should have at least submitted it to arbitration instead of deleting it so quickly. Please restore the article.
If you have an issue with specific words or phrases that can be ironed out, but to delete the whole article without even opening it for discussion is unacceptable.Johnpacklambert (talk) 15:21, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- Just an fyi, I've made a comment on this situation at Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Current_requests#Peter_LaBarbera.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:59, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- G11 is a high standard and there is no way this article came even close to "unambiguous" advertising.Johnpacklambert (talk) 17:24, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
CeBIT
I noticed you speedily deleted CeBIT, an article that has existed since 2001 and is one of the largest technology expositions in the world. Regardless of the shape the article was currently in, I can't imagine how it could fulfill any of the speedy deletion criteria and I'll eat my hat if it would ever be deleted at an AfD (It's been mentioned hundreds of times by the New York Times alone). I hope you'll promptly reverse your action, as I can only imagine it was a mistake. Cheers, henrik•talk 17:46, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- I fully agree that it was in a sorry state, but that's still not grounds for deletion. Check out this revision (admin only link) - it is a reasonable article. It seems that early 2009, User:Moenni01 created a bloated monster without anyone putting a stop to it, but before then it was a decent article. Please check if articles have a reasonable history and consider restoring previous versions instead of deleting when you encounter cases like this. Cheers, henrik•talk 18:03, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- (I guess I should qualify that 'reasonable' a bit. Even that old revision is not a particularly good article, but it's not the type of material that are grounds for deletion) henrik•talk 18:05, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- Excellent, thank you for restoring it. I have undeleted it so that the entire history is available to all users (See Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia - we must attribute original authors, this is usually done with the page history). Just copying text from an old deleted revision is akin to a copy & paste move, which of course should be avoided. Anyway, glad this is resolved - have a good day! :) henrik•talk 18:17, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Image license
Hi Fastily, I've moved the File:Tepoztopilli.jpg to commons, and now it is marked "to be deleted" due to its license. You've deleted your image that I tagged as "NowCommons". Could you check the license into the deleted image? Could it be restored on en.wiki? Jalo 20:31, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Edits
Okay, so what would be a constructive edit? Is it unconstructive because I'm not logged in? I don't really get it. Should I include a source link or something? I would like to know what I'm doing wrong and fix it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.65.151.47 (talk) 23:53, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Why?
Why undo an edit that was obviously correcting a defaced article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.34.72.249 (talk) 00:01, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi.
All I am trying to do is add a link to a perfectly informative web page which conforms to the wikipedia guidelines for external links.
In my view, I was the victim of vandalism from the guy that removed the link I added.
Please just at least take a look at the content of the site I am trying to add. It features helpful instructions to skaters accompanied by informative video clips. None of this is available in the wikipedia articles themselves.
I have plenty of hits without a wikipedia link. It just seems silly to me that somebody should look up these things on wikipedia and not be presented with the information which is available on my site.
Please get back to me and let me know what you think. If there's some good reason why my site should not appear as an external link then I'd be glad to hear it.
Regards
- Dave Curtis —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davenomiddlenamecurtis (talk • contribs) 00:15, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Editing
I recently tried to edit the page: "The Redemption of Althalus" as there was a small mistake regarding one of the countries. I tried three times to change this, only for it to be reversed. I gave an in depth reason for why the piece of information was incorrect, and I was then accused of vandalising. I was only trying to make the article more factually correct. I don't want to try it edit any future mistakes I might find as I may now be blocked for trying. 78.147.94.15 (talk) 00:31, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
|
The Admin's Barnstar | |
| I see that on two AIV reports you responded to, you warned both users. Although they'll likely only get one more chance, here's a barnstar for giving them that chance. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 00:35, 15 November 2009 (UTC) |
Deleted Images
Hi Fastily,
Thank you for the welcome message. I'm sorry to say that I had uploaded 2 images in my name in error thinking they were the ones I had created. I will resubmitt the similar images I have taken myself, and I apologize for the mistake.
Thanks again, Sully Art Sully art (talk) 04:20, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
- No worries - just be sure to watch out for that in the future! -FASTILY (TALK) 19:50, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Uncontrollable
Sorry if it wasn't you but why did you delete Uncontrollable oout of the Iron Man Armored Adventures episode guide? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.238.160.242 (talk) 10:02, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
- I think you might have me confused with someone else. I haven't edited the page (see the article's history). -FASTILY (TALK) 19:53, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
RFA
Thanks, I guess I was getting a little ambitious there. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 15:01, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
About the Pig edit
I just noticed that the word was a link to its use relating to police but it wasn't illustrated as such. Just made it more clear... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.5.130.14 (talk) 15:56, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Rusyns page
Fastly, why are you helping the vandal blanket revert? As a registered user I assume good faith, but did you read the situation? A lot of good edits by multiple users are being reverted here.--Львівське (talk) 19:53, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
I wonder why do you paste your warning only to my page, but not Lvivske's page. He has vandalized the stable version that had been there for half a year (see last edits of Rusyns before 5 November 2009 Cydebot (talk | contribs)). Everything was fine with the page till IP 84.226.172.251 came in 12 November 2009 and vandalized it by deleting sourced statements and pasting wrong definitions. I had reverted 84.226.172.251 edits but Lvivske has reverted mine, accusing my in vandalism and starting edit war. Hope you are honest to paste warning label to his page too...--59.141.18.155 (talk) 02:27, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
IM000004.JPG
Delete this one as well, it's another I failed to tag as delete-duplicate. If you come across any more photographs of mine with a basic camera filename (the IM and six digits), feel free to delete them without notifying me. Bms4880 (talk) 21:26, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
- Done Alright then, I'll shall keep that in mind. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Deletion of " Astrel Tima "
Hi! My name is Fabrice Rouzier. After someone wrote a page about me on Wikipedia, I thought that It was a great idea to write about this a well known Haitian/American Producer, Piano player, Musician and Mix Engineering Astrel Tima. I was extremely desapointed to see that the page was deleted because like I've explained in my "talk" when I wrote "HOLDON" it's true that there aren't many Haitian super stars that are not known to the world because it's such a small country. However, when someone has contributed so much to they country being such an entity a legend, I believe that they should be remembered not just when they no longer alive. There's a reason why there are several pages on Wikipedia on Beyonce Knowles, Micheal Jackson, Wiclef Jean, Fabrice Rouzier, and more. They are people who have contributed big in the history of music, Why not Astrel Tima? Why not Nickenson Prud'homme? Why not Tines Salvant? There are several names on wikipedia such as: Jackie O,Misty Jean and more. What have they contributed to give them the right to have a page on here? As a Haitian, a music producer and a musician if you ask me, I'll say " nothing ". On the contrary, Astrel Tima is an entity and a legend and has contributed great music to not just the Haitian Music industry but the American music for the past years and he is the first Haitian/American music Producer to have crossed over both nations and still made it! I wanted to be the first to write about him. I may have not used the right format or whatever the reason may have been but I still didn't think that there was a reason for this page to be deleted. Deleting this page is more then just deleting an advertisement or publicity, like you thought it was,It's deleting history of the Haitian Society. I respect your decisions but I'm just hopping that you could see beyond that and give this a chance to be seeing by the world. I thank you for your time and may God bless you! My email is Astreltima_2000@yaahoo.com. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Astreltima (talk • contribs) 21:21, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
- I believe your answer lies in Wikipedia's notability guidelines for music articles. Also, regardless of how noble your cause is, Notability is a requirement, not a suggestion. Big in Haiti != notable in the grand scheme of things. --King Öomie 15:35, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Image help
Hey, recently you deleted an image for the page Hero (2009 TV series) that I had nominated for deletion. The image had already been deleted before, but another user had readded it. After you deleted it, the user once again uploaded the image back here. Do you know what to do in this case? Ωphois 10:22, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
- And when the user read this message, he attempted to remove it from your talk page. Ωphois 11:01, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
- Of course I did because ever since I edited you supernatural article you've been purposely harassing me and my edits. Everything I edit you find fault with. You've already got what you want, leave my edits alone please Ophois. JKSarang 11:04, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
- And now the editor is responding by going through all the files that I and a user have uploaded, and tagging them for deletion for invalid reasons. Ωphois 15:17, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Image copyright tagging
Your bot has, correctly, tagged at least one image uploaded by User:Pippin0490 (a friend of mine) as lacking copyright information. If the images are copyright, it is believed that they would be fair use since they are being used to portray buildings in Kingston upon Hull which are no longer standing (destroyed in WW2). I'm hoping your knowledge of the relevant policies and tags is better than mine. Would you mind offering him some assistance in finding the relevant tags if possible? Many thanks, HJMitchell You rang? 03:19, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Sockpuppet Invesigation
Hi. I'm trying to submit a sockpuppet investigation, I havn't saved it yet, but there are a few things I don't understand and I would like help with them. The link for it is here : Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Littlenino. Thanks! --Addihockey (t/c) 03:41, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
- Okay. I submitted an IP for the same reason, so I don't know if I should still remove the CheckUser request. One question, what's the differance between a SPI request w/o CU and one with CU. Why would you have a CU with one and not the other? I'm still learning here and this is where I'm at a blank. Thanks for your help :) --Addihockey (t/c) 04:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
User:User team
He changed his password at my advice, so I don't think the account would still be compromised? Ks0stm If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. 03:41, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Astrel Tima
I appreciate your answer and I'd like to know, how do I rewrite this article without having it deleted again, please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Astreltima (talk • contribs) 05:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Fribbulus Xax's RfA
|
Thanks, Fastily, for supporting me in my RFA. It passed unanimously. I am very grateful of your input – if you have any further comments, let me know! Fribbulus Xax (talk) 12:08, 17 November 2009 (UTC) |
Emergency help?
Hey Fastily, would you do us all a favor and block NignogTheAfricanChild pronto? I've reported this idiot at the Usernames board a while ago already, but they're still at large, vandalizing under an obnoxious, offensive name. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 02:53, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
- Wow--you did so while I was putting this on your talk page. Great minds think alike... Thanks! Drmies (talk) 02:54, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Actually..
I was reading about that today.... and I didn't really get it. What's the difference between that and a template? In layman's terms :P A8UDI 05:49, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 06:21, 18 November 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
A8UDI 06:21, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Hosdurg Taluk
Hi, Can you move the page Hosdurg Taluk to the new title Hosdurg taluk as per Wikipedia naming policy? While creating the page Hosdurg Taluk, i just redirected Hosdurg taluk to Hosdurg Taluk..My mistake...Now when i see the Kasaragod taluk article, I feel that the name actually should have been Hosdurg taluk....
AruNKumaRTalK 07:28, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks.. :) AruNKumaRTalK 07:53, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
7 has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!
Thanks for the note, and thanks for adding the edit stats note to the RFB. I was planning to and then RL called and I got pulled away from my PC for a few hours for an actual work meeting. 7 08:36, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Image
Hey mate, I've updated what I need to on the image AET Map.JPG in regard to copyright, can you delete the notification for deletion??? Thanks --Parradudes (talk) 22:30, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Pettao
Thanks for speedy deleting the page, could you close the AfD? --Pontificalibus (talk) 00:29, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Mig-3 image
Did you miss the fair use statement that is already on the page or is it not good enough?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:34, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Heindrek Allen
Dear Fastily,
My name is Heindrek Allen. I see from your log history that you recently deleted and attack article aimed at me. I want to let you know that I greatly appreciate this and am curious as to what exactly it said or if there is any way that I could see the deleted article or it's text. Once again thank you for catching this early on and deleting it in a speedy and effective manner.
Thank you for your attention, Heindrek Allen heinadrekallen@ymail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Heindrekallen (talk • contribs) 03:28, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
new tool
Tx. Now I have some learning to do.--Epeefleche (talk) 23:54, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
RE: File source problem with File:Lselogo.gif
I obtained the file from the web site for the Northern Ohio Railway Museum, the image accompanied the page for each piece of Lake Shore Electric Railway rolling stock on the site. I am a member of this Museum (member #549R). I have sent email to the webmaster, the president of the museum and to another member I know. I have yet to receive a response to any of them. They do have a restriction on using any content from the web site without written permission. I did not notice this. I have updated the Lake Shore Electric Railway (Ohio) page, voluntarily removing the file. Once I obtain this permission, or obtain it from another source (such as a scan of a historic document with the logo); I will upload a new file.
I did hear from a co-author of a Lake Shore Electric Railway book out right now in an email I received on 11/15 (Dennis Lamont--Images of Rail/Lake Shore Electric Railway, (c) 2009, Arcadia Publishing) who told me he knew of no copyrights on the logo of any kind. He said "There is NO copyright on any of this stuff, nor is there anybody to get permission from, nor is it necessary...Zars (talk) 02:39, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
About my editing List of Championship Gaming Series teams
The name of 'dead or alive 4' players were wrong and I have changed them right. See the bbc official news report reference:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7532594.stm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.105.47.195 (talk) 16:45, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
User:Garconsaxon block
Just curious... how long did you intend to block him for? The text you left on his talk page said it's an indef block, but the block log says only 3 hours. I'm thinking it's supposed to be indef but I want to make sure first. Tabercil (talk) 04:41, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I'm not quite sure how that happened. I meant to select indefinite but, I guess I somehow that didn't happen. I've adjusted the block settings for Garconsaxon. I appreciate you letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:29, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
It's probably time to salt that, wouldn't you think? ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 05:26, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
La Pianista's userspace
Hey. The pages in La Pianista (talk · contribs)'s userspace you've deleted were just restored by me, and I was just about to remove the old/moot db-u1 tags. Could you restore those with Twinkle if you get a chance (I don't know of any mass-restoration scripts). Cheers, –Juliancolton | Talk 05:45, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
- Done It didn't occur to me La Pianista wanted the pages back. Sorry about that. -FASTILY (TALK) 06:06, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
I think that the recently blocked user user:JanArtemisAxle is a sock of user:JarlaxleArtemis as the names of the both account are derivable from each other by just jumbling the content words....My god I didn't know he was such a persistent vandal.He wrote some very satanic sentences on my talk page...Hope he will not be back.... arunkumarcheckmate me 06:54, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the info
Hey, thanks for the info. I remember seeing Grawp somewhere before. You'd have to be a persistent vandal to keep vandalizing for five years! Thanks again, — Oli OR Pyfan! 06:50, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for blocking ip130 for a while, he was really getting disruptive. Off2riorob (talk) 17:42, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Did you notice that this image had a speedy-disputed tag on it? In my view it made a fairly solid case as to why the image should have been retained.
Can I ask you therefore to reinstate the image, or if you still think the image should be deleted, to reinstate it and then list it at FFD?
Thanks, Jheald (talk) 18:21, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Jheald. Somehow, I get the feeling that Wikipedia doesn't have a license for this kind of media. It might be a good idea to pose a question regarding this at WP:MCQ. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:52, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
- It's not a question of a licence - it's straightforward, clearly transformative fair use (compare eg Bill Graham Archives vs. Dorling Kindersley, and passes WP:NFC, both at Australian electoral system where HTV cards are discussed; and at How-to-vote card where it was letting the reader see the very subject of the article.
- It's also now not exactly easy to present at WP:MCQ, when neither the image or its context can any more be seen. Jheald (talk) 13:01, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
- I've raised this as an example at WT:CSD#F7 etiquette Jheald (talk) 13:05, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, can you please un-delete the file C.W.W. Kannangara.jpg? It was deleted as an unused non-free media. The reason it was unused was a vandal edited the file name and "broke" the link. I haven't been too active on Wikipedia lately, and I guess there was no other user watching the C. W. W. Kannangara article.--snowolfD4 ( talk / @ ) 17:37, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Blocked Vandal
Hi Fastily, a blocked IP is making attacks from their own talk page, see report on my talk page. I made a report to AIV, but as the IP is currently blocked, I'm not sure if any action was taken. As you are original blocking admin I thought I'd let you know.
Kind Regards Marek.69 talk 04:51, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Happy Thanksgiving!
I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 19:07, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
how to get a page undeleted
My page Chatra_Nandalal_Institution has been deleted by you. This is the very first page I created in wikipedia. Naturally, I was not aware of general guidelines etc for creation of a page.Please suggest how I can get it undeleted. If necessary, I can change the content of the page. The sole intention of mine is to put some information about a public school as wikipedia does contain article on other schools. It has nothing to do with advertisement or promotion. Pionnier (talk) 05:55, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker)Only admins can undelete a page, but you can re-create it, but adverts aren't allowed on this wiki. December21st2012Freak (talk) 06:38, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Image license (again)
Referring to this previous message, now everything seems to be ok. If you want, you cane re-delete your image. Bye, and thanks for all Jalo 13:48, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
WP:ANI question
Can you just confirm Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#98.234.169.63__.3D_Fastily.3F? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:07, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
thanks
thanks for reminding me —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arsenalfc06 (talk • contribs) 04:57, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Bye and Happy Christmas
Please accept my advanced Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.I will not be able to wish you on those days as I will be taking a Wiki break for one month starting tomorrow. Also wishing you a Happy editing.. :) arun talk 06:52, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Twinrova600ppx.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Twinrova600ppx.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is 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).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:23, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Seasons Greetings
Merry Christmas.--Sky Attacker the legend reborn... 01:29, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks!
Phantomsteve has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!
Thank you! I will hopefully be able to do a weekly check and keep current/old/removed requests in order! Mind you, with the holidays almost upon us, I'm not sure how much will be done next week or the week after! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 20:05, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Oi to the World! cover
With regard to this, the file is not a speedy deletion candidate. It does not meet any of the criteria at WP:CSD#Files. You many nominate it at WP:FFD if you feel it does not meet the non-free content criteria, however it does pass the criteria you have claimed it violates. Specifically, you have said that it fails NFCC #s 3 and 8 as there is no critical commentary, however WP:NFCI allows cover art in the context of critical commentary of the item, and Oi to the World! contains critical commentary about the album. The album was released initially in 1996 with the first cover, then was out of print for several years, and has been back in print since 2000 with the completely different second cover. Criterion #3 is met because one item cannot convey the equivalent information, as the album has been released twice with two completely different covers and thus neither cover alone can accurately convey the identifying image to the reader. Criterion #8 is met because having both covers significantly increases reader understanding, as again the reader must be able to see the images to understand the visual distinction between the two completely different releases, and because eliminating either image would be detrimental to this understanding as neither cover alone accurately represents the album. Believe me, I'm in favor of getting rid of alternate covers in situations where their differences are minimal and can be explained in words alone (and have done so on several occasions), but this is not one of those cases. For recent relevant discussions on this topic see here and here. --IllaZilla (talk) 20:11, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- For the sake of not fragmenting the discussion, I have moved your reply from my talk page to here. Having back-and-forth discussions across two talk pages makes the conversation difficult to follow, especially for any outside observers. I ask that you place any further replies below mine here. --IllaZilla (talk) 22:23, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Mkay, couple things. First, the image is not up for speedy deletion. You are correct in that there is no WP:CSD criterion that would justify this image's immediate deletion. Second, the critical commentary I'm referencing here is not about the songs in the album, but rather the direct commentary regarding the image itself. Third, you cite WP:NFCI as rationale for keeping the file (please carefully read it again). By your own logic then, the image should be deleted. I hate to break it to you but, frankly, only one of these album covers is sufficient to convey the meaning of the article. From reading the article, I'm in favor of moving File:Christmas-with-the-Vandals-Cover.jpg to the infobox and deleting File:Oi to the World original cover.jpg instead. It would appear that File:Christmas-with-the-Vandals-Cover.jpg is the normal cover while File:Oi to the World original cover.jpg is a just Christmas special cover, a cover which itself, is not specifically described and elaborated on in the article and does not add educational value to the Oi to the World!. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:31, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- You have the situation all wrong. It's not a "Christmas special cover"; the album is a Christmas album. As I explained, the top image in the infobox is the original cover it was released with in 1996. The album was then out of print for a few years. It was re-released in 2000 with the lower, completely different cover, and has been in print with that new cover since 2000. The new cover replaced the original cover. There are 2 official covers that this album has been released with: the original, and the current one. Both are required to properly identify the subject of the article, as both are officially the cover of the album, merely from different time periods, and their differences are so drastic as to be unable to explain with text alone. WP:NFCI does not state that their needs to be critical commentary about the cover itself; it explicitly states:
- Cover art: Cover art from various items, for identification only in the context of critical commentary of that item (not for identification without critical commentary).
- Note the use of the word "item". It does not say "only in the context of critical commentary of the cover art", it says "critical commentary of the cover art of that item", meaning the item that the cover art represents (in this case, the album). The article contains critical commentary about the album Oi to the World!, therefore the use of the album's cover art in the article passes NFC and NFCC, as it enhances readers' understanding of the subject and its removal would be detrimental to that understanding. In the discussions I linked to you at WP:ALBUMS, there was no consensus for removal of alternate album covers that are significantly different from the originals. As I said, you are welcome to nominate the image at WP:FFD if you feel it fails the non-free content criteria. But you should not re-add the deletion template to it after it has been contested, because the issue of whether or not it passes the NFCC has been contested. --IllaZilla (talk) 22:19, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Please see File talk:Christmas-with-the-Vandals-Cover.jpg. Thanks,FASTILY (TALK) 22:38, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- You have the situation all wrong. It's not a "Christmas special cover"; the album is a Christmas album. As I explained, the top image in the infobox is the original cover it was released with in 1996. The album was then out of print for a few years. It was re-released in 2000 with the lower, completely different cover, and has been in print with that new cover since 2000. The new cover replaced the original cover. There are 2 official covers that this album has been released with: the original, and the current one. Both are required to properly identify the subject of the article, as both are officially the cover of the album, merely from different time periods, and their differences are so drastic as to be unable to explain with text alone. WP:NFCI does not state that their needs to be critical commentary about the cover itself; it explicitly states:
Deletion of file tagged to have copy remain on this project
(del/undel) 20:47, 18 December 2009 Fastily (talk | contribs | block) deleted "File:Risker moon.jpg" (Deleted because "F8: Media file available on Wikimedia Commons by same name". using TW) (view/restore)
I don't mind that there is a copy over on Commons, but this file was specifically tagged to keep a local copy. I have done this very deliberately; I cannot count the number of times I have seen images disappear from Commons without notice or warning to the original uploader. Since this image is not used in any articles anywhere on any WMF project (and it's really not good enough, it's a personal photo not a good quality one), it is at even higher risk of mysteriously disappearing. Please reinstate it here on this project, as per the tag that was in place at the time of deletion. Thanks. Risker (talk) 21:18, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Thank you
Well, the header says it all. Thanks for restoring. :-) Risker (talk) 21:23, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
S2daam
I'm a bit surprised at your block of S2daam (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). He's one of those editors that I have always found to be a complete pain, but an indefinite vandalism block seems a bit strong. He has created articles with notability problems in the past, and the end result has always been a redirect. It looks to me like he had given up on his latest creation, decided to redirect it, and tripped up over how to handle the AFD that was inevitably going to wind up in the same place.
I'm all in favor of an indef, but I would have done it as an "indef until agrees to follow WP:N and WP:CRYSTAL prior to article creation", not as an indef for vandalism, since I haven't seen any evidence that he actively means to cause harm. All I've seen evidence of is that he doesn't quite understand the difference between Wikipedia and a fan site.—Kww(talk) 21:36, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
intervention
could you (temporarily at least) stop this [21]. I've posted both users on wp:3rr but it's backlogged. Thanks Gerardw (talk) 02:49, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
I am not vandalizing.
All I was doing was adding links to LittleBigPlanet. I do not think it is a good idea that they're being removed for no reason.--76.174.71.100 (talk) 03:27, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- I warned you per a report filed on you at WP:AIV. Perhaps you might want to see why other users think your edits are disruptive. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:35, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- Well, why don't you explain to me then? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.174.71.100 (talk) 03:39, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Admin Coaching...?
Can you admin coach me? Right now I feel a bit disillusioned about the project, and desperately need something to motivate me to stay in, and learn something productive in the process. I'm not going to run an RFA any time too soon, but I want to be of as much help to the project as possible Rkr1991 (Wanna chat?) 16:09, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
- Sure, I'll be active from now on. And thanks a lot in advance. Rkr1991 (Wanna chat?) 14:10, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Please explain your reasons for deleting my post.
Hi Fastily,
Can you tell me how to edit the content that you deleted in order to have it published within Wikipedia? I have read all of the available resources regarding the creation of stubs and I have also used current published stubs as my references. My original content is below:
{{Userspace draft|source=ArticleWizard|date=December 2009}}
'''A-Prime Handling, Inc''' Located in the Industrial Park of Avon, MA A-Prime Handling, Inc. (more commonly known as "A-Prime") is a national facility service, sales and installation company for material handling products. It's core business consists of selling, coordinating, delivering, servicing and installing the material handling products that it provides as well as those already owned by its clients. Essentially moving a retailer's products from their mode of delivery to their final destination.<br>
<b>History</b>
Founded in 1977, with just two employees, A-Prime Handling, Inc. started as a pallet rack and mezzanine installation company known as Master Installers. It's founder and current company president, Michael Zelman started the company after working in the material handling industry for several years. However, the actual A-Prime Handling, Inc. enterprise did not exist until January 1990 as a result of Michael Zelman's desire to start selling material handling products in addition to simply installing them. Then, because of A-Prime Handling, Inc.'s success and increased recognition within the material handling industry, Michael Zelman decided to consolidate the businesses leaving Master Installers to fade away in 2004 and operate under the A-Prime Handling, Inc. name.<br>
Today, A-Prime Handling, Inc. is a national material handling facility service and product provider, hired by leading retailers within the US, Canada and Puerto Rico.<br>
<b>Material Handling Products</b><br>
*Balers
*Overhead Doors
*Dock Equipment
*Conveyors
*Vertical Lifts
*Scissor Docks
*Pallet Racks
*Mezzanines
*Handicap & Wheelchair Lifts
== References ==
<ref>[http://www.prsm.com Professional Retail Store Maintenance Association]</ref> {{Reflist}}
== External links ==
[http://www.a-prime.com A-Prime Handling, Inc.]
<!--- Categories --->
--
Thanks in advance.
-Zianette
- Actually, I shouldn't even have been deleted that page in the first place since it's in your userspace. I have restored User:ZFrost/A-Prime Handling, Inc. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:38, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
the St. Louis Gateway Mall images
Hi, I'm having all sorts of trouble with this. The images aren't that good actually, so I would hope to eventually replace them anyway. I have two e-mails from the director of the conservancy group.
- Thanks for taking this on...I have not personally used wikipedia. I am attaching the text from our Gateway Mall brochure...may be helpful. The images in the Master Plan, while created by Urban Strategies and Thomas Balsley Associates, are owned by the City, so use of them is fine. I also have a ton of photo’s of each of the “rooms” that I can add. Additional information about Citygarden can be found on their website, www.citygardenstl.org. My Gateway Mall website should be up and running next week...I’ll let you know.
and then today,
- Our website went live yesterday. You can “grab” any of the images there.
I don't know how to get this authorized any better than this. I have a similar flagging of an image that I tried to list as fair-use, deletion discussion here . I'm really confused about this. Is the only way for me to prove this for the conservancy group to put up a notice on their website saying their images are creative commons? That's a whole lot of trouble, and I'm not comfortable asking. I would like to use some of the renderings, especially the block plans. If you have any ideas about how I should proceed, I'd love to learn them. DaronDierkes (talk) 07:36, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- This is really complicated. As I said, the pictures aren't that great anyway. I'll just take my own pictures and post them instead. You may delete the ones you tagged. :( DaronDierkes (talk) 02:53, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
reply to you message regarding council-manager government page
Fastily:
As I tried to state, I created this quite basic org. chart from the information given and from my knowledge having worked in the profession for almost 10 years. I thought that this chart was no different from the ones I replaced, where the contributor stated the same as I do now regarding its creation and origin.
thanks!
Fred Fredvent (talk) 16:34, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
The guy's only effectively been here since April, which means he created it two months after beginning to edit. I think it's pretty safe to assume that even if it had gotten any attention it would have almost immediately been closed. HalfShadow 22:14, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
File Warning Templates
I've made a couple of suggestions on the talk pages for the 4, I'll watch them to continue discussion there, if needed. Skier Dude (talk) 03:51, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
Pinochet Image
Unfortunately after searching high and low, I could not find the copyright to this image. It used to be available on the Chilean Library of Congress (Image Library) website, however it's been removed. I've replaced the image with the former version. Sadly, the image I uploaded will have to be removed. --NayadethFigueroa (talk) 17:01, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you...
...but I have a fair use image question that I can't decide on. I'm currently in the process of reviewing Neighbours for GA status and there are three or four other editors actively involved in bringing it up to scratch, of whom one has uploaded a variety of "through the years" screenshots of the title sequences. Personally, I'd be inclined to say the rationales are invalid but I've built up a relationship with these editors and it's not something I've encountered in these particular circumstances in the past, so I wondered if you would be so good as to take an expert look and zap them or tag them if the rationales are indeed invalid. Many thanks, HJMitchell You rang? 23:00, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Inadvertently deleted a used image
Earlier today, you deleted the image C&CN64.jpg because you had thought it was unused and non-free for more than seven days. While it was unused for a period of time, I put it back onto the article Command & Conquer (video game) so that it was used again. So I was quite surprised (and admittedly a bit angry) to find that it was deleted today as though I'd never fixed the problem. I suppose there's nothing for me to do but reupload the image, but I just wanted to let you know in case there was some misunderstanding of why you thought it was still unused. Thanks, -Thunderforge (talk) 01:14, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
- Restored. Sorry for the inconvenience. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:15, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks, I know it was just a misunderstanding. -Thunderforge (talk) 01:18, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Deletion of an image that was still in use
Sorry to bother you, but you've apparently deleted an image that I had uploaded and used in an article, File:Fc-04 darkseid.jpg. In the edit summary, you say that the deletion is in accordance with F5 criteria, despite the fact that the non-free media was currently being used in an article, namely Darkseid. It can be seen here that the image was being used until the ImageRemovalBot removed it. A week ago I was told that the image had been orphaned, but I was under the impression that simply adding it back per WP:BOLD was enough to keep it from being deleted in the next 7 days. Was there a step to this that I hadn't taken into account? Hopefully I can prevent needless speedy deletion in the future. Thank you. Friginator (talk) 03:06, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
That IP user you're involved with...
At least he is starting to use talk pages. Is there something I should know more, because it seems like you're antagonizing him right now. Just curious. --Jayron32 04:26, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
The edit I made to the Skala section of the Nightrunner Series page
You reverted my edit, saying, essentially, that it didn't appear to be a constructive edit. My change was from the statement "power is transferred matrimonially" which suggests that the royal authority is transferred by marriage. It passes from mother to daughter--matrilineally. The two words are not interchangeable, and I put the correct word in place so that the statement reads with the proper understanding. I'm afraid that I don't understand how that was unconstructive? Please let me know. Matrimony Matrilineal98.212.129.83 (talk) 04:33, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! I was really worried for a minute there. ;-) I'm actually noticing a few errors in that article...there may be more edits coming soon...Dsheff (talk) 04:49, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Slow down on the huggle a bit dude
I think you're having an unacceptable number of false positives on the rollbacks. this edit was in no way a bad-faith edit, and yet you rolled it back and warned the user that made it. You seem to be getting a bit bitey. here's another that isn't obvious vandalism (maybe not the best edit, but not blatant). Sure, you're getting lots of vandalism, but maybe take the time to get it right a little more often. --Jayron32 04:37, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
- Seriously dude, here's another one: [22]. Please take a breather! --Jayron32 04:40, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
your comment
Your comment here was in my view, completely unwarranted and makes me feel very unwelcome. If you are trying to chase people away, you are doing a good job. 216.153.214.89 (talk) 04:56, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
- Ummmm Excuse me? In that case perhaps you might consider not harassing User:Duncan. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:02, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
- There is no "harrasment" going on from me to Duncan and in any case, as evidenced by my current discussion with him, he is more than able to make himself heard. But even so, thank you for your kind words. Have a nice day! 216.153.214.89 (talk) 05:29, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
- Very well then. Just please don't make anymore threats towards User:Duncan. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:31, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
- I disagree with your characterization of my comments. A statement that one is aware of their rights and intends to press them if bullied is not a "threat". If anything, both you and Duncan should read this and this. I can assure you with all candor, it's boring and enervating (to me) to experience what I've experienced from you and Duncan tonight. If you wanted to design a technique of chasing people like me away, the way you treated me tonight is exactly right in that treatment such as that will do much to make me not want to post here. You should consider this. Also, if you actually READ some of my past article edits, you would EASILY see that they are all very earnest. The simple fact is that some here are hovering over Medieval Warm Period and had I not posted there, I'd likey have not run into the buzz-saw of reverts and admonitions tonight. That's the way it looks to me! 216.153.214.89 (talk) 05:44, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
- Very well then. Just please don't make anymore threats towards User:Duncan. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:31, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
- There is no "harrasment" going on from me to Duncan and in any case, as evidenced by my current discussion with him, he is more than able to make himself heard. But even so, thank you for your kind words. Have a nice day! 216.153.214.89 (talk) 05:29, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. :)
I just love dealing with folks who don't review the rules and then get angry when I do my job. Thanks very much for watching my back. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 05:00, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Chico Debarge
I got your message, but the person who is "editing" Chico's page re saying he has 7 kids and pending paternity suits, is not citing any sources for what could potentially be libelous —Preceding unsigned comment added by Realitylogger72 (talk • contribs) 05:17, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Chico Debarge page
I think the person who is updating chico's page re him having 7 kids and being involved in paternity suits (it may in fact be his soon to be ex wife) should be notified that those allegations are potentially libelous and they should be forced to cite legit sources —Preceding unsigned comment added by Realitylogger72 (talk • contribs) 05:23, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
re chico debarge
how can I know who did it? The same person is adding the same stuff. Can't they be blocked? their ip address is listed when you go to edit Chico's page and you see their changes —Preceding unsigned comment added by Realitylogger72 (talk • contribs) 05:30, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
how do you create a wiki page
How do you create a wiki page for someone? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Realitylogger72 (talk • contribs) 05:37, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
You might want to talk to Smokeizzy
I was contacted by Smokeizzy, who contacted me about the chico debarge page. That person you warned re adding potentially libelous info to chico's page re him having 7 kids and being involved in a paternity suit, readded the info. I told smokeizzy of our talks and included the warning you gave that person, who still has not verified the potentially libelous claims. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Realitylogger72 (talk • contribs) 06:57, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
File:TG Test Track.PNG is my file!
Hi. Everyone keeps marking my file, File:TG Test Track.PNG for deletion. I am not the most experienced Wikipedian, but this file is my file and i do not wish for it to be deleted. I will let anyone use it or copy it as they please, so could you please just get it off the files for deletion. Joelrussell (talk) 09:08, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Can you please restore the file since it is actually used in the C'est peut-être pas l'Amérique article? Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\Work 10:12, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
File:The Old Market Cross, now relocated.JPG
Please note that this image is now used in article Naseby so does not require deletion --palmiped | Talk 14:20, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
- The nomination has been withdrawn accordingly. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:49, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
WikiPage: Mines and Associates
Dear Fastily,
I see that you have deleted the MINES and Associates Wikipedia page. While I understand your position on the page I was wondering if you would be able to help me reword it to make it a non-advertisement page. I tried to write it in a way that made it non-biased. If you have any comments or suggestions that would be useful, please feel to contact me.
Thank you, Namiller8 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Namiller8 (talk • contribs) 16:52, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Rkr1991 (Wanna chat?) 07:37, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
File:RebShimon.jpg & File:RavYosefLeibBloch.jpg
Happy Holidays from Phantomsteve!
-- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 16:51, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Snowded RFA
Are you sure you put him in the right place as the RFA took place in June, but you put it in as ending this month. Should it be put in June is I guess what I'm asking. Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:22, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
- The RfA was indefinitely placed on hold until as of yesterday. I closed the RfA as withdrawn in December because the user only just officially withdrew it two days ago. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:38, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks. I didn't know that you could put an RFA on hold, so that makes sense now. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:49, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
|
|
The Admin's Barnstar | |
| Thanks for assuming good faith giving two users a fifth chance here --I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 23:02, 22 December 2009 (UTC) |
Sideways pic
whats wrong with it it has all the material required it does not meet the criteria to be deleted The Movie Master 1 (talk) 03:26, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Huggle and vandalism - read first
Read edits before you use huggle to call them vandalism.[23] Thanks. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 04:40, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Yes I am still interested in adminship, I only put in my application three days ago and I am still waiting to here back.
lscot5 (talk) 10:47, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Ugg boots
Hi there. I just protected this page via RPP, and then checked on commons the picture that was getting all the abuse File:Uggbootsmale.jpg. I've restored the description back to the original version, as your revert undid one piece of vandalism back to another one. I go on Commons incredibly rarely, so would you be able to keep an eye on it if you go there with any regularity? GedUK 13:08, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
- Seems to be a commonly spammed item besides Rolex watches, Viagra and Nike sneakers. I think admins should semi-protect these pages, as they have a high risk of being crapped at by spam bots. Blake Gripling (talk) 13:36, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Picture deletion
Hi, I wrote the mineralized tissue article and now that I have provided an image for this page using a collage made from pictutres of Wikimedia Commons, I see that you have tagged it for deletion. I don't understand what I need to do to remove this tag, please help me if you can instead of tagging it for deletion because as far as I see it is not a matter of copyright problems if it is taken from an open source free place such as Wikimedia. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by BMDE 501 (talk • contribs) 15:43, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Great, thanks for the reply. I understand what you are saying. The problem is I don't know how to get these tags to on my picture page. I get what tags are, but I don't know where to get their codes from to put on my picture's page. Can you let me know please? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by BMDE 501 (talk • contribs) 16:12, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Vandalizing
dear friend,
I got a message from you where you claimed I would vandalizing on Wikipedia. My question to this would be where I am vandalizing or push POVs or whatever on Wikipedia-articles? When I changed or added informations on articles, I used reliable sources from experts. The User:Ketabtoon who is a socket of banned User:Nisarkand, Tajikkharkuss etc. is changing facts and deleting scientific sources and push his own POVs (for example on Ghurid article), tough many Users did a lot, brought him many proofs of experts but he used always his own head. He is well-known trolling on articles related to Afghanistan, Iran and Central Asia. Dear friend, please take an eye on him and warn him. I wish you the best.
With best regards--188.97.76.95 (talk) 17:54, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
- For sockpuppet accusation, please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations. You can request for an investigation there. For other issues, please refer to the discussion pages. In every case, a consensus has been reached and there were third party (neutral members) involved in the consensus - we even asked for third party mediation. However, you are ignoring the consensus and still pushing for your POV. And, it would be a good idea for your to register a user-name instead of using random IPs. Thank you (Ketabtoon (talk) 18:27, 23 December 2009 (UTC))
You are talking abt nonsense as you 1000 times have proved. Can you please prove my POVs? If the admins would read all diskpages where you were active on the articles, the admins would clearly see everyone calling your statements as POV. I repeat myself again, User Ketabtoon is banned User Alishah, Khampalak, Afghan4Ever, Tajikkharkus etc. Those who came close to them and you identified you as the mentioned accounts.--188.97.76.95 (talk) 18:42, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
The above IP is the banned editor Šāhzādé (talk · contribs) (also known as User:Germany2008, User:Draco of Utopia, and others) and is located in the same location in Germany as User:Tajik.
Mineralized tissues image copyright issues
Thank you for the tips. I have followed your directions and added the corresponding tags for each image for my collage. Would you please let me know if everything is alright with my image and whether I can now remove the delete image message that you have marked on my image page? Thanks a bunch. The page is: File:Mineralized Tissues.JPG --BMDE 501 (talk) 19:17, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
RFA
I closed it after I saw that lopsided count. I assumed that it wouldn't hurt since people were basically piling on top of those that were piling on others. Well, as long as he wasn't scared off, I guess no harm was done in keeping it going. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:30, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I have added a fair-use rationale--is the image now acceptable? Thanks, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 04:57, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Thank you!
Excellent. I just wanted to thank you for all your help in getting my image to be acceptable for Wikipedia standards. Also I wanted to let you know that I have added the links that you mentioned under "sources" on the picture's page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mineralized_Tissues.JPG Thank again --BMDE 501 (talk) 05:04, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Notification: Proposed 'Motion to Close' at Wikipedia:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC re: a 'Motion to close', which would dissolve Cda as a proposal. The motion includes an !vote. You have previously commented at Wikipedia:WikiProject Administrator/Admin Recall. Best Wishes for the Holidays, Jusdafax 07:12, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
how to:
I've inserted my first article under "Bilgin Enerji" subject to be pogressed with more content, and received the message that it has been deleted. How can I set such article for other users to develop the content without having it deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abilgin (talk • contribs) 08:03, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello
I am wondering why you deleted the image at KLDK-LP ? There was a motion (or something) to delete it, I responded to that posting on the deletion discussion page, no one else, as far as I saw, argued to counter my POV and now it is gone. Or did I miss something? Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 04:24, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
- [talk page stalker] It was a copyright violation, which Wikipedia doesn't allow. December21st2012Freak Happy Holidays! 04:46, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for getting to this . I thought I made it clear that I created the image. That another KLDK staff person and I are the copyright holders. Was I not clear or was the rational on the discussion page never looked at? Carptrash (talk) 04:49, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
- It might be because you didn't have a source to the image. I didn't look at it until it was deleted. You should also indent your posts, like the next one should have a ::: at the beginning. December21st2012Freak Happy Holidays! 05:31, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
I prefer the beginnings of these posts to go back and forth rather then to always get smaller (with a larger left margin) . What I had intended to convey at that image was that I was the source of the image. So, can you get it back? Carptrash (talk) 17:52, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
- You can upload it again, but make sure it has a source. December21st2012Freak Happy Holidays! 17:55, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, but why was this not discussed further here? the discussion I thought, apparently a mistake, that this sort of discussion took place for a reason and should be reckoned with before something is deleted. or do I not have the process right in my mind? Carptrash (talk) 01:02, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Merry Christmas
A NobodyMy talk is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
To those who make Good Arguments, who are appreciative, or supportive. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 16:48, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Deletion of File:MusicOfCnC.png
Hiya, you deleted this file but it was actually still being used on Music of the Command & Conquer series (the red image link has since been removed) I'd be grateful if you could restore the image.
Cheers,
I added a source reference, which is my best guess of where the picture originally came from--although actually I do not know which of the many places that this picture was reproduced is the original source. Is it ok now? Thanks, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 23:08, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for your help!CordeliaNaismith (talk) 23:14, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Copyright problems
An article you just removed a tag from has issues, the editor that has uploaded about eight pics, they all have issues, they are more or less all pics from a photographer and he has admitted he is not the copyright owner, I am also attempting to get them removed from commons, the editors name is User:Mr1001 . Off2riorob (talk) 00:25, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
- Basically it is all the files he has uploaded, he has no permission for them, I tagged as many of them as I could see here..if you look on his talkpage you will see the templates, a few have gone but they are still at xcommons, I just asked a q at commons help about how to tag them there, if you have a look at his talk you will see, the discussion is there also about the situation. If you need me to dig deeper let me know and in the morning I will look exactly. Off2riorob (talk) 00:36, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks, they are still at commons, what is the best way to deal with that? Off2riorob (talk) 00:43, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the help. Off2riorob (talk) 01:18, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Happy festivities
- Happy Yuletide to you Fastily
- and best wishes for 2010. Off2riorob (talk) 01:18, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Could you let me know in what way the Fair Use Rationale for this image was defective, whether you considered it at all, or if you had considered it, why you didn't send it to WP:IFD for more considered debate? Thanks. Rodhullandemu 00:50, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hmmmm. It would appear Aspects didn't leave the appropriate message on your talk here. The reason the rationale was disputed is as follows "The single cover is used in the band's article without critical commentary against Wikipedia:Non-free content, the single is only listed in the discography section, and is being used to illustrate the band and not the album itself against "solely to illustrate the audio recording in question" from the album cover licensing agreement that should be listed on the file page." To be frank, this is a valid reason for the image's deletion. Basically, what this is saying is that the file fails WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8. If you feel you can adequately address this concern, feel free to let me know and I'll restore it for you. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:08, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
- Aspects, like most image patrollers, is on a mission from God. Would that image usage were that unsubtle, but it really isn't, and deserves some thought. Where images are unique and irreplaceable, they transcend normal rules, and more so when there is zero risk of compromising commercial opportunities, as in this case. I have been in email talk with Robert John Godfrey, of The Enid, and they don't even have a copy of this single any more, and later reissues of their compilation "Anarchy on 45" include copies of my single, which is in mint condition, and not their formerly corrupted and distorted mangled tape. I gave them that for free, as I gave this image to Wikipedia, but since I don't own the copyright, I can't put it on Commons. To sum up, it should not be assumed that free images are still available, and image patrollers should realise this limitation. I assert that this is the only known image of this (largest) lineup of the band, and is therefore irreplaceable. Rodhullandemu 01:21, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
- Very well then. I believe you. File restored. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:25, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
- I am disappointed by the file being restored since the image was tagged for seven days with a disputed fair use rationale, the uploader was notified of the dispute and yet did nothing to address the dispute. Then 25 minutes after the file is deleted, they came to your talk page to complain about the deletion when they had seven days they could have discussed the issue with me either on the file talk page or my talk page. The reason I did not "didn't leave the appropriate message on your talk" is because the user asked me not to template them, so instead I left the message saying I placed a disputed fair use template on the image with the link to the image and responded on my talk page to their thread. The user thanked me for not using the template and said they disagreed with me, but then never addressed my concerns. [24]. The user in their appeal above still not does address my fair use concerns at all about using a single cover without critical commentary against Wikipedia:Non-free content to illustrate the band and not the single itself. Aspects (talk) 05:59, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
- That case ("using a single cover without critical commentary") is not the be-all and end-all of fair-use policy, which, like all policies, should be applied with a measure of common sense. In the case of a disputed FUR, the rationale should be tested by consensus at WP:IFD on its merits, not dismissed out of hand by one maverick. Rodhullandemu 13:06, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
- I am disappointed by the file being restored since the image was tagged for seven days with a disputed fair use rationale, the uploader was notified of the dispute and yet did nothing to address the dispute. Then 25 minutes after the file is deleted, they came to your talk page to complain about the deletion when they had seven days they could have discussed the issue with me either on the file talk page or my talk page. The reason I did not "didn't leave the appropriate message on your talk" is because the user asked me not to template them, so instead I left the message saying I placed a disputed fair use template on the image with the link to the image and responded on my talk page to their thread. The user thanked me for not using the template and said they disagreed with me, but then never addressed my concerns. [24]. The user in their appeal above still not does address my fair use concerns at all about using a single cover without critical commentary against Wikipedia:Non-free content to illustrate the band and not the single itself. Aspects (talk) 05:59, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
- Very well then. I believe you. File restored. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:25, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
- Aspects, like most image patrollers, is on a mission from God. Would that image usage were that unsubtle, but it really isn't, and deserves some thought. Where images are unique and irreplaceable, they transcend normal rules, and more so when there is zero risk of compromising commercial opportunities, as in this case. I have been in email talk with Robert John Godfrey, of The Enid, and they don't even have a copy of this single any more, and later reissues of their compilation "Anarchy on 45" include copies of my single, which is in mint condition, and not their formerly corrupted and distorted mangled tape. I gave them that for free, as I gave this image to Wikipedia, but since I don't own the copyright, I can't put it on Commons. To sum up, it should not be assumed that free images are still available, and image patrollers should realise this limitation. I assert that this is the only known image of this (largest) lineup of the band, and is therefore irreplaceable. Rodhullandemu 01:21, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
sigma sigma phi logo
Fastily,
I'm a member of Sigma Sigma Phi and my local chapter of the organization created this version of the image. I'm working with the National Chapter President of Sigma Sigma Phi in adding this image to the article. What do I need to do to allow this image to stay online?
Thanks,
Bouspret —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bouspret (talk • contribs) 05:02, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Os Trapalhões' images
Can't I put images about secondary actors?Brazilian Man (talk) 00:58, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
You are vandalising the page, please stop.--119.73.1.134 (talk) 04:29, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
In Reference to the zoklet page
Are we allowed to add to it as necessary? I am a moderator at the site so my information is legitimate. We are in the process of revising and reediting all changes but you seem to be working against me.
If you do not want the page to exist, fine. Let me know what the deal is.
There is also another member claiming to be opposing this presentation of zoklet and that he is abusing the message system to try and get the page removed. You can find this information at the zoklet page, but your page told me you were busy. ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kundalinirise (talk • contribs) 04:33, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
my org. chart on council-manager government
I am a bit uncertain about the choices I have to state a usage guideline/free-use policy for the image I created. What are the best choices for an image like my organizational chart? I am also uncertain how to "tag" it once the choice is made.
It looks like GNU/GFDL or Creative Commons are the most common and preferred choices by Wikipedia. I am confused, however, by the following statement, which appears before describing the GNU choices: "NB: These licenses require reprinting the entire license text with any reuse of the image. If you created the image yourself, please consider using a different license.
Apparently, if one has created the image him/herself, as is the case with me, GNU/GDFL is not a good option, but from other descriptions of this choice, and from the usage I have seen, it seems appropriate.
Thanks for any assistance you can give.
Fredvent (talk) 05:12, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
Ok, help my montage, please.
Adding time stamp -FASTILY (TALK) 21:33, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Remember this IP that added categories like "Fictional characters from Minnesota" to articles on Sailor Moon characters? He came back as 69.176.50.44 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) and is doing the same shit, such as saying Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2003 TV series) is set in Missouri.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:08, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
69.176.0.0/18 appears to be the range that encompasses both, just in case he does come back.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:09, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Since you seem to be going around looking at old RfA's that never went live
I just want to point you to this if you didn't already know about it ... it's probably the best way to find them. -- Soap Talk/Contributions 15:07, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hah thanks for the suggestion. That was the very list I used to find the old RfAs. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:28, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
The Heat miser & Snow miser images
Ya mean I wasn't allowed to use those guys for my Xmas messages to editors? GoodDay (talk) 17:07, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Update: They've all been deleted from the user talkpages. GoodDay (talk) 01:16, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
ANI
I think that the statement from BQZip01 today on ANI: "Curtis, I'm not seeing any mountains and WVU doesn't claim that they are supposed to be indicative of them." Confirms that this is being played out as a game. If you review BQ's history, you will see that he has played the lawyerly, multi-venue, drawn out game with other editors that he has driven away. It is unfortunate that he focused on Hammersoft and/or the free use issue in this round of his fun. I would say that if the 'tireless nagging child' strategy does not work, he will shift to SPI tactics or other methods to put HS on the defensive. 74.50.125.97 (talk) 20:06, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Socialist Party of Florida
Hey, stop deleting our logos!Chegitz (talk) 00:27, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
What?
The deletion log on an image I uploaded only minutes ago says you deleted it. Why did you delete it? It was a perfectly good image. Please respond. AndrewEnns (talk) 07:58, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
- I just saw it was deleted because of copyright violation. I have no clue where that came from. It was simply a screenshot. If that is copyright then I'm screwed. AndrewEnns (talk) 08:01, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
- Screenshots from Google Earth are fine. Look at this one. If mine gets deleted, then this should too. It's only fair. AndrewEnns (talk) 08:13, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
Re:File:HarrisonBMS CDcover.gi
You knew perfectly well what that image was - you could have helped the encyclopedia by adding it yourself in less than the time it takes to add the AfD. Season of goodwill?--Kudpung (talk) 08:44, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
File:Freedom Tower New.jpg
I noticed that you have deleted File:Freedom Tower New.jpg, saying "F7: Violates non-free use policy" without it previously being tagged {{di-replaceable fair use}} or {{di-disputed fair use rationale}}. Considering the recent lengthy discussion about the fair use of this image (see File talk:Freedom Tower New.jpg) and others like it, I am curious why consensus has once again been ignored. Astronaut (talk) 05:45, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hello. Looking at the deleted revisions, I can confirm the image was tagged with a {{di-replaceable fair use}} tag. Was there solid consensus to keep the file? If so, please give me a link to the discussion and I'll restore the file accordingly. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:08, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry for the delay getting back to you ... real life got in the way. The problems started when Rama (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) speedily deleted several fair-use images from articles about under-construction/proposed buildings. Lengthy discussions followed at User talk:Rama#File:Nakheel Tower.jpg, User talk:Rama#File:Chicago Spire.jpg and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive585#Admin:Rama ignoring previous consensus, refusing to gain new consensus concerning Rama's unique interpretation of WP:NFCC. Peripheral discussions also took place at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 December 10 (section: File:Chicago Spire.jpg), Commons:Deletion requests/File:Chicago spire.svg, File talk:Chicago Spire.jpg and File talk:Freedom Tower New.jpg (IIRC). Out of all this, I believe consensus was reached that such images did meet the requirements of WP:NFCC. However, Rama continued his efforts, persisting in his attempts to get File:Chicago Spire.jpg deleted (see here for example). So now I'm curious if it was Rama who added the {{di-replaceable fair use}} tag to this image and if he has moved his "campaign" to File:Freedom Tower New.jpg. Astronaut (talk) 13:31, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
- No worries. Thanks for letting me know about the relevant discussions. File:Freedom Tower New.jpg restored. -FASTILY (TALK) 08:43, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry for the delay getting back to you ... real life got in the way. The problems started when Rama (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) speedily deleted several fair-use images from articles about under-construction/proposed buildings. Lengthy discussions followed at User talk:Rama#File:Nakheel Tower.jpg, User talk:Rama#File:Chicago Spire.jpg and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive585#Admin:Rama ignoring previous consensus, refusing to gain new consensus concerning Rama's unique interpretation of WP:NFCC. Peripheral discussions also took place at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 December 10 (section: File:Chicago Spire.jpg), Commons:Deletion requests/File:Chicago spire.svg, File talk:Chicago Spire.jpg and File talk:Freedom Tower New.jpg (IIRC). Out of all this, I believe consensus was reached that such images did meet the requirements of WP:NFCC. However, Rama continued his efforts, persisting in his attempts to get File:Chicago Spire.jpg deleted (see here for example). So now I'm curious if it was Rama who added the {{di-replaceable fair use}} tag to this image and if he has moved his "campaign" to File:Freedom Tower New.jpg. Astronaut (talk) 13:31, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you. I have replaced the {{di-replaceable fair use}} tag with {{Rk}}. If you think I have wrongly done the admin action (eg. because I'm not an admin), or the matter still needs further discussion, please do revert my edit. Astronaut (talk) 11:10, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Please clarify
If it is so obvious, perhaps you could explain what is copyrightable about the image in question. Serifs are not. Letters are not. Mere arrangement of letters isn't. Coloring isn't. Oh, and please respond in such a manner that even a troll or someone incapable of thinking can understand (I was under the impression that administrators were supposed to be WP:CIVIL, though I note that wasn't a policy you asked me to read).
Ok, so maybe that last sentence was a bit harsh. I thought a lot about actually posting that, but in the end I decided to do it but also figured I'd throw in a disclaimer that it is intended as sarcasm to just illustrate a point, not to be harsh. Please refrain from the name calling (i.e. calling me a troll or implying that I'm an idiot simply because you disagree with me). If you just take the time to read what I've written, you'll see that I have a point and, if I'm wrong, I am confused and need straightening out. If I'm missing something that people keep repeating, then surely it should be easy to cut & paste a response. — BQZip01 — talk 11:09, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
- Are you going to respond? — BQZip01 — talk 00:52, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
- You don't WP:OWN the talk page and you have no right to delete valid discussion! You demand I use user talk pages to discuss things and then you refuse to talk to me. I use the image talk page and you delete my comments/questions? WTF?!?! — BQZip01 — talk 05:54, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
- This is extremely confusing.
When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors
- You have just warned me and then asked me to use talk pages to resolve my disagreements, however, you delete all my contributions to the talk page. Bit of a catch-22 there. Heck of a way to silence someone. Reverting the vandalism of sockpuppeteer is perfectly acceptable behavior, especially when that person is a banned user. Please make up your mind. — BQZip01 — talk 06:29, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
- What the template says is irrelevant. I know full well you get the message. I would simply like to see you stop reverting edits at File talk:West Virginia Flying WV logo.svg. Good day. -FASTILY (TALK) 06:33, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
- This is extremely confusing.
Admin
I had applied but must admit the application process was SO complicated I was not sure it had ever got through to anyone... I would still be interested.James Frankcom (talk) 03:41, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, if you wouldn't mind that would be helpful James Frankcom (talk) 06:52, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Deletion of File:Fc-04 darkseid.jpg (Again)
I'm really sorry, but I didn't realize that the deletion tag was still attached to the image that was being used. Clearly I should have read your message more carefully. If possible, could you please restore the image? I swear I won't make the same mistake again. Thank you. Friginator (talk) 06:48, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll be more organized in the future. Friginator (talk) 06:58, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
best fix i can think of
On the off-chance that you are not watching my page so closely for yet another response, write one yourself before this gets too out of control. It is the best suggestion i have at this point. delirious & lost ☯ ~hugs~ 09:16, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Survivor Samoa
I am not vandalized the survivor samoa page. How dare you imply this? What I added was the strategic move that was made in the game explaining how Natalie won. You may not think it's important but you do not own the rights to this Survivor page and others may find it important to know. Adding time stamp -FASTILY (TALK) 22:16, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Can I specifically ask why did you delete this article? As I last recall, the page was not used for advertisement and has been a on Wiki for some time. NPeeerbvsesz (Push) 10:05, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
- Looking through the deleted diffs, it seems to have been vandalized heavily by a few IPs to the point where it became advertising/spam. If I restore the article, would you be willing to help clean it up? -FASTILY (TALK) 21:26, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
- That hardly justifies deleting the article, since the article wasn't mainly used for promotion, yet it was the because of IP vandalism, that's like deleting a page for vandalism. Nevertheless, if you restore the article, I will try and clean the article off fan cruft, etc... NPeeerbvsesz (Push) 10:06, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
Excuse me, but I'm not vandal
Soviet Russian Kamrad (talk) 11:33, 28 December 2009 (UTC)Hello! Eaglestorm has erased my comment at Modern Warfare 2 talk page. Is that normal? Please, respond at my talk page, Sincerely yours, Kamrad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soviet Russian Kamrad (talk • contribs) 11:35, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I won't do such things again.Soviet Russian Kamrad (talk) 07:01, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
Prod....
I understand that this is the festive season... However, this is a gentle reminder that I have answered the questions you asked me in my first lesson. Rkr1991 (Wanna chat?) 12:26, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry about the delay. Yes, I've seen your answers and will be getting back to you on that shortly. In the meantime, if you could do some editing outside of coaching, that'd be great. I'd like to get a sense of how/where you edit/habits, ect. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 20:51, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
- OK. Rkr1991 (Wanna chat?) 06:42, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
Deleted image
Hey. This image is still being used in the article where it was supposed to be in fair use rationale. Why delete it? I don't remove the CSD note because I am afraid that somebody may see it, and I am not an admin myself that has the right to remove CSD's. Is there any way to restore it? I have no other copy of that seal. Thanks. (Background: Jezhotwells redirected it to the main college where the institute is located, saying that it is a non-notable school, which made the image in orphan. I reverted it, saying that schools are supposed to be notable. At that time, Skier Dude tagged the file for CSD F5. Restoring the image left it remaining on the article, and I never removed the CSD note because I'm afraid that admins reserved the right to remove that. Have you checked the "File links" section before deletion?)--JL 09 q?c 13:53, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
- Restored. Admin or not, I wouldn't worry too much about removing tags if they're improperly placed. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:49, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Bionumbers deletion
If you see this discussion I think the notability concerns that prompted the original AfD were resolved. The new article didn't seem very promotional to me, so I've tweaked the wording and restored the article. If you still think this should be deleted, I think it should be taken to AfD, not speedy deleted. Tim Vickers (talk) 18:53, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
- Looks better. No, I don't think an AfD is warranted. Thanks for going through the trouble to clean it up. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:58, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
- No problem. Tim Vickers (talk) 22:59, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Rfa
Hi Fastily. Yes i do intend to request to become an administrator, but i thought i submitted a request already? --Stevedietrich (talk) 22:43, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
That would be very kind of you. I would appreciate it very much if you would submit it for me. Thanks! --Stevedietrich (talk) 23:23, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
I think you deserve this...
|
|
The Admin's Barnstar | |
| Simply because every time I click on the recent changes, I see you doing otherwise almost unrecognised hard work and, of course, for being generally helpful! HJMitchell You rang? 00:16, 29 December 2009 (UTC) |
James Frankcom Admin
Hi Fastly I have been asked to request you take the page Requests for Adminship/James Frankcom off hold as the nomination box has now been completed.James Frankcom (talk) 03:14, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
Block of Hippo43
Fastily; Hippo43 (talk · contribs) has requested an unblock and more information about the conditions that warranted the block. Looking through his recent edits, I can't readily see what triggered an indefinite block for 'vandalism'. Is there a discussion somewhere about this I'm missing, or could you clarify the reasons around the block? Thanks! Kuru talk 16:59, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Kuru. I blocked Hippo43 for WP:EW (slow motion), swearing in edit summaries, insulting people, not assuming good faith, ect. To be honest, that unblock request looks a tad bit like forum shopping to me. If you think an indef might have been a bit harsh, please feel free to go ahead and unblock/reduce block length for Hippo43 (honestly, I don't mind). But if you do, I'd recommend keeping a close eye on the editor. Their past history is suggestive of the fact that they will repeat same behavior if unblocked. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:19, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
- Concur on the accumulation of aggressive editing, but blocking indef should be pretty rare for established editors and probably followed up with a notification/discussion at ANI. I have not been able to look through all of the history, but it looks like there are several dispute resolution steps that could be tried instead. No critique of your methods; you probably know I have a bad hair trigger myself. :) I've watch listed several talk pages of those involved with him to follow up. Kuru talk 01:58, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
- Follow up. It took him a day to bear out your prediction. Kuru talk 03:43, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
- My Nostradamus moment of the day. Cheers. One thing though - once the block expires, please be sure to keep a watchful eye on User:Hippo43. Whether right after release of the block or in the near future, Hippo43 is very likely going to edit disruptively again. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:32, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
- Follow up. It took him a day to bear out your prediction. Kuru talk 03:43, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
- Concur on the accumulation of aggressive editing, but blocking indef should be pretty rare for established editors and probably followed up with a notification/discussion at ANI. I have not been able to look through all of the history, but it looks like there are several dispute resolution steps that could be tried instead. No critique of your methods; you probably know I have a bad hair trigger myself. :) I've watch listed several talk pages of those involved with him to follow up. Kuru talk 01:58, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Deleted images
Hello. You just deleted a couple coats of arms by Xanderliptak. He didn't request their deletion in good faith. See User talk:SchuminWeb#Deleted images. He tried before to get them speedied before, because their history shows that he originally uploaded them without the watermarks/credits plastered all over them. At the same time he upped replacements which are lower quality versions with watermarks. See example of one of the watermarked replacements. Another admin put these replacements for deletion on the basis the others (which you deleted) don't have the watermarks. So anyways, they weren't put up for deletion in good faith. Could you un-delete them?--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 10:30, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
- Additionally, if there is anything else that you can contribute to the discussion on my user talk page, please do. SchuminWeb (Talk) 14:31, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hello. I noticed you restored my images. I pulled the licensing on my images and asked that they be deleted. Actually, such a suggestion was echoed by SchuminWeb, but somewhere along the lines he decided to edit and repost the images and license them as if I had given permission. The images clearly have copyright issues at this point, and I would appreciate if you would delete them again. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 12:24, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
RfA Thanks
Dear Fastily, here is a little note to say thank you for your kind vote on my request for adminship which failed with a final result of (40/19/12).
Thank you for your participation in my RfA which I withdrew after concerns of my knowledge of policy. Special thanks are owed to Coffee, who defended me throughout and whom I cannot thank enough for the nomination; to 2over0 for being supportive and helpful; to A Stop at Willoughby for the thorough, thoughtful and articulate support rationale; to IP69.226.103.13 for maintaining composure and for a pleasant interaction on my talk page and, last but not least, to Juliancolton who was good enough to close the RfA at my request and, frankly, because an editor whom I respect so much found the time to support me! If the need for more admins at the main page is still apparent in a few months, I may try again. Thank you all for a relatively drama-free RfA and for providing me with much material from which to learn from my mistakes. You're all welcome to drop by my talk page any time. God save the Queen Wiki! HJMitchell You rang? 18:08, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
InkHeart
Hey, thanks for your help with those pages. I suspect that the user Special:Contributions/Clara20 is yet another sock of InkHeart. Though it is possible that it is only a coincidence since all the pages are connected to the same actor, Clara20 has only edited pages previously edited by InkHeart and her socks. Clara20 also created a duplicate page of the actor that was frequented by InkHeart. Ωphois 19:18, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
- And she is also using the anon Special:Contributions/69.159.197.246 to undo my reverts. Do you mind semi-protecting Hero (2009 TV series), Iljimae, Time Between Dog and Wolf, J Style, My Jun, My Style, The King and the Clown, The 101st Proposal, and The Hotel Venus to prevent further disruptions by her in those articles? Thanks. Ωphois 20:27, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
- why do you keep on hurting me Ophois? I have been a pieceful editor here and you keep harrassing me. All I want to do is edit just like you yet you keep doing this. You have your Supernatural articles and I have left them alone, I gave you the Lee Jun Ki article yet you keep undoing my edits. What's your problem? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.159.197.246 (talk) 20:31, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
- You attempted to create a duplicate article on the actor and then changed all the links to direct to your page. This is obviously an attempt to create your own version of the page without being noticed by other editors. Ωphois 20:34, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
- And you wouldn't be under so many people's radars if you hadn't turned into a vandal when you couldn't have your way. Ωphois 20:36, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
- why do you keep on hurting me Ophois? I have been a pieceful editor here and you keep harrassing me. All I want to do is edit just like you yet you keep doing this. You have your Supernatural articles and I have left them alone, I gave you the Lee Jun Ki article yet you keep undoing my edits. What's your problem? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.159.197.246 (talk) 20:31, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
- Do you have any heart Ophois cause if you did you would know how the he'll I felt. I am angry because I have worked so hard on his articles and tried to be quiet about it then suddenly everything that I have done him gets completely changed. Yes the multiple accounts was a mistake but I wouldn't have done it if I wasn't harrassed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.159.197.246 (talk) 20:42, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
- InkHeart, it is not like you were blocked for the original events and have now been trying to make constructive edits. You used multiple accounts to harass users who opposed you, and have been avoiding blocks to make unconstructive edits over the past few months. Heck, you were blocked YESTERDAY for similar actions. So please don't try the sympathy card, as it is obviously just an act. Ωphois 20:51, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
- I had an issue with InkHeart's sockpuppet, Belov, who pretty much reverted articles back to his/her edition, pretty much without discussion. Also, the Lee Jun Ki article doesn't belong to you, so you can't give someone it. NPeeerbvsesz (Push) 21:16, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
Don't understand why Wide Area Multilateration was deleted
Hello Fastily. I am not sure why my page Wide Area Multilateration was deleted. I was informed that "This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article." The article simply describes a technology, much like other pages that describe technologies (see "Multilateration", "TCAS", "ADS-B"). It does not promote a company, product, group, service, or person. If it was deleted due to lack of references, please let me know as there are a number of additional ones that can be added. Any advice would be much appreciated. Thank you in advance.--Ludmilovna (talk) 20:07, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
Undelete an image?
Is it possible to un-delete File:Wearepilotsv2.jpg? The article it was in was deleted and I missed the timeframe to make an update so it wasn't left orphaned. The album articles have now been merged into one (We Are Pilots) which include the "v2" information, so I would like to put that photo in that section. Or should I re-upload the file? Thanks for your assistance. [Reference: We Are Pilots (v1), We Are Pilots (v2), We Are Pilots (v3) ] – gRegor (talk • contribs) 08:20, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
why did you delete my addition to the side effects of ritalin/concerta did you want a citation? -person with no acount. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.5.27.82 (talk) 10:34, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
ostoearthritis
Why do you delete my addition of PRG4 deficiency and additional information about viscosuplimentation and steroid injections?Lrunge (talk) 10:42, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
WKRK-FM recent edit
hi- name of radio station in article is simply WKRK, not WKRK-FM; station has gone through some 13 callsign changes in its history (by far the most in cleveland market), so this isn't the first time a wikipedia article has been created for the station (see WXTM, WKRI, WXRK, etc.)-- the "-FM" suffix was added to differentiate between this station and another in north carolina, WKRK (AM), but i feel the more appropriate title is WKRK with "FM" in parantheses ("dash FM" is not part of the 4 letter callsign). sorry for the change, but i wasn't sure how to edits/changes to the article title-- i try to only make constructive edits in good faith. please change the article name in whatever manner is appropriate TheBlankingCompany79 (talk) 10:57, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
COI
Hello. I may have added some mud to the water with my request to upload photos. I am only doing so to provide an updated photo, which is more accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwestondesign (talk • contribs) 21:14, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
- Is the file you intend to upload copyrighted or a free/Public Domain image? -FASTILY (TALK) 22:05, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
It's a public domain photo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwestondesign (talk • contribs) 07:01, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for deleting your comments earlier. I am new to all of this and thought that was the correct thing to do. Woops! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwestondesign (talk • contribs) 07:02, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
And Now I will sign my posts too. So much to learn. Sorry again. Jwestondesign (talk) 07:14, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
- No worries, it's all good. Considering that the file is a Public Domain file, I'd suggest taking Xeno's recommendation. Upload the file at the Wikimedia Commons (commons:commons:Upload). This way the file will be available for use on different language Wikipedias/Wikimedia projects. Don't worry, you can use the file in the same manner as if you had uploaded the file directly to the English Wikipedia. Hope that helps to answer your question. -FASTILY (TALK) 10:34, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
You have left a "fair use rational" message for me, but I'm certain that the rational supplied is already more than legally adequate. The image is a screenshot of a login session to an IBM AIX host, being used in the IBM AIX article. I created the image. It's doubtful whether IBM have any copyright claim on that image whatsoever; nevertheless following the guidelines for uploading screenshots of non-free software leads one to the "fair use" template. I suspect this is probably inappropriate in this case. I will change the copyright status to GFDL-self. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thparkth (talk • contribs) 21:54, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, but it's not clear that you have sufficient understanding of what we're discussing to offer advice. Of course IBM has "copyrighted the computer program" but this is not a computer program; it is an image of the output of a computer program - an image made by me. The file does not contain a "portion of the Windows OS". Again, I am the author of this image, and I have chosen to license it under the GFDL. I'm not sure how you can justify threatening to delete it as a "copyright violation". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thparkth (talk • contribs) 22:12, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
(Had requested an undelete, but I'm withdrawing it as simply not worth the hassle. I will re-upload with a fair use justification. This whole situation could have been avoided if you reacted with more patience and less anger. You might want to look up "de minimis" at some point though.) Thparkth (talk) 23:23, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for File:RealNetwork Logo.png
Hi
I have noticed that you tagged me for fair use rationale of file:RealNetwork logo.png. I have rewritten the description on the page. Please help check if it works.
Thanks! Fellowedmonton —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fellowedmonton (talk • contribs) 02:32, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
I took it to WP:PUF but seriously think you should reconsider your decision, I went through his uploads and found all of his uploads to be copyright violations. He had uploaded images he found in online news articles, and it's obvious that this is the case here too even though I haven't been able to locate a link. Please use common sense and delete the file asap. Regards. —Krm500 (Communicate!) 03:42, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
- I agree that File:Fetisov.jpg is a likely copyright violation. However, the file bears no watermarks, no attributions, and no overzealous claims of pd/gfdl/cc. With any questionable files, my mantra is "innocent until proven guilty"; I never was a big believer of WP:IAR anyways. -FASTILY (TALK) 04:34, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
California Association of Student Councils
Hi
When making the page, much content was copied directly from CASC's publications. Edits have been made and can be viewed here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Michael.david.adkins/California_Association_of_Student_Councils is that suitable and not in violation of Wikipedia rules?
Mike Adkins (talk) 05:21, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Adding time stamp -FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:36, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
File: Charles Ezra Greene
I don't understand your comment. The source of this image is clearly stated. It comes from a book published in 1906 titled "History of the University of Michigan," by Burke Aaron Hinsdale. I own a copy of the book and scanned the image directly from the book, p 247. Since the book was published in 1906, it is in the public domain. If you still think there is a problem with the image, let me know. Cbl62 (talk) 06:04, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Fair-use rationale for File:Opera_Mobile_10_speed_dial.png
Hi, I've added a fair use rationale template to File:Opera Mobile 10 speed dial.png. If this is acceptable, can you remove the image from being marked for deletion? Thanks, J.Maurice (talk) 06:42, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Adding Time Stamp -FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:37, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Adding Time Stamp -FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:37, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 09:44, 31 December 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 09:44, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
erky perky rationale
So There Is Visual Identification Of The Main Characters of Erky Perky is the fair use rationale —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matt-tastic (talk • contribs) 10:05, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Leca
I verified this morning that you have deleted the site LECA, which I do not understand??? I was filling out the page with information on how and where to use expanded clay / Leca in a (after my opinion) non-commercial way. Will it be possible to put in on-line again??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.155.43.117 (talk) 10:44, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
- I deleted LECA for being a spam/advertising page under speedy deletion criterion G11. If you like, I can provide you with a copy of the deleted text, provided you'd be willing to help clean it up. -FASTILY (TALK) 10:47, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
I would appreciate that and for sure help cleaning it up. I am not experienced with wikipedia why I would like some help on the "too commencial" aspect of the site. My intention was to make a description of expanded clay, commonly known as Leca, and give information on the various application areas... which I dont think is commencial - or is it??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leca67 (talk • contribs) 10:53, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. I see that you have removed some images or maybe this isn't the latest version (I just made some uploads before you deleted the site)??? Can I put it online now and keep up-dating it from here...??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leca67 (talk • contribs) 11:09, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for a fast answer - and sorry for bother you again: you have removed two images "characteristics leca.JPG" and "leca img 03.JPG" - why??? I tried to follow the rules set up by wikipedia concerning rights etc, so everything should be OK??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leca67 (talk • contribs) 11:13, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
- File:leca img 03.JPG is a non-free file. Wikipedia policy forbids non-free images in the userspace. As for File:characteristics leca.JPG, you can remove the "<nowiki>" and "<code>" tags. As far as I can see, those files can be used in the userspace. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 11:20, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
What did I do that was vandalism!? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.83.100.52 (talk) 17:47, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
InkHeart again
Hey, she's back using Special:Contributions/219.93.30.34. Ωphois 21:01, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
- 219.93.30.34 blocked one year as a Sockpuppet and Zombie Proxy. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:56, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. What does blocked proxy mean? Ωphois 00:15, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- See WP:OPENPROXY. Basically, the Foundation has a policy which globally prohibits any usage of Open/Zombie proxies. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:24, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. What does blocked proxy mean? Ωphois 00:15, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
30 Rock Images
Fixed (Please contact me if changes do not solve the issue) - Nyxaus 23:09, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
- Looks better. I have adjusted the source information for both files accordingly but other than that, no issues. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:32, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
File:Sabra Wheless Ballinger Stoddart.jpg
You have added a file source warning for File:Sabra Wheless Ballinger Stoddart.jpg. Is such a warning warranted in this case? The file has the appropriate template for being pre-1923 US material and hence in the public domain. I had included a fairly detailed explanation when I originally uploaded it, and its pre-1923 date ought to be a key factor in favor of its retention. Is there a way to retain this image file? Canadian2006 (talk) 04:19, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Your recent tagging of File:Wes Mannion with Tiger.jpg
Thanks for the notice, though I am somewhat dissapointed in the lack of trust that i have been shown. I will however have the permission emailed to Wikipedia from my staff member who took the photo. Regards ZooPro 05:29, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry you had to receive the notice; just following standard procedural polices. Yes, that would be great if you could mail the permission to Wikipedia. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:32, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- No worries. Sally is one of our photographers and as such i decided to credit her as she did take the photo. would it be correct to consider the photo the property of Australia Zoo (i can give permission for the photo then) or would copyright fall to Sally as she technicaly took the photo using zoo owned equipment? ZooPro 05:43, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- Well, this really depends on the Zoo's policies - copyright ownership has the potential to fall to either party or be split between both. I would think that the photographer holds the copyright but it may be a good idea to note that the photo was taken with Zoo equipment. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:50, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- No worries. Sally is one of our photographers and as such i decided to credit her as she did take the photo. would it be correct to consider the photo the property of Australia Zoo (i can give permission for the photo then) or would copyright fall to Sally as she technicaly took the photo using zoo owned equipment? ZooPro 05:43, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Admin coaching
Hi, I was perusing the admin coaching page to see if there was someone who could help me learn the ropes concerning image deletion and tagging. I was pleasantly surprised to find that you have no student at the moment and are likewise interested in the same arena. I don't have any aspirations to become an administrator, but I do want to become more helpful in cleaning up Wikipedia's large image repository, so hopefully that's not a deal-breaker. I've had to learn on my own as I've been working through the Category:Images with watermarks backlog, which has led me to dealing with {{ffd}}, {{npd}}, etc. as well as multiple additions to and comments on the various files for deletion logs. I am primarily interested in becoming more familiar with any tools to facilitate tagging and/or cleaning up images, adding relevant opinions to deletion discussions and locating areas/backlogs where a normal editor with wiki-knowledge and GIMP can help out.
Let me know what you think, and if admin coaching is the wrong tact, maybe you could just point me to some resources I should know about or give me some feedback on my contributions every now and again so I can become a better wikignome. Thanks, — Bility (talk) 06:38, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Bility. Yes, I'd be happy to admin coach you! Just give me about a day or so and I'll set up coaching pages in your userspace. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 06:52, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind, but I reverted your revert at Wikipedia:Editor review/Shirik and replied to the comment. He's entitled to an opinion, and at the very minimum it's something nice for me to look back at in a few months. If you think it's to disruptive of the process, feel free to remove the comment and my reply, of course. Thanks for the concern though! --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 06:55, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
List of terrorist incident 2009
Now i also add "ref" on discussion page so can you please again come to discussion page of terrorist incidents 2009. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_terrorist_incidents,_2009 Please disscuss about those both incident so called terrorist incident.Please discuss.And 1 thing that have you doesnt hear news or read news on websites.All the text which i write there was speaked or written by media chennals.I doesnt write my opiniun. As i daily watch news and update war in Afghanistan article and check terrorist incidents article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_terrorist_incidents,_2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.152.23.223 (talk) 07:34, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Discussion?
Sorry, but somehow I missed the discussion about whether File:Donelan-selfportrait.jpg was consistent with Wikipedia's non-free use policy. I think it was, and the rationale for deletion you linked to states that there's a discussion period on anything that isn't blatantly mistagged. - Jason A. Quest (talk) 01:52, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- How does a photograph of him illustrate his style of art? - Jason A. Quest (talk) 16:25, 1 January 2010 (UTC), 14:13, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
71.77.20.26
Would you consider reviewing the block on 71.77.20.26 (talk)? I believe this user started out with good intentions (removing what he considered questionable unsourced content), and think a series of misunderstandings led him down a path that led to the block and later block extension. It might be productive to re-enable talk page access and open a dialog that (with some coaching) might lead o reinstatement of editing privileges. You never know where a great future editor might come from. This one has clearly gotten off to a bad start. It's entirely up to you. Thanks. -- Tom N (tcncv) talk/contrib 08:37, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Tcncv. You're welcome to return talk page access to the 71.77.20.26 (talk) if you're willing to discuss with them, but I think it's only fair to warn you that past behavior strongly suggests that a civil discussion with the IP editor will be unlikely. However, I request that the IP remain blocked until an agreement is reached/the IP understands why they were blocked or the block expires. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 11:03, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- I have re-enabled talk page access for this user and invited the user to discuss the possibility of restoring full access. We'll see if it leads anywhere. -- Tom N (tcncv) talk/contrib 17:44, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- (The following appears to be from User:Plumalley. I added a new header to separate the topics. It appears that when the file was speedily deleted from en.wikipedia, the referencing page began displaying the commons file of the same name. -- Tom N (tcncv) talk/contrib 17:44, 1 January 2010 (UTC))
I am sure that Editors of Wikipedia are vastly important.
However, you (somebody) seems intent on removing the photo of my Grandmother: Sabra wheless Ballinger Stoddart from your article "William Lee Stoddart", for reasons beyond my understanding; nor is it likely that I can or will learn how to protect my upload.
By pressing this matter you will simply deprive the public of an interesting point in 1921-34 history. So be it.
plumalley —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.233.85.0 (talk) 15:15, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- Upon checking the deleted revisions, I can confirm the file was indeed missing fair-use rationale. After being tagged for a week, I speedied it per WP:CSD#F6. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:51, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Possible Sockpuppetry
During recent edits patrol this morning, I noticed User:Peterjenka (self promotional userpage of self published young author), and then a mention of deleted article Peter Jenka on User talk:Bonnie Nagy, with further comments by Ms. Nagy that would lead me to believe that both Peter Jenkas are one and the same. Could you compare the text of the userpage, with that of the deleted article, to see if there is a likelihood of common authorship and/or possible sockpuppetry? WuhWuzDat 16:15, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Wuhwuzdat. I took a look and there is convincing evidence to suggest sockpuppetry. The text of the deleted article, Peter Jenka, is as follows:
Peter Jenka (born May 11, 1995 in Prague, Czech Republic) is a young Czech, English writing novelist.
He debuted in his 14 with the first part of ELDERION [25] SAGA, Birth of a King published in November 2009.
- The first line of the article, closely resembles the first line of User:Peterjenka here. Apart from the edits User:Bonnie Nagy made to List of fantasy novels, the similarity between User:Peterjenka and Peter Jenka is enough to justify filing a case at WP:SPI. I would block now (WP:DUCK), but to avoid getting caught in some weird coincidence, I think it'd be best to have a checkuser look at this first. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 22:16, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Pictures
Hi, I got your notice about the pictures I uploaded on my talk page. Do you have any suggestions on finding copyright for pictures taken with the PrtSc button from Youtube?
Thanks, Ob4cl (talk) 18:46, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
InkHeart
Lol, she's back again at Special:Contributions/202.181.170.231 and Special:Contributions/82.138.98.35 removing maintenance tags. After you block this one, do you mind semi-protecting those pages? Ωphois 19:15, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- Jeez, someone's very persistent. If you ever come across any other InkHeart socks, please don't hesitate to report them here. I'll be sure to deal with them ASAP. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:56, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
User talk:Victoriousm has resumed editing
Did you clear the autoblock? It seems to have gone away, without expiring. Autoblocks are mysterious. EdJohnston (talk) 19:41, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- No I haven't unblocked anyone in the last few days. That's very strange. I guess there might not have been an autoblock after all? -FASTILY (TALK) 21:59, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- The link [26] used to work, but doesn't any more. I think they are trying to prevent the editor's IP from being generally visible. However, you can occasionally see an entry in the block log of the admin who did the unblocking. (Showing only the autoblock number but nothing else). Assuming you can guess the unblocking admin. EdJohnston (talk) 22:49, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Adding a Picture
I would like to license my pictures through the GNU Free Documentation License (GNU FDL or simply GFDL), but I have absolutely no idea how to do that. They are my pictures, pictures that I have taken myself, and I am the sole owner. I have tried to license them through Wikipedia's suggestions, and have gotten confused and gave it up.
The Wikipedia instructions do not say how to license my owned pictures. They just describe what's available in the process.
I need step-by-step directions to the process, not descriptions of the directions.
Can you tell me how to do the GNU Free Documentation License easily and without complication, please? Simply the "go here, click here, type in this, insert that, etc" Csneed (talk) 20:36, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- Certainly! Add this text "{{GFDL-self}}" anywhere on the description page(s) of the file(s) you wish to license as GFDL. And that's all there is to it. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 22:50, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
A question about your image deletion tagging.
May I ask you why tagging images with lack of description that do not seem to be violating any rule is neccessary. I mean many of those images are appropriately tagged with lack-of-description templates and I do not see why some of them seem to be 'original research' which I assume (sorry if I am wrong) "OR" is supposed to mean. What do you mean also by UE and LQ? I am sure that many of these have explanations and so are deletion templates really neccessary?Regards, FM [ talk to me | show contributions ] 20:38, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Files for deletion#Glossary -FASTILYsock(TALK) 04:55, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Regards For RfA
Hello Yes I still want to run for RfA
Is this surficient enoth or do you want something more formal?
Many thank
Halgo123 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Halgo123 (talk • contribs) 22:57, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Re:Regards For RfA
Hello Again
yes can you please submit it
Many thanks
Halgo123 (Halgo123 (talk) 23:11, 1 January 2010 (UTC))
California Association of Student Councils
Hey
You recently edited the CASC page, as did another user saying he was only removing minute details. Question: why is it that details on CASC's programs are not allowed, while organizations like JSA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junior_State_of_America provide more detail but their page has not been modified?
Mike Adkins (talk) 04:49, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
NotesToYou.jpg copyright tag
Hi. I must have missed adding the copyright tag for this file. I'm trying to add it now, but I tried everything & don't know how to pull up a screen that has the list of copyright options like there is when you first upload a file. Is there any way for me to delete the file & reupload it with the information?Wtc4ever (talk) 04:54, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Emma Watson/Rupert Grint
I changed the speedy deletion templates you added for File:Emmawatsonfashion1.jpg and File:Rupertgrintpremiere.jpg. I found them on different webpages, credited to different sources, which means that the uploader is definately not the creator, and it is obvious copyright infringement per Wikipedia:Speedy_deletion#Files F9. Cheers! :-) -Duribald (talk) 05:30, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Chennai
Could you semi-protect Chennai and List of most populous cities in India? The Govt has issued an order to expand the city, but it won't complete until 2011 (see Talk:Chennai) when the population numbers will change to the "expected" number, but everyday, someone comes by to try and change the data, apparently size does matter. I would have done it myself, but I'm a content contributor to the former article. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff 06:11, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Re: Re: California Association of Student Councils
I recognize that, but I cant help but be a little frustrated when I notice other pages have not received similar retribution for the same thing. I'm not trying to point fingers at anyone for anything, but I modeled the CASC page off of the JSA page, so if anything, this message should serve as a warning that another article may have similar issues. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael.david.adkins (talk • contribs) 07:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Unprotect List of most populous cities in india
Hi, Can you please open the page List of most populous cities in India. I was trying to upload a few more pictures. Bhonsley (talk) 10:57, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
- I don't think that will be necessary. You're currently autoconfirmed so you should be able to edit the page and upload files. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 11:00, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Verity
Blackjack is continually reverting edits - however by blocking, useful info cannot be restored.HughGal (talk) 11:27, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you
I am sorry for whatever I did wrong
I am sorry. I am truly sincere and honest that I have no bad intentions here. I only wanted to be an admin. I am sorry. I have not insulted anyone, I have not broken any site rules. Coffee has been harassing me and now I have a false abuse report against me. Please do not keep trying to get me banned. I was just hurt and upset at how mean and rude Coffee was to me and I got mad and lost my temper. I should not have. But I was banned and that is over. Is that not enough punishment? And for all the insults and harassing Coffee did nothing happened to him. So I do not feel this is right to punish me more for this. Please do not keep punishing me for this. I am so sorry I just wanted to be an admin. I applied and I did not do anything wrong. I am so confused now. Why is this happening? Why is there an abuse report against me when i have done nothing? Please can you not keep voting to ban me. I am very, very upset.Wiki Greek Basketball (talk) 11:31, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Dehani Redirect
Thank you for your help. I highly appreciate it as it is a bit difficult for a new user such as myself to get used to the interface of Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adityarn (talk • contribs) 13:36, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
InkHeart
She is using Special:Contributions/199.60.113.30. Ωphois 19:55, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
- And I suspect that Special:Contributions/70.31.152.191 is also her, as it edited a Korean-related article at same time as the vandalisms were taking place. However, those edits appeared to be constructive, so just something to look out for. Ωphois 20:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
- 199.60.113.30 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) blocked three months. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:11, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Leca and user Leca67
Are you sure the article is ok? Virtually all the links, including the references, are to commercial sites (basically Leca's various sites, and for all I know they all have the same ownership), and the 10 external links all appear to be commercial. Also, the article creator was blocked for having a promotional username, unblocked at his request to get a new name, got a new name and then continued editing under the now unblocked old name. I've raised this at COIN here [27] if you want to comment. Dougweller (talk) 20:00, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I actually deleted the article as a blatant advertisement per G11, on the 31st of December. By Leca67's request and promises to clean the article up, I provided a copy of the page to the user in their userspace, telling them to move it back into the mainspace when ready. But...clearly that didn't end very well. Shame. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:32, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
- It happens. We do things with the best of intentions and GF, & it goes wrong. Dougweller (talk) 06:28, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
Just to say thanks for correcting my silly additions to my own permissions. I wasn't sure that I had the ability to create articles that were automatically tagged as reviewed and, when I went looking for that, was sufficiently ignorant about some of the other permissions to add them "to be on the safe side". I soon realized I didn't need them; thanks for tidying up after me. Accounting4Taste:talk 02:57, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Revert Permissions - Petiatil
Thank you for you feedback regarding my application for rollback permissions. I was almost positive I wouldn't be able to get it from reading other requests, however your feedback is crucial in ability to apply again. No hard feeling I suppose is what I am getting at, and a sincere Thank You. Petiatil (talk) 04:18, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
FYI
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/TomPhan; the comments from the IPs weren't random and were from a de facto banned user. — BQZip01 — talk 08:19, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
keyzer0 systems
I received notification on G11 criterion issue over an article about keyzer0 systems you managed. The related web site offers to all internet users, registered or anonymous guests, freely detailed information on dividends and corporate actions of more than 400 stocks of major exchanges, information not easy nor freely available elsewhere. That can be useful for investors and in that way i believe the article can be encyclopedic. Regards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Keyzer0 (talk • contribs) 04:34, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
- i wonder how encyclopedic are the following articles... 2 Girls 1 Cup - Bang Bus - Goatse.cx and many other commercial sites in Category:Erotica and pornography websites. Regards. User:Keyzer0 (talk • contribs) 11:00, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Re: Hedley Verity
I think you should review your protection of this article. Your reason for the protection is "excessive vandalism" but NPOV violations are not considered vandalism. Additionally none of the bullet points at Wikipedia:Protect#Semi-protection apply. This is a content dispute between an IP and an autoconfirmed user, to allow only one of these parties to edit the article is not the best way of resolving the conflict. --88.109.22.176 (talk) 11:29, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi. I'd like to thank you for protecting the article as the issue concerns POV only indirectly. It is more about original research as the person was inserting unsubstantiated personal views into an article based on his own interpretation of a short movie clip, which may or may not be typical of the subject. The same person has also been active on the talk pages of myself, WT:CRIC and User talk:Sarastro1 where he always ends his missives with the word "Tillmann" but never signs himself off. Among things, he persistently insists that the site should use primary sources, despite being told more than once about WP:PRIMARY. I have reason to believe he is now active as User:HughGal, if you would like to investigate that. Thanks again. ----Jack | talk page 16:00, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 04:24, 3 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
ww2censor (talk) 04:24, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Continued IP vandalism
Hi Fastily, I noticed your previous warning to User talk:194.176.105.56. You may be interested to know that yet another POV edit has been made from this IP address see here. Best, Daicaregos (talk) 14:49, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
- 194.176.105.56 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) blocked for a week. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:43, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. Best, Daicaregos (talk) 23:04, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Something funny happened with protection tag
Hello, Fastily, I moved Lee Jun Ki, a South Korean actor to Lee Jun Ki (actor) to make a WP:DAB because there is also another Lee Jun Ki (with a hyphen between "Jun and Ki" though). And the page was semi-protected by you for excessive vandalism, but well after I moved the page, the protection flag does not follow to the new title. And this log misleads as if I did something administrative action with the administrative tool. So I want you to remove the semi-protection from Lee Jun Ki and put the protection to Lee Jun Ki (actor) if that protection is still in need. Thanks.--Caspian blue 18:24, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
InkHeart
Thanks! That would be really helpful in dealing with her. :) Ωphois 19:47, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
- I promise. I understand that having it is a big responsibility, and I won't abuse it. Ωphois 21:31, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Inappropriate removal of "File:Madonna Ultimate Collection DVD box set.jpg"
Your deletion of "File:Madonna Ultimate Collection DVD box set.jpg" was made on 19:02 2 January 2010 with the reasoning of "F5: Unused non-free media file for more than 7 days". This justification is incorrect and against Wikipedia policy. The file was in use at that time, and it's reference was removed from the page The Ultimate Collection (Madonna) on 20:06 2 January 2010, clearly not 'unused' for 7 days. Can you please restore the image to that it can be returned to the article The Ultimate Collection (Madonna)? Thanks. CuriousEric (talk) 19:56, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
- Done. Sorry for the inconvenience. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:15, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick response! CuriousEric (talk) 03:14, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Regarding removal of DRMN 01.jpg
Hello, I noticed someone suggested removal of this image. This image originally had a fair use rationale based on its status as a promotional image without a replacement. The low resolution of the image, and its status as a unique image used for promotional purposes, fits the WP criteria for fair use. If this image had its original rationale removed, I was not aware of it. I would suggest greater caution in the future before removing such images, and would also suggest checking the history of the image to make sure that fair use rationale was not present at some point in the past. The image was properly referenced and its copyright status was listed. Again, the image had fair use rationale, but it may have been removed via vandalism or some other action. Thank you once again. --Xaliqen (talk) 21:09, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hello again, thank you for the prompt response. I may re-upload the file with the appropriate information for the new fair use guidelines, but I should point out that the original file met guidelines in place at the time of its upload. Since Wikipedia changed the fair use guidelines in the several years since the image was uploaded, the image fell out of accordance with the updated guidelines. It's true that I neglected to go back and specifically change the information in the image to meet the new guidelines. This is partially because I was unaware of the issue, but it should be noted that the image fully met fair use policy at the time it was originally uploaded. Thank you once again for your dedication. --Xaliqen (talk) 21:37, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Why is this information not allowed when Coca Cola and thousands of other companies are listed on Wikipedia
Preferred Seating Designs LLC of Louisville Kentucky is a design build and marketing organization consisting of President, Richard Barrios of Louisville, Kentucky, and Vice President Frank Sumner, of Preferred Seating Co. Inc, Indianapolis, Indiana. Richard Barrios, P.E., is recognized as a leading bleacher seating designer and does regular work with most of the major U.S. bleacher manufacturers to design, stamp and approve these type projects. Twelve seasoned professional representative groups market these products throughout the U.S and Canada.
Preferred Seating Designs LLC focuses on athletic facilities and other large public assembly seating venues that require tiered seating such as bleachers, grandstands, stadium and telescoping seating. From small movable benches to unmovable large grandstands, bleachers have flexibility like no other spectator seating. Indoor gymnasiums may have retractable platforms and or telescopic bleachers which are semi-automatic chair operation systems. The set up and take down features of this type of seating greatly decreases the time it takes to change a multipurpose facility from full seating to an empty floor space. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carolyncassidy (talk • contribs) 00:42, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Why is this information not permitted on Wikipedia. I see thousands and thousands of information about companies listed on Wikipedia
Preferred Seating Designs LLC of Louisville Kentucky is a design build and marketing organization consisting of President, Richard Barrios of Louisville, Kentucky, and Vice President Frank Sumner, of Preferred Seating Co. Inc, Indianapolis, Indiana. Richard Barrios, P.E., is recognized as a leading bleacher seating designer and does regular work with most of the major U.S. bleacher manufacturers to design, stamp and approve these type projects. Twelve seasoned professional representative groups market these products throughout the U.S and Canada.
Preferred Seating Designs LLC focuses on athletic facilities and other large public assembly seating venues that require tiered seating such as bleachers, grandstands, stadium and telescoping seating. From small movable benches to unmovable large grandstands, bleachers have flexibility like no other spectator seating. Indoor gymnasiums may have retractable platforms and or telescopic bleachers which are semi-automatic chair operation systems. The set up and take down features of this type of seating greatly decreases the time it takes to change a multipurpose facility from full seating to an empty floor space. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carolyncassidy (talk • contribs) 00:45, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Why can't a brief description of company like below be listed in Wikipedia?
Preferred Seating Designs LLC of Louisville Kentucky is a design build and marketing organization consisting of President, Richard Barrios of Louisville, Kentucky, and Vice President Frank Sumner, of Preferred Seating Co. Inc, Indianapolis, Indiana. Richard Barrios, P.E., is recognized as a leading bleacher seating designer and does regular work with most of the major U.S. bleacher manufacturers to design, stamp and approve these type projects. Twelve seasoned professional representative groups market these products throughout the U.S and Canada.
Preferred Seating Designs LLC focuses on athletic facilities and other large public assembly seating venues that require tiered seating such as bleachers, grandstands, stadium and telescoping seating. From small movable benches to unmovable large grandstands, bleachers have flexibility like no other spectator seating. Indoor gymnasiums may have retractable platforms and or telescopic bleachers which are semi-automatic chair operation systems. The set up and take down features of this type of seating greatly decreases the time it takes to change a multipurpose facility from full seating to an empty floor space. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carolyncassidy (talk • contribs) 00:48, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Re:File permission problem with File:Covered Carriage Truck BR 94300.png
I told you in the summery the website, and under permission, exactly where to find that paragraph. http://anoraksia.ukgeeks.co.uk/ -> 'Welcome' column on the right -> 4th paragraph, right there exact words put up, last time I check Wiki is NOT commercial. But to satisfy you I left a message for the guy Asked him to email me the permission, we'll see in a day or two. (Personally I hate the 25 different forms of copyright, could a page be made explaining what each one is for in English, biggest issue I had.)--The Navigators (talk)-May British Rail Rest in Peace. 01:43, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- About the whole commercial use thing, you might like to read http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-May/023760.html. Before May of 2005, these kind of images are fine. But, after that day, images needed to be able to be used commercially (like on Wikipedia DVD's and printed books) and also be modified. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:10, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
I addressed the concerns about this image. I can assure you it is not a copyvio; the PDF file is just a construction sheet on how to draw the flag. While yes, it is an oprhan, it is intended for use on the article Flag of India. Do you think it would be better to just transwiki to Commons and delete? User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:08, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- Is it possible to reasonably use it in the article? If so, I'll close the relevant deletion discussion as withdrawn. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:15, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- That was my hope, but I see what you like to do with images (I am also an admin that deals with images, so I know how you feel). Anyways, if you change your rationale from CV...to "OR, Transwiki to Commons." I will support that deletion. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:19, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- Alright then. If you can de-orphan File:Admiral of the Indian Navy rank flag.svg, I'll withdraw the nomination and see to it that the file is moved to Commons. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:00, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- See List_of_Indian_flags#Naval_flags. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:04, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- FFD nomination withdrawn, file flagged as a candidate to be moved to Commons. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:34, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. I think I have the other rank flags too, so I need to work on those. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:36, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- FFD nomination withdrawn, file flagged as a candidate to be moved to Commons. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:34, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- See List_of_Indian_flags#Naval_flags. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:04, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- Alright then. If you can de-orphan File:Admiral of the Indian Navy rank flag.svg, I'll withdraw the nomination and see to it that the file is moved to Commons. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:00, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- That was my hope, but I see what you like to do with images (I am also an admin that deals with images, so I know how you feel). Anyways, if you change your rationale from CV...to "OR, Transwiki to Commons." I will support that deletion. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:19, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
File:OceanOdyssey.jpg
Hey Fastily, would you mind if I undeleted File:OceanOdyssey.jpg, which you just deleted per a CSD request? I don't know why I forgot to fill in a rationale when I killed off the high-res original pic. — Huntster (t @ c) 07:02, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
File:Aisha.jpg listed for deletion
I fixed this problem--Gurdjieff (talk) 12:37, 4 January 2010 (UTC) File:Aisha.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Aisha.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:01, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Hey.i diint understand whats is the problem with this picture,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Agios_nikolaos2.JPG. The image is taken by my me and it is licensed.I have received notifications for other,licensed,images too. Thanks in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Koliri (talk • contribs) 13:03, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
g11
i wonder how encyclopedic are the following articles... 2 Girls 1 Cup - Bang Bus - Goatse.cx and many other commercial sites in Category:Erotica and pornography websites. Regards. User:Keyzer0 (talk • contribs) 11:00, 4 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.32.165.75 (talk)
Ocean Odyssey picture
Not sure what you mean by no fair-use justification. It was explained in detail on the image page. It is a publicity photo of a configuration of the article's subject (as a drilling rig) and therefore can not be replaced with a free image. That seems a pretty straightforward case of fair use unless I'm missing something. ghaff (talk) 17:43, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Saint Anselm College
Hi, I believe you have made a mistake, marking my images for deletion when I have shot them myself and even put the right copyright... please explain how I can fix any problem and make sure they are NOT deleted, they took a while to upload and I'd appreciate if they weren't deleted —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericci8996 (talk • contribs) 01:29, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Excuse me, but now the images are deleted, if you did this, can you please restore the page and explain why? They were still up when I posted this question to you asking for them not to be deleted... if it wasn't you then sorry, but please explain to me how to do this right —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericci8996 (talk • contribs) 02:18, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I forgot to name the files I want restored, thanks!
File:My Saint Anselm Ring 2010 (1).JPG listed for deletion File:Student Ambassador.JPG listed for deletion File:Alumni Hall 1889 Sun.jpg listed for deletion File:Alumni Hall 1889 dark.jpg listed for deletion File:Alumni Hall 1889 SNOW.jpg listed for deletion File:Alumni Hall 1889 RAIN.jpg listed for deletion File:ALUMNI HALL in 12-15-2007.jpg listed for deletion --Ericci8996 (talk) 15:46, 4 January 2010 (UTC)Eric Ricci
- I would, but the thing is, I removed them in the first place because they were not in accordance with Wikipedia policy page WP:NOTREPOSITORY. Secondly, the style in which the images, especially those of "Alumni Hall", were inserted into the article were turning it into advertising/spam, sonmething Wikipedia has a stolid policy against. I understand that you are new to the project and are eager to contribute, but what you've been doing isn't exactly in the best interests of the project. Those are some good quality images you have there and I suggest you go to the Wikimedia Commons and upload/contribute them there. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:12, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
I thoroughly disagree with your accusations that the pictures are of an advertisement basis... I am a Senior History major and have a talent, as I have a professional photography business, I publish these images to show my gift...
Also, your rationale is this I presume: Mere collections of photographs or media files with no text to go with the articles. If you are interested in presenting a picture, please provide an encyclopedic context, or consider adding it to Wikimedia Commons. If a picture comes from a public domain source on a website, then consider adding it to Wikipedia:Images with missing articles or Wikipedia:Public domain image resources.
If this is true, I will add an article SPECIFIC to Alumni Hall and re-add the images, (because then the collection of photographs from different seasons WILL apply to the text). I believe they already do, but if you say they do not, then I will edit this for you.
This still does not explain why the image of my class ring and of the student ambassador have been removed —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericci8996 (talk • contribs) 23:11, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
File:Akdeniz
Happy new year Fastily,
File:Akdeniz.jpg had been proposed for deletion. (OR,UE and LQ) Of course, if there is a problem, it’s my duty to correct it. The trouble is that I don’t know what is wrong.
- Akdeniz is the name of an city and up to yesterday it was linked to the article Akdeniz, Mersin . It is now an orphan just because today few hours ago you have celeared up the link.
- I don’t understand why it is called unencyclopedic. After all it is not a technical diagram. It is just the view of the city and there are thousands of other city views in this encyclopedia.
- It is claimed to be of low resolution. There you may be right. But 680 x 510 isn’t particularly low. Anyway, since the reduced size was used (288px) the resolution is a problem at all.
I’m waiting for your further comments and I’m willing to improve the file.
Thanks. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 08:12, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Nedim Ardoğa. Although it might not be amazing encyclopedic or high quality, it just occurred to me that File:Akdeniz.jpg is the only file in the article. Feel free to trout me. Nomination withdrawn, file restored. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:17, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Vandalism
You have put a fairly offensive post on my site. I wonder if you can justify it. What is vandalism about putting relevant information on an article or removing unsubstantiated pov that self references on another.HughGal (talk) 09:33, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- Please see the post I've added to this person's page, having restored your warning message. There is a trail of edits across a number of talk pages as mentioned in the earlier topic which clearly indicate that the individual has an agenda. --Orrelly Man (talk) 08:10, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
- As you will have noticed, I have been trying vainly to integrate HughGal into the site as, on the face of it, he has a lot of useful knowledge with numerous sources at his disposal. Unfortunately, he is not compliant and is extremely disagreeable. He persists in making stupid and childish posts – see User talk:BlackJack – and reverts using IP addresses. It is clear that he is here for the sole purpose of trying to discredit another editor, apparently the author of a cricket website that HughGal does not like.
- I can appreciate the difficulties that his variable IP address must pose but I have to conclude that he is never going to make a good or reliable editor. With regret, I think he should be barred from editing the site. Can you deal with the case or should I refer to an incidents page? --Orrelly Man (talk) 13:07, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Could you restore File:A Frontier Nurse Rides Through the Rain.jpg?
You deleted it as it had been copied to Wikimedia Commons, but it's been pointed out that it's not actually public domain as I thought back when I uploaded it in 2006. I'm asking that it be deleted from the Commons, and restored here, under a fair use rationale as Marvin Breckinridge Patterson's first important work. --GRuban (talk) 13:22, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
the Washington Squares photo you removed is not copywritten
The Washington Squares photo you removed is promotional. Ask Tom Goodkind - band member - at TomGoodkin@aol.com
There is no copyright problem.
Please place it back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Budfolk (talk • contribs) 17:40, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Admin coaching apology
Hi, after seeing the daunting first lesson that comes with admin coaching, I realized I made a mistake in asking you to take me on. Even if I had a desire to become an administrator, I'm nowhere near being ready. I was mainly looking for help in understanding all the policies and practices surrounding image tagging, discussion and deletion with the purpose of working on various image-related backlogs. Thank you for working on coaching me, and I'm very sorry I wasted your time like that. I'll continue reading up on WP policies and learning the ropes around my area of interest, and any tips, pointers or corrections you'd like to give me along the way would be greatly appreciated. Once again, I apologize for creating more work for you. Thanks, — Bility (talk) 19:59, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- I understand. The path to adminship can be an extremely daunting task - I don't blame you. Thank you for being upfront about it. Continue down the path you're going, and I know you'll make a great sysop in the future. Yes, if you ever have any media copyright questions or questions regarding media in general, please don't hesitate to drop me a line and I'll see if I can help. All the best, FASTILY (TALK) 21:42, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Abbreviations at FFD
Your use of abbreviations at FFD is really off-putting, both for newbies and not-so-newbies.
Since you're presumably using a script anyway to generate these, could you change it to spell out "Unencyclopedic", "Orphaned", "Low Quality" etc ?
It would make your contributions to the page a lot easier to understand. (And the usgase in particular of "OR" when what you mean is "orphaned" rather than "original research" is beyond perverse).
Thanks. Jheald (talk) 20:07, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- Also note that when you're claiming OB ("obsolete"), standing instructions are that you should identify the preferred file that could be substituted instead.
- I have to say, I find tagging a blank SVG map of Africa as "LQ" and "UE" quite bizarre. Similarly, so tagging a map of the German empire in 1871. You do think about what these abbreviations mean, I presume? Jheald (talk) 20:19, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
User:Nableezy
Why do you think User:Nableezy abused the unblock template? --Apoc2400 (talk) 21:25, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- Look in his talk page's history. That's the second or third time he's used the template to Forum shop. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:31, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Millennium Plus
You deleted Millennium Plus as "unambiguous advertising". The product and the company that sold it are both defunct, and the company's owners (at least one of whom pleaded guilty to federal charges) will not benefit from Wikipedia having an article about the product. I think Millenium Plus is an interesting technology (or perhaps just an interesting scam) backed up by references from reliable sources. Please consider restoring the article. - Eastmain (talk) 00:15, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
- Looking at the deleted diffs, I can tell you the article wasn't in great shape but it wasn't horrendous either. If I was to restore the article, would you be willing to work on and improve it? -FASTILY (TALK) 05:06, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Mohs Surgery
Totally disagree with your deletion. The drawings are essential for the understanding of the difference between Mohs surgery and bread loafing. This concept can not be explained without pictures. A picture is worth a thousand words. Unless you can find non-copy protected diagrams to demonstrate the "orange peel" or "pie pan" method, please do not delete these images without discussing it first. I understand that you are an administrator, but this is not warranted.--Northerncedar (talk) 02:54, 5 January 2010 (UTC). Please start a discussion on the Mohs surgery discussion page before you delete them.--Northerncedar (talk) 02:55, 5 January 2010 (UTC).
I do not know how to comment on these deletions, so I left comments on the deletion page.--Northerncedar (talk) 03:10, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
124.106.168.42 message
Hello!!!
Can you block this IP user 112.200.246.4 is also the same IP users as 112.200.224.120, 112.200.129.26, 112.200.231.104, 112.200.210.102, 112.200.140.201, 112.200.207.230 and the leastes is user 112.200.189.171 among other IP users are tying to vandalized articles like Cignal Digital TV and other Philippine Cable and Satellite Articles like SkyCable and even Asian Cable and Satellite Articles like Indovision inserting suspicious news about future channel and non program channels using Philippine actor and actress, which is not true at all. Both IP users are already warning of many onfenses which is only one person I guess. Honestly im not the one who they think I've vandalized SkyCable and Cignal Digital TV inserting non sence future channel without permission of the said cable and satellite provider in the Philippines im so disapointed and Im not that kind of person to vandalized these article but for search for the truth courtesy both Sky and Cignal website itself. My answer is positive No!!!
Please help to solve this problem to block this IP user at the i mention earlier at all at the top. Im begging you!! Forgive me and Im sorry!! - 124.106.168.42 12:58, 5 January 2010
- Looks like an IP hoping vandal to me. Could you please list the pages which are affected? I'll semi-protect them from editing accordingly. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:02, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Its simple, those affected article mostly from the Philippine's Cable and Sattelite provider articles are of the following:
Those two article are editing malicious information adding Future Channels and Interactive Channel (Mostly names from the Philippine Actor and Actresses) are now vandalize from the unknown user) can you semi-protect the two article to prevent unauthorized IP user especially IP user 112.200.189.171 are latest vandalizer. Again sorry and I apologized. Happy New Year!!! - 124.106.168.42 13:16, 5 January 2010
- Pages semi-protected for two weeks. This should stop the vandal. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:30, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
- It appears the "vandal" is actually banned user, Gerald Gonzalez, a prolific vandal who frequently uses multiple IPs to vandalize Wikipedia. I've blocked all the IPs and have extended page protection to a month. -FASTILY (TALK) 04:18, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Request for protection
Can you protect this page for being vandalized as well by the IP hopper of SkyCable and Cignal page. Thanks in advance.
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Global_Destiny_Cable
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Dream_Satellite_TV
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Cablelink
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/G_Sat
- Global Destiny Cable and Dream Satellite TV semi-protected for a month. -FASTILY (TALK) 04:19, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Concerning File:1055 vijayabahu~i au o copy.png and other currency images
Surely, the copyright on these images of old coins belongs to the photographer, and seeing as we have no evidence of release from the photographer, they should be deleted? J Milburn (talk) 17:11, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi J Milburn. Yes, that is correct. I was mislead by the {{Non-free currency}} tag and I neglected to read the date the coin was created. I will restore the {{subst:npd}} tags and remove the {{Non-free currency}} tags in favor of the {{PD-old}} tags. I appreciate you letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:25, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
- My understanding is that there is no copyright on the old coins. The photographer is not creating something new; he or she is simply making a two-dimensional reproduction. The same issue arises with old paintings: a photograph that is a faithful reproduction of an old painting is not a new copyrightable form. This is why {{subst:npd}} tags are not appropriate on the images of old coins. If the photograph consisted of several coins, things might be different, but probably not. - Eastmain (talk) 04:51, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
- You are correct in that there is no copyright on the old coins. However, the photographer, being the one who took the photo, is still the copyright owner of the photo, even though the photo depicts a couple old coins (note the given source of the files). -FASTILY (TALK) 04:59, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Autodesk Inventor
The article Autodesk Inventor that you deleted because you felt it was an advertisement. Inventor is a very popular and widely used product in Mechanical Engineering and deleting it is absurd. If corrections need to get made so it is not an advertisement (which i disagree with for one) than lets work on that, but don't delete it. If you can I would recommend you bring it back. username is guglido. sorry i didn't log in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.37.171.116 (talk) 21:52, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Deletion review for File:Liberalhtv.jpg
I have asked for a deletion review of File:Liberalhtv.jpg. Because you speedily deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Jheald (talk) 13:24, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Deleted File:WhirledLogo.png for lack of licensing information?
I just logged in an saw the notice you left about the lack of licensing information and resulting deletion of File:WhirledLogo.png - what does Wikipedia require as far as licensing information - what do I need to add that I left out? I think I labeled it as a non-free logo, and that there was, as a result, no free alternative, and that it was not too high-resolution. I'm pretty sure it already had the things you mentioned as reasons, so why was it deleted? The source was the blog of a Three Rings employee - I believe I said that looking at the upload logs, I definitely included that info. I included a non-free use rationale, and all the things the Help documents said I needed to include to comply with licensing and copyright law, at least as far as I know. Where did I go wrong? I would like to either re-upload the file with all the required information or get the deletion reverted, since it was used in the infobox of Whirled. I'm just a little confused as to why it was deleted - Please, don't get me wrong; I don't blame you, as I understand you're just trying to enforce the rules. I understand completely that it was probably done with good intentions. It's just, why was it deleted, and why did nobody notice the issue for the past year and a half that it's been there? I'd really like to know what was wrong, so I can fix the problem quickly. — Nuck Chorris(talk) 23:10, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- It seems you forgot to add a license tag. No matter, I'll restore the file and add the appropriate license tag for you. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:34, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
- Oh! I didn't even realize I had left that off - I'm so sorry! I'd seen those on tons of image pages, but I must have forgotten to add it to the logo. Thanks for noticing that, even if you did so in a quite roundabout way. Still, since I used the upload wizard thing to get the proper template stuff ready, why did it not include the license tag? Perhaps that was forgotten when they made that wizard? Or did I run into a glitch? I hope the upload wizard doesn't have a big mistake like that in it, cause that could cause some widespread issues... — Nuck Chorris(talk) 01:14, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of File:Median and Average Sales Prices of New Homes Sold in United States 1963-2008 annual.pdf
Why did you delete File:Median and Average Sales Prices of New Homes Sold in United States 1963-2008 annual.pdf? It is a resizable pdf version of File:Median and Average Sales Prices of New Homes Sold in United States 1963-2008 annual.png. You could at least leave a message on my page...Smallman12q (talk) 03:15, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
- I deleted it as a blatant copyright violation. You cited a government website as the source of the file but then claimed below it that you were the copyright holder and that you were releasing it into the Public Domain. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:03, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
- Comment: Perhaps the uploader tagged the image in error when he intended to use {{PD-USGov}}. U.S. federal government publications are in the public domain. See Wikipedia:Copyright#United_States_Federal_Government. - Eastmain (talk) 05:29, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
- I wasn't fully sure what to tag it as its a chart based off government data. As a derivative of public domain government work, I probably should have changed it to simply {{pd-self}}. I still don't see why you couldn't have left a message on my talk page before(or at worst after) you deleted the pdf.Smallman12q (talk) 12:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
- A response would be appreciated.Smallman12q (talk) 13:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
- I wasn't fully sure what to tag it as its a chart based off government data. As a derivative of public domain government work, I probably should have changed it to simply {{pd-self}}. I still don't see why you couldn't have left a message on my talk page before(or at worst after) you deleted the pdf.Smallman12q (talk) 12:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
124.106.168.42 message additional sockpuppet of Gerald Gonzales
Hello!!
here's another suspected or confirm sock puppet of Gerald Gonzales IP user which is already detect courtesy of Revision History of Cignal Digital TV web page of the following:
Note: These user have already warning message especially Cignal's article.
These unknown IP user are previous vandalize Philippine Cable and Satellite TV provider articles like Cignal Digital TV, SkyCable, Global Destiny Cable, Cablelink, Dream Satellite TV, G Sat and Indonesia's Indovision.
Please block this 5 unknown IP users effective immediately. regards - Puppyph (talk) 17:03, 65 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Puppyph. It appear that all of these IPs, although undoubtedly Gerald Gonzales, have not been used to edit anywhere from 3-20 days, meaning that a block really isn't warranted at this time due to inactivity. If the IPs start vandalizing again, please consider making a report at WP:AIV; you'll probably get a faster response there. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 01:54, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Lady Elizabeth (1879) image
Hi!
I would like to know why you deleted the Lady Elizabeth's image I uploaded two days ago? It's author gave me the permission to do so.
Here is the thread on Flickr about that authorization: http://www.flickr.com/photos/25063579@N08/3993280668/
What should I do or ask him to get the right/proper license please?
Kindly, --deckarudo (talk) 16:02, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
17:30, 6 January 2010 (UTC) This file http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2008.03.29.1836.tanguy_logo.png
- I am a close friend of Olivier Tanguy
- His wife gave me this picture of him
- I uploaded it at the request of his wife
- Olivier Tanguy knows about this photo
- There are no copyright, but gfdl license would be nice
What should I do more to fulfill your bureaucratic request?
yf 17:30, 6 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfayel (talk • contribs)
Deleted: Autodesk Inventor
Greetings, I originally posted the article on Autodesk Inventor which you deleted on 1/3/2010. I am unclear as to what about the article was considered to be blatant advertising. For example, in comparing the article for Autodesk Inventor to, say, the article for Final Cut Pro, they read very similarly to me, a description of features and revision history, etc. Yet, Autodesk Inventor has been deleted while Final Cut Pro is considered fine. Can you please help me understand what needs to be changed about the original article in order for it to be re-posted without being deleted again? Also, I'm hoping I can get access to the page in order to make the necessary edits.
Thank you very much. Tnocera (talk) 18:48, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
OfferMe
I'd like to understand why you felt the need to delete the page OfferMe.
This page merely described the website and it's features. There was no positive spin to it and it was just as promotional as Groupon.
I first created the article in my userspace - see OfferMe. I received no negative comments and so published the article.
Further to this, I approached previous critics of the OfferMe wikipage to ensure that my approach was valid. You can see this discussion here.
Additionally, OfferMe is strong in the Australian social media scene. Check out the following pages:
These fans have all been gained over the past 4 months since OfferMe launched their Group Buy, showing the web-demand for this site.
If you truly feel that this page is SPAM, I ask that you be more specific.
Thanks --Nadimcsharbean (talk) 23:52, 6 January 2010 (U
________________________
Fastily, thanks for your response.
As a man from a copywriting background, I might have a different view to you, as I did not find this content at all promotional. Is it because OfferMe isn't of eBay proportions that a Wiki article can't be dedicated to it?
Here's the article (again within my userspace) - OfferMe
Please feel free to leave any comments regarding which parts of the text that you find 'promotional'.
Just write them here.
Thanks again --Nadimcsharbean (talk) 02:58, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Is this you?
Hi Fastily - just a quick heads-up - this new account has made some strange contribs, including voting at AFD as a new account, welcoming themselves, and copying one of your sock's userboxes... is this you? 7 00:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
- Negative. It looks like a possible votestacking sockpuppet to me. Best to keep a close eye on it and report to WP:ANI or WP:AIV as necessary. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
- Was afraid of that - will be watching. Thanks 7 00:50, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
deletion of File:Farokhnezhad.jpg
hi , I had uploaded this file after talking with the copyright holder of it , hence the same person who I have written the article about and he gave me the permission to. Maybe I had put the wrong license for it. what can I do now?Bbadree (talk) 00:49, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Query regarding revert
Hello. Your revert of the blanking of User talk:24.186.76.184 has me puzzled. As per WP:BLANKING, editors are permitted to remove these sorts of warnings from their own talk pages. Thanks, — Kralizec! (talk) 00:55, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
deletion of "blogtronix"
why was this article deleted? it is totally factual and not at all promotional. did you not read the discussion page? also, another editor left a note that the article was notable. this is ridiculous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elimccargar (talk • contribs) 01:10, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Baffled, puzzled, confused, don't understand
Please see my comments here. I really don't understand the point of these kind of nominations. You must know by now that almost nobody else agrees with the idea that we should delete images which could be at all useful on Commons. It would be ten times easier to add {{move to commons}} and there wouldn't be the chance the image would be deleted by the overzealous. Angus McLellan (Talk) 01:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
- I would disagree on Commons not wanting them. Collecting and categorising and improving images is their only reason for existing. And they have deletion processes to weed out the crap. Even more glacial than ours but they do have them. Cheers, Angus McLellan (Talk) 02:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
File:FFVI characters on airship.png
Greetings Fastily. You previously weighed your opinion about Stifle's deletion request of File:FFVI characters on airship.png involving licensing. He has nominated the article for deletion on the same grounds. The discussion can be found here. I haven't commented yet on it. But I figured since you acted once in regards to the argument he gave that you'd want to know what's going on. --ZeWrestler Talk 05:20, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
- No problem. As I said, I just wanted to let you know that the vote was going on about the image. I have as a side note, returned it to Characters of Final Fantasy VI article, which meets your original argument of not having a free license. --ZeWrestler Talk 12:05, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
2015 article is defaced in a strange way, cannot be fixed. HELP
The article on 2015 appears to have been defaced with "THE WORLD ENDS IN 2012/2015 I AM GOD" right at the top. It happened somewhere around Oct 18th 2009 +/- 2 days. Yet I cannot find the actual defacement in the edit box, to manually undo it. I suspect it may be one of the INFOBOXes that is actually defaced. I have no idea howto fix this, can you please alert someone who knows howto fix it, thankyou. Roidroid (talk) 05:33, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
blogtronix
but if its exactly the same as the other articles about other companies then why havent those been similarly censured? please take a look at articles like socialtext and thoughtfarmer and let me know what changes i need to make Elimccargar (talk) 07:59, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
File:Orme-Johnson Israel Study 1988.png
Could you explain these edits? Why was the tag you removed the wrong tag? The editor who added the image claimed on the copyright form to have the permission of the author, but had not submitted any proof of the permssion. I was told on Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions that this was the right tag to add under those circumstances, and that seems logical to me.
Has the editor who uploaded this image supplied the required proof of permission in the interim?
Also, it appears that this image is an orphan.
Thanks.Fladrif (talk) 15:25, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
- Not quite; the uploader never claimed copyright status of any sort, meaning that a "no evidence of permission" tag isn't exactly applicable. Unless the uploader names a source other than themselves and specifically uses a free license or any such variation, then {{subst:npd}} is the right tag. -FASTILYsock (TALK) 02:00, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of image Razziainsanktpauli3crp.jpg
We want to insert this image into Razzia in Sankt Pauli. We "lost" the image and have been talking to SkierDude about how to adjust sizes. In the mean time you deleted it. If its gone, we can replace it. We are learning as we are going. If we make a mistake please be patient.
As you are an administrator we have a question on autolinks which don't work.
On the related page Justin Rosenfeld, there are dead links which got put in automatically to Births 1901, deaths 1947 and German producers in all of which Justin Rosenfeld does NOT appear. Similarly, while Razzia in Sankt Pauli is listed in German films of 1932, it does NOT appear in Weimar Films list.
Can we remedy this? or do you have other suggestions.
Thanks for helpJustinsophie (talk) 20:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, but it isn't clear what you're asking. Could you please specify which article/pages(s) you are referring to? -FASTILY (TALK) 22:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
why did you delete the eCamp article? 79.180.47.39 (talk) 20:27, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Article on Phil Cooke
Hey Fastily,
I'm thinking of building an article on Phil Cooke. I know you deleted an article on the subject just a few days ago, but I think that he's a notable person and that there is sufficient sourcing to prove so. I'll let you know when I've got a stub going, and you can let me know if it's ok. Thanks! Jeremiah (talk) 02:32, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
- I posted the stub and I'm going to try to add a few more sources and flesh it out in the next few days. Please give any input as you see fit. Jeremiah (talk) 03:01, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
re: Notification: Deletion of File:TorchedChurchKualaLumpurAllahRulingControversy.jpg
I've sent an email to permission-en at wikimedia.org __earth (Talk) 10:04, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
GalenLogoExplained.png
Hello,
You deleted this file from the Galen Institute Wikipedia page I created, but the Galen Institute submitted permission for me to use the image to Wikimedia. Since I've been granted this permission to use the image, can I re-upload it to the page? If not, can you explain: A) why; and B) the additional steps I need to take so that I can post the image? Thank you. Andrewpsroyal (talk) 16:01, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Your bulk FFD'ing of images...
Hi, I noticed that you've been IFD-ing a lot of free images. This may be considered disruptive; please stop doing it and seek advice from the community.
Many of the images you are IFD'in seem to be compatible in licensing terms with both Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons, which is why they were in some cases tagged for Commons Move.
Tagging them for IFD, seems somehat WP:POINTy, especially when in a large number of cases the issues could be trivally resolved by talking with the uploader or doing some homework.
Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:00, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Toronto Municipal Election 2010
Hi Fastily
I wish to request the removal of a mistaken warning from you that arrived in my Inbox today.
My changes to the Wiki page mentioned in the subject field above are in fact not disruptive whatsoever. After being relentlessly attacked by SimonP, a Toronto resident and clearly biased contributor, I explained succinctly on the talk page what was occurring: I have broken NO Wikipedia guideline and I have NOT attacked other candidates by posting negative or irrelevant information on their bios. I have sought only to prevent SimonP from attempting to sway the electorate (in clear violation of Wiki rules) by posting 2006 election results that are already easily accessible by the links I have provided in my edits. I will simply not allow the candidate's 2006 last-place finish to be flaunted on a Wiki page intended to illuminate the 2010 campaign. SimonP writes ungrammatically (the changes also make no sense), he has demonstrated zero neutrality in this matter and he now wishes to block me from editing in order to continue posting biased information: if you check the Talk page, SimonP actually posted "the truth is that State is a fringe candidate with no chance of winning", a clear subversion the bedrock of the entire Wiki concept -- the democratic process.
I am not in violation of any Wiki rule. All I have done is to annoy a self-promoting Wiki administrator overstepping his protocols on an election page. I request a removal of the warning and an end to the edit war: please instruct SimonP to leave Mark State's bio alone.
Thank you, Hezbollatte (talk) 18:44, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
AN/I vs AIV
I noticed you've been referring vandal reports to AIV (makes sense). Being new to the vandal patrol game, I'm a bit unsure as to what I should be reporting to AN/I and what should go to AIV. My understanding is that ongoing vandalism that requires immediate intervention should be reported to AIV, whereas more complex issues should be reported to AN/I. Is this correct? Thanks. Throwaway85 (talk) 09:10, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply on my talk page. As a followup, I'm coming across a lot of pages that seem to be written primarily in Hindi. How should I treat these pages? Is there a tag I can throw on them, or should I ignore them? Throwaway85 (talk) 09:47, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Akapic.jpg
Uploader served as the band's manager and business agent for a number of years and, as such, often also served as photographer. This information is factual common knowledge and is not in dispute. The previous comment is unwarranted slander, legal ramifications may apply. Band can be contacted through their web-site for further information and/or confirmation of the facts. If Wikipedia requires additional proof of the photo's copyright, that can be provided by the Uploader and/or current band management upon request. Joe Burd(TALK) 14:58, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Deletion review for File:Median and Average Sales Prices of New Homes Sold in United States 1963-2008 annual.pdf
An editor has asked for a deletion review of File:Median and Average Sales Prices of New Homes Sold in United States 1963-2008 annual.pdf. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Smallman12q (talk) 18:01, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of 2010 Hong Kong Tennis Classic
I don't agree with this deletion. The article had lot of information that is now gone. Why was this done?--Nitsansh (talk) 20:07, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Source information?
That is the first image I've ever uploaded. I got the images from various old books on Google Books and Project Gutenberg and cleaned them up using Microsoft Office Picture Manager and put them into one file. Where do I go to put in the source information? Tom Reedy (talk) 20:27, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
- Will do. You might want to check this file out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Whowroteshakespeare.jpg Tom Reedy (talk) 05:54, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
hello
I am a relatively new user and I have recently created my first article 'Top Shelf Coffee Inc'. Not knowingly I have uploaded Top Shelf Coffee logo into wikipedia without properly tagging it, but with the author's permission. I don't know how to tag it properly, I would apprecite help very much. Thank you! Masashige (talk) 20:36, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Concerning MY OWN photo
Hello,
I'm Ehab: the one who took this photo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Amr_Diab_In_Fairmont.jpg on 01/09/2010 and I'm the true original owner of that photo. The problem is that I totally forgot to explain that in the description when I uploaded the photo on Wikipedia. When I clicked "Upload" I stopped the page suddenly (There was no description or a license) because of an internet disconnection. Then I reuploaded it with the description and the license on. Please release it into the Public Domain as it is free and it is my own work.
Ehab,
Best Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Information Advisor (talk • contribs) 22:02, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
|
Hello, Fastily/Archive 1! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 22:17, 9 January 2010 (UTC) |
Thank you!
Thank you for your help Fastily! Masashige (talk) 04:01, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
UE image?
In this edit diff you removed some images you described as "UE images" what does this term UE refer to? Your lack of any explanation past this two-letter abbreviation has greatly puzzled the main contributor to this article (who was the person who uploaded the images). I've been contributing to Wikipedia for quite a few years now and if an experienced user such as myself has no idea as to what you're referring to it will probably be doubly mysterious to relatively new users. Please try to talk down to our level! :) Tim Vickers (talk) 22:24, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Tim. I'm sorry to hear you were confused by the "UE" abbreviation; it simply stands for "Unencyclopedic". See Wikipedia:Files for deletion#Glossary or go simply go to Wikipedia:Files for deletion and click the "edit this page" tab or any of the small [edit] section links for further reference. -FASTILY (TALK) 08:49, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, perhaps you might link abbreviations if you use them in edit summaries? That will make your messages more likely to be understood. Tim Vickers (talk) 17:43, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Indovision Article Vandalism
Hi
somebody vandalize the article of Indovision (Indonesia DTH provider) of the unknown IP user 112.200.142.190 contain adding Future Channels who is also the same IP user who vandalize Cignal Digital TV in the Philippines last January 9, 2010 (Saturday). I technically removed the whole Future Channel content due to false information meaning its totally incorrect information or suspicions act of dishonesty. It was suspected as a another sockpuppet of Gerald Gonzales was confirm who also vandalized Philippine Cable and Satellite articles.
Please protect the article of Indovision and to block the IP user 112.200.142.190. Thanks and regards - Puppyph (talk) 13:45, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
- The IP hasn't edited in about a day or so. If they continue to vandalize, please consider filing a report at WP:AIV. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 22:07, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Copyright of the 159 image
I have included the source. Its based on an original by the Wiki user Unisouth which is in the Commons and is released as a CC by atribution. I presume I've just not worded things right in the template? --Enotayokel (talk) 19:36, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
What's the problem with the picture of him that I uploaded?--Jerzeykydd (talk) 00:55, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Request to Resstore Deleted Image
It appears you deleted image file File:AFFSC 01a.jpg because it lacked the necessary licensing information. That image was originally uploaded with all required licensing information. In fact, it is a Public Domain image from the United States Air Force—photo 070914-F-8155K-282.jpg. I don’t know what happened to the Wikipedia image page to remove the licensing information, but it was probably some kind of vandalism. Can you restore this imagage or do I need to upload it all over again.--Orygun (talk) 02:53, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Please Help
{{helpme}}
Hi Fastily, I on behalf of mydala have created mydala page few days back and i don't know if i have put any Unambiguous advertising or promotion through it. Please let me know what content i need to modify and i'll do it accordingly.
Please revert ASAP
Thanks, Sandeep —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandeepenviro (talk • contribs) 22:39, December 30, 2009
- Re-adding time stamp as thread does not seem to have archive properly -FASTILY (TALK) 23:56, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Blocked user requesting name change
I answered an {{adminhelp}} at User talk:Myklroventine, who wasn't sure how to answer your request to know what username s/he wanted to change to, but has responded there. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:43, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Note
There is still the matter of Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2010_January_6#File:DALEK.jpg, perhaps this should be closed as the image is claimed under free-use? If necessary it could be resolved over at Commons. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 00:40, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Blocked users
You blocked Yakudza19 without any explanations. It is scary to start working in en-Wiki. Wiki rules says "Administrators must supply a clear and specific block reason which indicates why a user was blocked." What vandalism he did? Dragon24 (talk) 04:23, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Zupan's Markets
Hello, We saw that you deleted Zupan's Markets Wikipedia entry. We are a 3-store local grocery chain similar to Whole Foods and New Seasons and don't understand why our article was taken down, when stores like these have Wikipedia pages all the time. Please let us know how we can rectify this situation and get our business back up on Wikipedia.
Sincerely, Brooke Strickland Zupan's Markets —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zupansmarkets (talk • contribs) 16:29, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily marked his deletion with Speedy Deletion tag G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion.[29] Using the Google cache of the page[30], I tend to agree with him. The article reads like a press-release. It's a well-written press release, but it's not an encyclopedia article. The problem is that the article presents the subject in an overwhelmingly positive, self-serving way. Wikipedia is not free hosting for your company's mission statement and product lineup.
- Avoid terms like "artisan" and "all-natural" when referring to foods in an encyclopedia article. These terms, among others, are only used in ads. This sentence-
"Instead of competing on price, Zupan’s stores were different: they focused on quality"
- -Is not written with an encyclopedic tone. The purpose of the article is clear- "This is who we are, this is why we're great- this is why you should buy from us". This is unacceptable. We're looking for "This is who they are, this is how they were formed- this is what they've done".
- Also, your user name appears official or promotional, which is a no-no as well. Please see WP:ORGNAME. Though since you've made few edits with the account, you should be able to abandon it and make a new one fairly easily. Check back in here and this can be sorted out. Your company can have an article, assuming it meets the requirements- but it's not THAT article. Read through WP:N and WP:V, as well as WP:NOR and WP:NPOV. If you still have questions about why your article was deleted, contact me again. --King Öomie 17:46, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Why and earth have I recieved a message
HughGal (talk) 08:01, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
File:Liberalhtv.jpg
I closed the deletion review for File:Liberalhtv.jpg as "overturn speedy deletion and list at FfD". Since you deleted the file, I thought you might want to know. Cheers, –BLACK FALCON (TALK) 19:21, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
RfC: Inactive admins
Not sure if you were being tongue-in-cheek, or if you were asking if someone wanted to actually put together an RfC at policy) regarding the topic of de-sysopping inactive admins, I'd do that. The only down side is that I;ve never done one before. and am wary of the perception of creating two fronts for this discussion, politicking/cancassing/whatever. Your thoughts would be invaluable. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 02:45, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Your block of 172.162.230.29
Could I request that the block be extended? The personal attacks and bad faith from this editor is very troubling, and I don't think a 31-hour block will do that good. Connormah (talk) 05:08, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of page Cerberus FTP Server for unambiguous advertising
Hello,
I am the author of Cerberus FTP Server. You deleted the Wikipedia page I created for Cerberus FTP Server, claiming it was an unambiguous advertisement. I created the page to inform people and I don't believe it presents Cerberus FTP Server as an advertisement. It follows the same format as many of the other FTP server wiki pages that were not deleted. If there is something specific I can do to make it better or less of an advertisement I would be happy to make the changes. However, I respectfully request you un-delete the page.
Thank you.
Learning Chinese ...
Hi, I see you're zh-3 ... Have any suggestions for a good online study system etc. ? (I understand people learn languages differently, and leaning languages is not my gift ... but by a fluke of name, 90% of the visitors to my site are Chinese, so I've been meaning to see if I can do a bit more than use automated translation systems). Proofreader77 (interact) 05:19, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
- Reply Proofreader77 (interact) 05:20, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Feedington requesting unblock
Hello Fastily. Do you want to give your opinion there? Orderinchaos asked him to make some concessions, and it appears he has agreed to accept them. I might want to add a further restriction about uploading images, since his understanding of copyright is so wide of the mark. EdJohnston (talk) 07:32, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi EdJohnston. I think the terms Orderinchaos has presented will work, although at this point, it probably wouldn't hurt to impose some sanctions on uploading files. If you can get the user to agree to these terms, please feel free to unblock them. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:50, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of Image
Could you please expand on your reason for "improper license" for the Black Sabbath picture. It's a picture of a poster that is owned by Allen Pamplin, who emailed it to me. It was produced by a company "Rainbow Posters" which is no longer in existence. Allen Pamplin is the owner of the Califorina Jam Fan Club. I guess I'm at a loss, because the company no longer exist the picture is non-useable? A picture taken of a poster is non-useable? FYI,(respectfully) this all started with the picture on the main article page of Black Sabbath with the caption stating "this is Black Sabbath on stage at California Jam" the is clearly not of them "at" the California Jam. The artical was talking about the band involvement and the other acts at the festival. I corrected the caption, removing the reference to where the picture was taken, but I would like to re-place the picture with one of them "AT" the California Jam. What can I do? Mlpearc (talk) 15:59, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
- That depends on who acquired their copyrights. A holding company? The founder? Did they become public domain? Find out. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is bound by rather stringent policies in the case of possibly copyright infringement- the Foundation survives tax-free on donations, and could lose both if we develop of habit of looking the other way in cases like these. --King Öomie 17:14, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you I will try to find out. Do you know a good place to start ?
- Mlpearc (talk) 19:18, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
- I'd start with Wikipedia itself, researching the company, and Google. --King Öomie 19:21, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again King Öomie I'm hard at work on it, but don't be surprised if I keep bugging you for help.Mlpearc (talk) 19:58, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Cerberus FTP Server
Is the article there now the same as what was previously deleted? Can it be redeleted if it is? Miami33139 (talk) 21:07, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
- It is not the same; the new version is significantly less of an advert than the old, deleted version. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:48, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Block of Yakudza19
Yakudza19 worked a lot on this article (and several other linked: International Karate Association, Gosoku Ryu...). He added references, listed ranks, started to list film roles and added books. He added some facts of biography with references on sources. This is important work. Yakudza19 is not vandal, rather a novice and blocking him indefinitly is too strict. The work on this article is continuing (Yakudza19, me and several other people) not only on en-Wiki (ru-Wiki, pl-Wiki, etc).
You blocked indefinitely Yakudza19 (read only DAJF unprooved occusation in vandalism and copyvio), didn't explained the reason of blocking, you didn't warned him and blocked his IP. Now a person, who knows the materials well (I mean Yakudza19, I know he read a lot of sources) cannot write an article. Sometimes I have to use the same IP (proxy), so I cannot edit on en-Wiki too. Please, respect rules of Wiki: 1) you should explain blocking reasons, 2) you should unblock if he use shared IP with other editors. We will have to start a request for arbitration otherwise. --Dragon24 (talk) 23:56, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
- It appears Yakudza19 is requesting an unblock at User talk:Yakudza19. If you have any comments to make, please do so there. Another administrator will come by shortly to assess the request and determine whether to decline the request or unblock. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:26, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
WP:AFC/R and categories
A quick reminder that WP:AFC/R is also for categories (see the page's header). Timotheus Canens (talk) 06:41, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
asi picture file deletion
hello....alló...hola....je suis ponchobonjo....soy ponchobonjo....I am ponchobonjo and on april 2008 i upload an image for the flat cable for the ASi(actuator and sensor interface article) because the current version that date had not one......now i got a message that the image file is listed for deletion......why? can you tell me?.....i think the image is pretty well used since then....regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ponchobonjo (talk • contribs) 06:44, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
European Network of Transmission System Operators
Hello Fastily,
I saw that you deleted the two images File:Map entsoe.png and Regional groups ENTSOE.png in the Article. I would like to inform you about the information provided from the ENTSO-E itself on its homepage under: http://entsoe.eu/index.php?id=13 where you can see that the images are allowed to be in editorial use. As I understand it wikipedia is such kind of use (internet publication). So do you think it is possible to review the deletion again, or it is neccessary to ask the entso-e for their property right (which in my opinion is not needed due to their statement on their homepage)
best regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by U$V$Sci (talk • contribs) 13:01, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Heads up, User:24.186.76.184
Looks like User:24.186.76.184 waited out your block and then immediately resumed the same edits. - MrOllie (talk) 15:56, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
InkHeart
I believe that Special:Contributions/173.32.219.141 is a sock. Is making very similar edits as InkHeart, including readding unsourced information to the article. Same with Special:Contributions/TelaCroft, whose sole edits have been readding InkHeart's old stuff. However, the latter appears to be willing to discuss the edits on her talk page, but not certain. Ωphois 18:34, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- And Special:Contributions/GeneralHayez, whose sole edit has been to restore the unsourced information. Ωphois 00:28, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- 173.32.219.141 and GeneralHayez blocked. Please let me know if you find that TelaCroft (talk · contribs) is also a sock. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 07:11, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Hippo43
Hi, I've informed Kuru as well, so I apologize in advance for what might be perceived as WP:Forum shopping... just wanted to let you know that he's back to his old ways, jsut check List of common misconceptions. Thanks in advance. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 20:11, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- I've replied to this on Kuru's talk page. --hippo43 (talk) 00:05, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Jesus Never Existed button, the Christ myth theory article, and fair use
Hi Fastily,
Obviously I'd like to keep the picture of the button, but I certainly understand your concerns. I think it would be helpful to reproduce the email corrspondense I had with the Louisville Atheists and Freethinkers who are selling the button in question.
- Hi,
- I was wondering if you'd allow one of your photos to be included in Wikipedia. Since your organization's name appears in the picture, allowing Wikipedia to use the image will increase your group's visibility. If you'd like to agree to the photo's inclusion in the project, please reply to this email with the form below completed. That's all it takes.
- Sincerely,
- Eugene
- I also got that image from someone else.... I cannot for the life of me remember their e-mail either. I found the image and asked if we could use it for our group since we're not selling it for profit and only using it for our own private group's use they agreed.... I cannot give permission to Eugene and it was so long ago I cannot remember where I found that image nor the person I contacted for permission.
- Sorry.
- Dana
- Hi,
- Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. I understand that you don't remember who you initially obtained the image from. But, I'm not sure that really matters. I'm not interested in putting the logo on Wikipedia by itself (cropped of the context), I'm interested in the complete picture of the 3.5" button with the LAF subtitle and everything, which I assume you control. Would you be okay with me putting this complete image on Wikipedia? If so, please just reply back with the form below filled out.
- Sincerely,
- Eugene
- If you want to use the image I can't stop you from fair use (Fair Use Copyright Law), but nor can I sign your release I am not the copyright holder. I am not the original artist. As an artist myself normally I'd be able to sign this, this is one of the few images I also had to request the use of the image myself. The only thing I added to this image was the name of our local organization for the buttons and t-shirts for our members. That's hardly a copyright.
- I cannot in good conscience sign this form, I own no legal rights to that image.
- Thank You,
- Dana Armstrong
The group's representative says that she recieved permission to use a graphic which she then utilized in a derivative work, the button. She then states that we can use a picture of her derivative work under Fair Use copyright exemptions. I then went further and cut the resolution from 400x400 to 200x200 so further derivative works based on the wikipedia file would be unlikely (it's included in the Christ myth article at 170x170 and I'd be happy to edit the source file down to that lower resolution if it would help matters).
As for the picture failing Criterion 8, well, I grant that the article wouldn't be incomprehensible without the picture. But, then again, most movie articles wouldn't be incomprehensible without fair use inclusion of copyrighted movie posters. In both cases though the articles' aesthetic value and accessability are greatly increased by the inclusion of these files. What do you think?Eugeneacurry (talk) 21:03, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- Well, nothing should be added to wikipedia for the purpose of "putting it on the map". It shouldn't touch the site until it is firmly anchored on said map. --King Öomie 21:30, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- The picture isn't included for the sake of putting LAF "on the map". It's included to illustrate the Christ myth theory article. I mentioned the potential for greater visibility in the hopes that that would persuade that LAF to grant me permission to use the image. Eugeneacurry (talk) 00:31, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
File:EnidBandPic.jpg listed for deletion
I am sorry for the late notice, but I just realized that you should have informed the image being put up for deletion since you deleted the image after the disputed fair use rationale expired and then reverted that deletion. Your opinion in the matter would be helpful at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 January 13#File:EnidBandPic.jpg. Aspects (talk) 00:59, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Non Free Images in you User Space
Hey there Fastily, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot alerting you that Non-free images are not allowed in the user-space. I removed some that I found on User talk:Fastily/Archive 2. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use images to your user-space drafts. Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 01:30, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hey Fastly, I used you as my test subject. Hope you didn't mind. Give any feedback at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/DASHBot_5 if you like. : ) Tim1357 (talk) 01:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
I have uploaded this image, along with two others as screenshots.
I have said where it came from, the purpose of its upload and the article for which it is intended.
The upload page specifically stated that, screenshots, uploaded for the purpose of illustrating a point, were permissable.
Please clarify what you mean by This image or media does not have information on its copyright status.
Please clarify which further information will be required. I will be most happy to conform to any regulations. surfingus (talk) 02:15, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for the clarification.
Have added the appropriate box. Will do the same with the other two images.
Thanks again. surfingus (talk) 12:13, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Hey could you restore this image? I wasn't notified at all of the CSD tag, and would have added a rationale had I been notified. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:27, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi King of Hearts. Ah, my bad. I frequently tag a large volume of files with twinkle, but it does happen that sometimes users aren't notified; sorry for the inconvenience. As for restoring the file, well, to be frank, I'm not particularly inclined to do so. Apart from missing fair use rationale, the file is improperly licensed ({{Non-free web screenshot}} only applies to full screenshots of website, not images/media found on websites), and fails WP:NFCC#8). I would restore the file if I could, but it violates many image usage policies... Sorry, FASTILY (TALK) 04:17, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks!
Just wanted to thank you quickly for rollback privs. :) -Tanner (talk) 03:48, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
64.228.131.129 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
I was wondering why do you think their edits are vandalism? Materialscientist (talk) 04:47, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Vandalism after final warning: [31] -FASTILY (TALK) 04:48, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Never mind. I've looked through their contribs again and though they looked good, they might indeed be vandalism. Happy editing. Materialscientist (talk) 04:58, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
File:Guides1-4.jpg
I see in my watchlist that File:Guides4.jpg, File:Guides3.jpg, File:Guides2.jpg, and File:Guides1.jpg were deleted but they are still there. Could you verify?--RadioFan (talk) 17:11, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
I believe you just blocked a sock (of a blocked SPA)
I see you blocked Special:Contributions/CaptainPickles
I've been watching Special:Contributions/CaptainPickles since it appeared on Roman Polanski behaving in the style of the SPA User:Tombaker321
FYI: The SPA User:Tombaker321 was recently given a 3-day block (after a spree of venue shouting), so the burst of activity on CaptainPickles would not be surprising.
While your indef blocking of CaptainPickles certainly handled that account, is it true that if it was a sock of Tombaker321 that would still be a serious matter (of block evasion)?
Excuse my ill-informed questions, I have not dealt with the sock issue before (although I did help block a dynamic ip a couple of times). To be more specific, how much proof do I need to request a checkuser in this matter. (Note: I also believe there is one other sock, but let's start with this case) Thanks.
-- Proofreader77 (interact) 03:46, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I think you may be right - there is a degree of similarity between the users' edits. To open up a sockpuppet investigation case, you can have as little evidence as WP:DUCK or as much as a detailed diff by diff comparison between the edits of the suspected sock{s). If you believe that the accounts all belong to one person, then I strongly encourage you file a SPI case. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:56, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you for the quick response. I assume if it is perceived that I haven't brought enough information, the result will simply be a decline (rather than, e.g., forcing me to wash my mouth out with soap? LoL) Proofreader77 (interact) 04:00, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Barb Morrison photo
Hello Fastily. Nice to meet you! As mentioned on my talk page, I'll read the specifics of free licensing the photo carefully, and will have the original creator/owner (and in this case, also the subject) of the picture send that email to wikipedia.org as you mention. Thank you Fastily! -- User:RyanFreisling @ 07:22, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Image source
Fastily:
No doubt, it's important to keep to Wikipedia's stringent image use stipulations. The image in question, however, was taken from a well-known Argentine newsmagazine, and first published in its April 1965 issue (source provided in description). Per Argentine copyright law, images published at least 20 years ago can't be copyrighted, particularly when they deal with public figures.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Kindly,
Sherlock4000 (talk) 07:30, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Uploads
Message received. I was cleaning up the last one when you beat me to it. I could tell you the reason for the repeated/redundant templates, but I'm on Drama-out now, and it involves drama ;) Otis Criblecoblis (talk) 07:32, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Community de-Adminship - finalization poll for the CDA proposal
After tolling up the votes in the revision proposals, it emerged that 5.4 had the most support, but elements of that support remained unclear, and various comments throughout the polls needed consideration.
A finalisation poll (intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to;
- gather opinion on the 'consensus margin' (what percentages, if any, have the most support) and
- ascertain whether there is support for a 'two-phase' poll at the eventual RfC (not far off now), where CDA will finally be put to the community. Matt Lewis (talk) 01:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Copyright on uploaded pictures
Hello Fastily,
I got a message from you (link) regarding the copyright status on the pictures I am uploading. Can you please let me know which pictures do you mean, so that I can do the corrective actions ? I am still quite new on Wikipedia and want to keep the rules and do a good job here, so your advice is very much appreciated !
Thanks, Tomiwoj (talk) 12:31, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Community de-Adminship - finalization poll for the CDA proposal
You are recieving this notice as you have participated in the Admin Recall discussion pages.
A poll was held on fourteen proposals, and closed on 16th November 2009. Only one proposal gained majority support - community de-adminship - and this proposal is now being finessed into a draft RFC Wikipedia talk:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC, which, if adopted, will create a new process.
After tolling up the votes within the revision proposals for CDA, it emerged that proposal 5.4 had the most support, but elements of that support remained unclear, and various comments throughout the polls needed consideration.
A finalisation poll (intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to;
- gather opinion on the 'consensus margin' (what percentages, if any, have the most support) and
- ascertain whether there is support for a 'two-phase' poll at the eventual RfC (not far off now), where CDA will finally be put to the community. Matt Lewis (talk) 01:42, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
File:PapeeteDestroyed.jpg
You state that there is no source information listed for this photograph, but it is indeed listed as being from American Forestry Magazine. XavierGreen (talk) 21:26, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Where can i find this mystical biblo format that you speak of?XavierGreen (talk) 22:10, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- [32] -FASTILY (TALK) 22:12, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- That link has nothing to do with wikipedia formatting. Ive cited it as one would a source within an article, though ive never seen or heard of anyone doing such a thing before.XavierGreen (talk) 22:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- [32] -FASTILY (TALK) 22:12, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
your warning
Noted: I'm familiar with the policies. I have adhered with guidelines. I am writing about an artist.
RE: == January 2010 ==
If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
- editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
- participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
- linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.
For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:22, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
William Woodward (preservationist,_artist)
Dear Fastily, You deleted an image I recently created on William Woodward. I have the rights to the picture. Why has it been deleted. Quazar121 (talk) 21:33, 18 January 2010 (UTC)quazar121
- Hello. I deleted your uploads because when you uploaded the files, you indicated that they were only to be used on Wikipedia. However, please be note that any free files considered free enough for use on Wikipedia must allow commercial use and derivatives; media that places limits on commercial use and derivatives may be deleted on-spot. -FASTILY (TALK) 04:19, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Deletion notices
All my images come from eBay, postcards advertised for auction. They all pre-date 1923, so there is no problem with copyright. Please be aware that I am not a newbie, and am conscientious about what I upload. Regards. --Hugh Manatee (talk) 21:45, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Images copyright
Hello Fastily,
I have corrected copyright info on this image File:Decalogue_dwa.jpg. Can you please confirm if it is OK or not before I start doing the same on the other ones ?
Thanks Tomiwoj
- File:Decalogue dwa.jpg appears to be taken from a copyrighted TV show, not a copyrighted film. Please use the appropriate license tag (see WP:ICT/All for a list). -FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:41, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Are you really trying to claim that any Wikipedia content can be copied anywhere without attribution? Woogee (talk) 00:05, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
COI problems
Fastily, in reading through the information and guidelines you sent to me I still have questions.
In part I found the following:
If you do write an article on an area in which you are personally involved, be sure to write in a neutral tone and cite reliable, third-party published sources, and beware of unintentional bias. Neutral point of view is one of Wikipedia's five pillars.
My claim that this article should be legitimately allowed are:
- 1. I wrote the article in a neutral point of view.
- 2. I used only facts that were independently verifiable.
- 3. There was no original research.
- 4. All information was gathered from editorial sources.
- 5. There were no links to outside non-editorial content.
- 6. The notability criteria for Wikipedia inclusion had been met.
- 7. The article does not refer to, promote or otherwise advertise the author.
The guidelines for which you sent me links noted that writing about something one is connected to is "Discouraged" not "Forbidden", and it went further to say that if the above guidelines were adhered to an article could be written and included in the Wikipedia.
I am affiliated to a degree with the subject of the article (L. Cedeño), but not to a degree to which I want to promote his work. I think the notability of the artist in question ads to the quality of the music entries on Wikipedia and I believe the article will expand due to the fact that the artist is involved with other notable projects.
I did take the photo. I also altered it for the record label which L. Cedeño owns and the image I created was used for the album cover. I receive no remuneration for the article nor do I use it for gratuitous promotion. Originally the artist did not ask me to write this article. During the course of the discussion about the article I have been in contact with him and today while going over the issues at hand he entered information through my account that we both thought would alleviate the questions. It would appear that the information (permission to use a photo) created more confusion as it now seems the community believes I am the author and the subject. This is not the case.
Is there a way through this that you can prescribe so that this artist and the album can be included in the Wikipedia?
Thanks.
Etrangere (talk) 01:26, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Mystified
Are you talking to me. Do you think I have "vandalized Wikipedia" with "destructive edits." Konformist Stanford '67 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Konformist (talk • contribs) 03:27, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Request to Restore Deleted Image
Your bot deleted image file File:AFFSC 01a.jpg because it lacked necessary licensing info. That image was originally uploaded with all required licensing info. In fact, it's Public Domain image from U.S. Air Force—photo 070914-F-8155K-282.jpg. Don’t know what happened to Wiki-image page to remove licensing info, but it was probably some kind of vandalism. Can you please restore image. I'll be glad to add back licensing info, but it would be easier to do that from original image page vs uploading entire file again. This is second time I've made this request.--Orygun (talk) 19:29, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, I deleted the file because it had no source (i.e. Lack of licensing information). Can you provide a external link where the file may be found? I will restore the file if you can. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:02, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, it's in text above—i.e. it's Public Domain image from U.S. Air Force (photo: 070914-F-8155K-282.jpg) at http://www.af.mil/photos/media_search.asp?q=wynne&page=8. Photo shows Secretary of the Air Force passing flag to new commander of Air Force Financial Services Center.--Orygun (talk) 04:43, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded Photo File:Cheetah & Cubs Lying on Rock.jpg
Hi Fastily, I'm not sure what I have to do here. I thought I had all the information I needed. I'm pretty frustrated, I read and tried to understand what info was needed this past weekend, it seems like for hours. File:Cheetah & Cubs Lying on Rock.jpg, fair use rationale. Can you please help me out? Thank you.Thisandthem (talk) 00:09, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
- Certainly. I'm sorry you found the image uploading process frustrating. Before I can do anything to help however, could you please specify what kind of image this is, where it is from (source), and the purpose it will serve on Wikipedia? -FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:25, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
- You're making a fair use claim for an image of a Nick Brandt photograph? It seems completely unlikely that wikipedia can claim fair use of a living artist's photographic work in an article about the photographer. I suggest it be speedied for copyvio immediately. Just my opinion. --IP69.226.103.13 | Talk about me. 00:36, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
- Well its from Nick Brandt, which he sent an email to permissions that he is the copyright owner, and I thought I read that if the photo helps to show what was written about the book, I could use the fair use, non-free context. That is what Nick wanted to use for his photo, in order for me to use it in his article. So does that help? Thisandthem (talk) 01:03, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
- If he sent an email to permissions stating it could be used, then it's not fair use, non-free content. Fair use, non-free use is for usually small images of things like a corporate logo that are used without permission. What is needed is to tell exactly what permission Brandt gave in his email for the use of this image on wikipedia. In addition it has to be clear: his permission, and who took the image of the poster (I don't remember if it said). Fastily should be able to clear this up, and if he can't, he can send you somewhere that it can be cleared up. The problem is, the non-free use permission attached to the photo isn't the same as Brandt giving permission for it to be used.
- Take a breather, someone will figure out the correct way to use it properly with Brandt's permission, although it may take a little time to get it correct. --IP69.226.103.13 | Talk about me. 01:13, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
- I was hoping to upload the photo's mentioned in the article as a thumbnail photo, describing it like this.(His work is a combination of epic panoramas of animals within dramatic landscapes (Hippos on the Mara River, Masai Mara, 2006; Cheetah & Cubs Lying on Rock, Serengeti)then inserting the photo there. Where should I go from here? Should I contact Nick again? Not sure what to ask. I really appreciated the "take a breather" needed that.:=)Thisandthem (talk) 20:08, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
- Check out WP:COPYREQ for instructions. It gives a fairly decent step-by-step of how to obtain the proper permission and the best way to request it. If you are confused or are in need of assistance, please don't hesitate to ask. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:24, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
- I was hoping to upload the photo's mentioned in the article as a thumbnail photo, describing it like this.(His work is a combination of epic panoramas of animals within dramatic landscapes (Hippos on the Mara River, Masai Mara, 2006; Cheetah & Cubs Lying on Rock, Serengeti)then inserting the photo there. Where should I go from here? Should I contact Nick again? Not sure what to ask. I really appreciated the "take a breather" needed that.:=)Thisandthem (talk) 20:08, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
- Well its from Nick Brandt, which he sent an email to permissions that he is the copyright owner, and I thought I read that if the photo helps to show what was written about the book, I could use the fair use, non-free context. That is what Nick wanted to use for his photo, in order for me to use it in his article. So does that help? Thisandthem (talk) 01:03, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
- You're making a fair use claim for an image of a Nick Brandt photograph? It seems completely unlikely that wikipedia can claim fair use of a living artist's photographic work in an article about the photographer. I suggest it be speedied for copyvio immediately. Just my opinion. --IP69.226.103.13 | Talk about me. 00:36, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Goedel photo
I see you deleted File:Kurt Gödel.jpg on the grounds that it had no fair-use rationale. Probably this was the correct action, technically. But surely the rationale is routine — the man is dead; there's no way to get a free-licensed shot of him now. Can we undelete and add the rationale? --Trovatore (talk) 08:46, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I don't think undeleting will be necessary however. It seems there is a free version available, see Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 January 11#File:Kurt Gödel.jpg. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:27, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Claim of vandalism against user C.Kent87
I would like to ask you take a look at user user:C.Kent87's activities on the Mestizo page (the point is taken as far as me and "personal attacks"). User C.Kent87 has twice deleted an entire section of academic references in the "Criticisms" section because he doesn't agree with them on a personal level. This compromises Wikipedia's integrity because it is blatant censorship-by-deletion. In speaking with him, he made it abundantly clear that he identifies with the Spanish racial caste system ideology. To me that is fine. But he has no right to wholesale delete other people's work, especially if it is academic in nature and with references. To me, this constitutes vandalism. He made no effort to discuss the issue in the Discussion page prior to such deletions. As an aside, the "mestizo" race label in question is not an official Census term and has been thoroughly discredited by biologists, anthropologists, sociologists, et. al. So it isn't like we are talking about the Periodic Table here. Such an historical ideology should be open to academic information that is critical of the tenets it has professed (i.e. the supposed "racial purity" of the Spanish race). I find user C.Kent87's attempts to feign innocence interesting, considering that his biggest contributions thus far to the article have been to delete other people's work. By contrast, I do not take such a scorched-earth approach to content that I do not agree with, and I have left intact the great bulk of the article, opting to instead add a "Criticisms" section. Say what you will about my personal attacks "off stage", but I do not engage in censorship-by-deletion. It bears repeating once again that the article in question is not a scientific certitude. It is a 16th century "racial purity" ideology. It needs to be explained, not censored. Dropmeoff (talk) 15:23, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
- It looks like both you and C.Kent87 are engaged in an edit-war on Mestizo. Please move the dispute to the talk page or I'm afraid I'll have to block :( -FASTILY (TALK) 00:44, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
"Freedom of panorama" and medieval Georgian churches
Hello Fastily, I'm a bit astonished at what you did at File:Ikorta church.JPG ([33]) and in a few parallel cases. The lack of FoP in those countries obviously comes into play only with modern building, where the architectonic design is still copyrighted. Historic buildings like these medieval ones are of course free to take photographs of, and thus the images are easily replaceable. Besides, even if the buildings were copyrighted, we would still not accept photographs of them where the photographer's part of the copyright is non-free; they would be replaceable with images where the photographer has released their work as free, even if we'd still have to invoke FU on the architect's part of the copyright.
Would you mind me doing the deletions now, or would you do them yourself? The case seems, frankly, quite clear to me. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:13, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
- Another thing where we might need some clarification of policy just occurred to me on looking at a few of your recent contribs: you de-speedied a number of images like File:Alando.jpg, removing them from F9 (blatant copyvio, instant deletion) and instead sorted them under F4 (lack of licensing info, with waiting period). These were images where the uploader had not provided any info at all, but a later image patroller had found the source and unambiguously identified a copyvio. Now, I can see your point why under a literal reading of F9 as it stands these don't fall under F9 (images "that are claimed by the uploader to be images with free licenses when this is obviously not the case") – but they don't actually fall under F4 either. F4 is for images where we genuinely lack the information, and the waiting time is to give a chance to fill that information in. In these cases, we actually do know the copyright status; we already know it's a copyvio (except if the uploader turns out to be the owner of Getty Images), so why wait? These should most certainly be deleted, especially with high-profile commercial sources where we are really putting ourselves in danger by keeping them, and I think that's always been the predominant practice (certainly what I've been doing). The text of F9 just doesn't make much sense here. In fact, the paraphrase of F9 on the {{db-imagevio}} tag makes much more sense: instead of "images that are claimed by the uploader to be images with free licenses when this is obviously not the case", it says "copied from [...] and there is no credible assertion that [...]" (i.e. that it has an acceptable status). The point is that there is "no credible assertion", not that there is an assertion but it's wrong. How about we propose a clarification at WP:CSD? Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:43, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Future Perfect at Sunrise. Thanks for your message. In regards to File:Ikorta church.JPG and it's relevant cases, please carefully read the text at Commons:Commons:FOP#Former Soviet Union. As you can see there is no free Freedom of Panorama that is free enough for Wikipedia. Georgia restricts FOP to non-commercial images only; per WP:CSD#F3, any 'free' files uploaded as no commercial use are to be speedied on-spot. Hence, the only images we can actually use from Georgia are non-free files. If you don't like this non-commercial policy, you are free to make that suggestion to someone who actually has power over Wikipedia's licensing. As for my speedy deletion declines, please be aware that my administrative philosophy is AGF, (forgive my language) not shoot-first-oh-shit-check-later; I was never a big believer in WP:IAR to begin with. Sure, the files are probably not suitable for Wikipedia, but they are not copyvios because the uploader never claimed Public Domain, Creative Commons, GFDL licenses. So I AGF and tag the files with {{subst:nld}}. Is that so wrong? To avoid stepping on toes, not bite newbies, and AGF? Regardless, the files are already tagged to be deleted so it's not like anyone is going to scrutinize us for AGF and not biting newbies. I've been working with images and copyrights for the majority my time on Wikipedia and encountered some very strange situations. Please rest assured, neither of concerns is likely to be an issue. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:05, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hmm. About the FoP thing: I'm afraid your response seems to ignore both of the main points I made initially. I know there is no FoP in Georgia, and I know what consequences that has. But FoP or lack of FoP only ever has any relevance if there is an architectural copyright at stake to begin with. The section at Commons:Commons:FOP you point to obviously needs to be read in the context of that entire page, which makes it quite clear that that is the scope of the whole issue. In the present cases, the image isn't showing any copyrighted object, so the FoP question never comes into play. (It doesn't matter in the present case, but you also didn't respond to the second issue, the choice between a "non-free photograph of a non-free object" and a "free photograph of a non-free object"). – I'm not sure about how to proceed now, since this whole matter still seems blindingly obvious to me. If you don't mind, I could of course nominate one or two of them at FfD to get the opinions of others. – About the other thing, we can agree to disagree, but I still find your argumentation problematic: "they are not copyvios because the uploader never claimed Public Domain, Creative Commons, GFDL licenses" – that's a non sequitur. Being or not being a copyvio has in fact nothing to do with what the uploader has claimed; it's an objective fact to be judged according to what we know about the image. If we know it's from a non-free copyrighted source, and there's not a snowball's chance in hell any wikipedian could have a realistic claim to owning the copyrights, then of course it is a copyvio, and nothing the uploader has or hasn't claimed or might yet claim could change that. I do see a danger in not acting rapidly here, since we are in fact "stepping on somebody's toes": on the economic interests of the copyright owners. And in these cases, the copyright owners are in fact powerful organisations that could sue us into oblivion if they heard we don't honour our legal obligation of removing copyvios immediately but instead systematically wait a week. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:51, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
- Ummmmm....I disagree with pretty much everything you just said. I simply cited policy with no interpretations - please refrain from interpreting policy and my words. If you don't like my methods (you're actually the first to complain) well there's really nothing I can do about that. Regardless, they won't be any more detrimental to the project than BLP vandalism that gains publicity. If you want to make interpretations of policy and IAR, I kindly request you not do it here. Like I said, if you don't like Wikipedia's WP:IUP policies, please feel free to suggest changes at the relevant noticeboards. Good day. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:26, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
- There can be no question about me "not liking WP:IUP policies", and, honestly, I'd appreciate if you wouldn't make such inferences. I thought we were having a friendly collegial discussion here. Anyway, I have put up File:Ikorta church.JPG at FFD to get this FoP thing clarified, and I have also made an edit [34] to the Commons page which I think should clarify the misunderstanding -- people over there will revert it if they disagree. As for the F4 vs F9 issue, as I said, I acknowledge that your practice is in line with a literal reading of CSD F9 (though not with that of F4, and in my opinion not with the spirit of either), and I intend to get that clarified at WT:CSD. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:58, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
- Update: you may want to comment at WT:CSD#F9 vs. F4. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:18, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
- There can be no question about me "not liking WP:IUP policies", and, honestly, I'd appreciate if you wouldn't make such inferences. I thought we were having a friendly collegial discussion here. Anyway, I have put up File:Ikorta church.JPG at FFD to get this FoP thing clarified, and I have also made an edit [34] to the Commons page which I think should clarify the misunderstanding -- people over there will revert it if they disagree. As for the F4 vs F9 issue, as I said, I acknowledge that your practice is in line with a literal reading of CSD F9 (though not with that of F4, and in my opinion not with the spirit of either), and I intend to get that clarified at WT:CSD. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:58, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
- Ummmmm....I disagree with pretty much everything you just said. I simply cited policy with no interpretations - please refrain from interpreting policy and my words. If you don't like my methods (you're actually the first to complain) well there's really nothing I can do about that. Regardless, they won't be any more detrimental to the project than BLP vandalism that gains publicity. If you want to make interpretations of policy and IAR, I kindly request you not do it here. Like I said, if you don't like Wikipedia's WP:IUP policies, please feel free to suggest changes at the relevant noticeboards. Good day. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:26, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hmm. About the FoP thing: I'm afraid your response seems to ignore both of the main points I made initially. I know there is no FoP in Georgia, and I know what consequences that has. But FoP or lack of FoP only ever has any relevance if there is an architectural copyright at stake to begin with. The section at Commons:Commons:FOP you point to obviously needs to be read in the context of that entire page, which makes it quite clear that that is the scope of the whole issue. In the present cases, the image isn't showing any copyrighted object, so the FoP question never comes into play. (It doesn't matter in the present case, but you also didn't respond to the second issue, the choice between a "non-free photograph of a non-free object" and a "free photograph of a non-free object"). – I'm not sure about how to proceed now, since this whole matter still seems blindingly obvious to me. If you don't mind, I could of course nominate one or two of them at FfD to get the opinions of others. – About the other thing, we can agree to disagree, but I still find your argumentation problematic: "they are not copyvios because the uploader never claimed Public Domain, Creative Commons, GFDL licenses" – that's a non sequitur. Being or not being a copyvio has in fact nothing to do with what the uploader has claimed; it's an objective fact to be judged according to what we know about the image. If we know it's from a non-free copyrighted source, and there's not a snowball's chance in hell any wikipedian could have a realistic claim to owning the copyrights, then of course it is a copyvio, and nothing the uploader has or hasn't claimed or might yet claim could change that. I do see a danger in not acting rapidly here, since we are in fact "stepping on somebody's toes": on the economic interests of the copyright owners. And in these cases, the copyright owners are in fact powerful organisations that could sue us into oblivion if they heard we don't honour our legal obligation of removing copyvios immediately but instead systematically wait a week. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:51, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Future Perfect at Sunrise. Thanks for your message. In regards to File:Ikorta church.JPG and it's relevant cases, please carefully read the text at Commons:Commons:FOP#Former Soviet Union. As you can see there is no free Freedom of Panorama that is free enough for Wikipedia. Georgia restricts FOP to non-commercial images only; per WP:CSD#F3, any 'free' files uploaded as no commercial use are to be speedied on-spot. Hence, the only images we can actually use from Georgia are non-free files. If you don't like this non-commercial policy, you are free to make that suggestion to someone who actually has power over Wikipedia's licensing. As for my speedy deletion declines, please be aware that my administrative philosophy is AGF, (forgive my language) not shoot-first-oh-shit-check-later; I was never a big believer in WP:IAR to begin with. Sure, the files are probably not suitable for Wikipedia, but they are not copyvios because the uploader never claimed Public Domain, Creative Commons, GFDL licenses. So I AGF and tag the files with {{subst:nld}}. Is that so wrong? To avoid stepping on toes, not bite newbies, and AGF? Regardless, the files are already tagged to be deleted so it's not like anyone is going to scrutinize us for AGF and not biting newbies. I've been working with images and copyrights for the majority my time on Wikipedia and encountered some very strange situations. Please rest assured, neither of concerns is likely to be an issue. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:05, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
External links
Please reconsider your deletion. If you give me a little time, I will improve and add links to appropriate citations in other reference works to this on-line community, and it's newsworthiness.
thanks Jim
J (talk) 00:08, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Adding timestamp. -FASTILY (TALK) 08:07, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
unblock on hold, your input would be most appreciated
User talk:Wx5uuh. He's using the "little brother defense" but he may actually be telling the truth. I'm also a bit puzzled by the block reasoning, so any light you could shed on the situation would be helpful. Thanks. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:13, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
- I blocked Wx5uuh (talk · contribs) per this as there was a recent report made at WP:AIV (reported by an established user - "Legendary" something...) regarding vandalism and suspected socking of this user. Likewise, I blocked 208.114.43.98 (talk · contribs) and Zanyzenman (talk · contribs), mainly per WP:DUCK if you will. I'll admit though, the justification may have been a little shaky; if you'd like to unblock, you're certainly welcome to, but please not before carefully reviewing the situation. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:21, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
- Judging by his pattern it seems his version of events may in fact be true. I went ahead and did an AGF unblock, I hope I don't end up regretting it... Beeblebrox (talk) 01:56, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
I am urging you to intervene... please, this has gone way too far. At least two other editors have grown tired of hippo43's incessant disruptions. I have done more than enough, I seriously believe that my cointributions are valid and do not contradict the WP guidelines, in spite of hippo's endless efforts to hinder my work. I await your sincere response – thank you very much in advance. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 06:00, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
You tagged it, (and correctly) for lack of license. I've added one, and since I'm for lack of better words new to images, can you please check it and make sure I did it right? Regards, NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 06:25, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 07:18, 20 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Kerαunoςcopia◁talk 07:18, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
23:33, 19 January 2010 Fastily (talk | contribs) deleted "Expressions Holidays" (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)
Hi Fastily
I just wanted to discuss the deletion of my article, I think it provides a fair and impartial description of the company and is certainly no more of an advertisement than, for example, Kuoni Travel. In fact it is extremely similar in terms of what information it includes. If there is any text that you believe sounds promotional then perhaps you could edit it rather than delete the whole article. It should not qualify for speedy deletion under G11 as "simply having a company or product as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion."
In terms of notability it is as notable as many of the other companies on Travel agencies and holiday companies of the United Kingdom
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts.
Thanks
Garlandhoff (talk) 11:22, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
erased page
hi, i am wondering why my page, Mayu Alpaca was erased. it says it is an advertisement. how can i make it more "encyclopedic" so it is no longer erased. thank you, kate 201.53.173.171 (talk) 13:21, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Hippo43
I've thrown a last-ditch proposal on his talk page. If he quibbles, then I have no problems moving on to the next step. For the record, I'm not one to whine about wheel-warring; any other administrator is free to undo my actions if they see fit. I would like to see if he bites on this last attempt, however. Kuru (talk) 13:24, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Vandalism accusation and subsequent threat
I do not appreciate this one bit. If you have an issue with something I have posted, you are within your right to change it. But please do not ever accuse me again of vandalism and threaten me with having my account revoked. Thank you. SigKauffman (talk) 14:47, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Yakudza19 still requesting unblock
Hello Fastily. As the blocking admin, do you wish to comment at User talk:Yakudza19#Continuation of unblock review? The issue seems to be, do we trust that Yakudza19's problems with copyright are now in the past? He also had some of his socks blocked due to an SPI, and that needs to be weighed. One thing that could use your comment is why he is blocked for vandalism. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:46, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi EdJohnston. I blocked Yakudza19 for vandalism and disruptive editing. If you have faith in the user and wish to unblock them, please feel free to. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:40, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
I just thought you should know, after some research, I found some interesting information, and as you are involved, I want to make sure that you know, just in case my reply is deleted by the blockee or some other user. Here is my reply. Yak was the one that added the copyrighted line, not other users as they belay. I shall be posting this message to all involved users.— Dædαlus Contribs 02:14, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Unprotect the page you extended the semi-protection of please
Hi, Would you unprotect Timeline of rescue efforts after the 2010 Haiti earthquake? There is potential for significant contribution from IP users and related articles suffering similar co-ordinated vandal attacks were typically protected for hours, as this was orginally. Thanks --Pontificalibus (talk) 23:53, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Alexander Scherbakov Deletion
Hello Fastily, please explain why you think you should be deleting peoples work just like that. Articles are not created in a matter of seconds and reading and studying the guidelines and pages of texts takes some time too. This information was requested by many people around the world and is not an advertisement of any kind. I kindly ask you to put it back or give me a good and clear answer as to why you deleted it. Please see an article about Konstantin Scherbakov (father of Alexander Scherbakov) on Wikipedia. Who are you and people like you to decide which of these artists "deserves" to be on Wikipedia and which one not? Are you a classical music critic? Have you personally attended the concerts of either artist to decide that AS is not worthy of a page on Wikipedia when KS is?
It is not correct or acceptable. All best, Thomas Siamarts (talk) 00:09, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
SYS_logo.png
I see that image was deleted, with a previous advice of 5 days. I dont use wiki often, so that I didn't see the advice before. The image is a simple logo for the no-comercial SYS Linux distribution , which had today a new 'little' release , so I saw the logo missing when I updated the wiki page. The logo I, Werner Landgraf, founder of the SYS distro, hand-drawed using open office. The image is not of any copyright relevance and is put in public domain, since long time it's also on the SYS mirrors and install DVD, a link to one of them f.ex. here: ftp://ftp5.gwdg.de/pub/linux/install/sys/SYS.jpg ftp://ftp5.gwdg.de/pub/linux/install/sys/SYS_50.png It would be nice to restore the logo, what was also linked to the SYS wiki page. All linux distros have a snapshot and their logo in their wiki page. werner landgraf —Preceding unsigned comment added by SYS-Linux (talk • contribs) 05:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Block request for User:Konformist
This user is not discussing anything. I've tried to engage on his talkpage and through edit summaries. Can you block until he can staqrt discussing things? Hard to communicate what needs to be changed when they either are ignoring me or don't know how...Hell In A Bucket (talk) 19:42, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Atlassian
I don't think this article falls under unambiguous advertising, I was surprised to see its deletion on my watchlist. I would like to restore the article and source it better, it is certainly a notable organisation well known among software developers. Fences&Windows 20:27, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of File:InterContinental Hotel Providence.jpg
Hello; you recently deleted File:InterContinental Hotel Providence.jpg, stating that it violated a fair use claim. Can you please explain the reasoning? After the image was proposed for deletion, I clearly restated its fair use rationale and started a discussion on the talk page. The image was of a proposed building, so it was irreplaceable; obviously a free image is unavailable at this time. This was explained in the fair use rationale and on the talk page. Thanks and cheers, Rai•me 03:52, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- File:InterContinental Hotel Providence.jpg restored. Be sure to upload a free version once construction is complete. -FASTILY (TALK) 06:16, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 04:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 04:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
images of Donald Braswell II
Hi, I had 3 images removed today for missing evidence of license:
- Donald Braswell and Anthony Bazzani.JPG
- Donald Braswell in his thirties.jpg
- Donald Braswell at age 7.jpg
The publicity manager for Donald Braswell sent in the permission emails last night (January 20) before the deadline (21st). I would like to know why they were deleted. Thank you. Lucia medea (talk) 04:46, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Autoreviewer
I just wanted to say thanks to you! I know that Autoreviewer is not much, but it is quite a honnor! Thank you very much! :) All best, --Tadija (talk) 10:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
SYS_logo.png
This yesterday was put in your archive, but isnt yet resolved so I put here a copy
SYS_logo.png I see that image was deleted, with a previous advice of 5 days. I dont use wiki often, so that I didn't see the advice before. The image is a simple logo for the no-comercial SYS Linux distribution , which had today a new 'little' release , so I saw the logo missing when I updated the wiki page. The logo I, Werner Landgraf, founder of the SYS distro, hand-drawed using open office. The image is not of any copyright relevance and is put in public domain, since long time it's also on the SYS mirrors and install DVD, a link to one of them f.ex. here: ftp://ftp5.gwdg.de/pub/linux/install/sys/SYS.jpg ftp://ftp5.gwdg.de/pub/linux/install/sys/SYS_50.png It would be nice to restore the logo, what was also linked to the SYS wiki page. All linux distros have a snapshot and their logo in their wiki page. werner landgraf —Preceding unsigned comment added by SYS-Linux (talk • contribs) 05:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by SYS-Linux (talk • contribs)
Skycable article vandalized again
Hello
Can you block this user Sammuel458 who vandalize articles like SkyCable who insert wrong information about Future Channel section which is false information and truly speculation stories that it may might be true, but its not at all. SkyCable does not announce any Future Channels post on wikipedia to protect the dignity of the said cable company.
Not only once but three times vandalize the SkyCable article. Please help Im begging you. There is a possible suspect that was another sockpuppet of Gerald Gonzalez again who previously vandalize article like SkyCable, Cignal Digital TV and even Angel Locsin. Honestly I'm not the one who I vandalize SkyCable except user Sammuel458 due to undo the article from a sock puppet of Gerald Gonzalez but I rather to removed it which is not true and almost false infomation. Because I'm also the subscriber of the said cable company to prove the evidence from the website with actual references source.
Again, sorry and I apologized, regards - Puppyph (talk • Puppyph) 12:29, 19 January 2010
References
Resveratrol Lozenges
I think you unreasonably deleted the page of “resveratrol lozenges.” That article did not mention any company or brand name. And everything in the article is from reliably sourced references. If you or anyone disagrees with anything of the article, you or anyone can always edit it to make it better. But a deletion of the article is definitely an over reaction. I strongly protest!Pushroll (talk) 23:42, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily, after reading your new comment, I think you have a good point. I'll modify the article and resubmit it. Hope you'll see that it has addressed your concern.Pushroll (talk) 01:34, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
Jumptree
Hello-
You deleted the page I was starting for Jumptree, saying that is was spam or advertising. I followed the format of other software of the same industry such as Basecamp_(software), FogBugz, etc.
Please do consider the criteria.
Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.5.118 (talk) 04:21, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
Image Tag Removal
Please remove the PUF tag for the file at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carma3.jpg that you set up. Please see the notes posted.
I would do it but I don't know what the proper procedure is.
Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by N9jig (talk • contribs) 01:54, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
Never mind, I figured it out...N9jig (talk) 04:43, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Be more careful with speedy deletions
You've deleted File:Hexley.png citing WP:CSD F3: "Improper license". The image was in fact properly tagged as a fair use image, providing a source and a full fair use rationale for the article that it was used on. This was not an image you could speedy delete.
Just because someone has tagged an image for speedy deletion does not mean that you can delete it automatically without checking. Please be more careful.--Anon 05:56, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
- The file was vandalized. Please do not be so quick to accuse or jump to conclusions in the future. -FASTILY (TALK) 06:33, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
undelete
I must have accidentally added the deletion tag to User:Ikip/blp, can you please restore this page? thank you. Thanks also for taking care of housekeeping duties too, I know these actions are necessarily but rarely given the appreciation they deserve.
Thank you. Ikip Frank Andersson (45 revisions restored):an olympic medallist for f**k's sake 08:49, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
Lazard revert]]
I feel my edit to Lizard (comics) was as constructive as any other article that references "Non traditional appearances" of other comic book character. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.205.93.15 (talk) 21:49, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
Rercent edit to Urswick History
I have recently viewed and attemted to edit an article written by Steve Dickinson. You have decided it wasn't constructive? Why? It is a more accurate account of what transpired in this area a few years ago. This man has NO EVIDENCE for his claims.
He has been jailed once already for Fraud or similar, in that case he left adventure tourists around the world without support.
Perhaps you are correct, A warning isn't constructive unless you are attempting to prevent the further perpetration of fraud or the making a mockery of a supposed reputable encyclopaedia. Or at lleast offering an alternative opinion. I thought encyclopaedia's were full of Fact not self-delusion at best, Fraud at worst. I wonder if legally you are complicit in any way, because herein you have been notified but decided not to investigate furtehr-just a thought Have you not noticed he cites his own works continually. Works as i mentioned that have NO PEER REVIEW. It's tending to reinforce one idea by spreading it through the literature without any corroboration. Some poor kids doing their history homework would accept these factoids without question until a generation from now ther was a roman fort at st pat's birthplace, Urswick. If you would like to send me the text i suggested with some specifics on why it is not constructive, or what parts are not constructive, then i can decide how to proceed. Here's a good word-integrity-do wiki have it, or enough of it, to actually investigate entries, particuarly when doubts are raised to their validity.Still, never let the truth get in the way eh?
Dave Coward95.145.103.218 (talk) 22:37, 23 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.145.103.218 (talk) 22:35, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
I notice that you've deleted this file earlier today.
If I remember correctly this was a file, of possibly questionable accuracy, that appeared to be handmade by the uploader; who I think (if I remember correctly, because I can no longer see the page) had released it as PD.
I think actually the article may well be better without it, so I'm not clamouring for its restoration; but I'm curious as to what the "improper license" problem was, that was so unfixable that it had to be immediately deleted? Jheald (talk) 15:44, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
- I'll go ahead and respond, since I'm the one that tagged the image (Fastily performed the actual deletion). The reason I did so was that, while the template license was {{PD-self}}, the uploader also left a comment during upload that "Nuclear Flask wagon internal diagram. Copyright Ryan J Fuller of www.railspot.co.uk - may not be used without permission from the author." He was already asked to clarify this, and did not do so (see User talk:Ryanfuller), so since the uploader tagged it as PD and then left an explicit statement that he was not releasing it as PD, we'd need to have that clarified before it could be used. Seraphimblade Talk to me 04:36, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Abbreviations at FFD
Further to our previous exchange on abbreviations at FFD, there is a discussion at WT:FFD, WT:FFD#Remove_acronym_list_from_edit_notice? to which you might like to contribute your point of view.
FPAS has added a note to the main WP:FFD page [35], to the effect that these acrononyms are now deprecated -- ie to be avoided, if possible.
Just thought you might be interested. Jheald (talk) 15:38, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
deleted page
hi,
You deleted my green office software page. This was in no way meant to be an advertisement. My husband just wrote his MBA thesis paper on this topic. I simply used it when creating the page. The goal of the page is to simply educate people on what green office software is, what the benefits are, and what software solutions currently offer green office solutions.
Again, the page you deleted was "Green Office Software".
I look forward to your reply, Erin Steinman Toronto, On —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.112.55.106 (talk) 03:38, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Fastmail.fm Page deletion
As an IT professional, I would like to state my opinion that the deletion of the page for Fastmail.fm is very unfortunate. The service is not heavily advertised but, among those in the know, is recognized as one of the most robust and feature rich email systems around, and a bigger service than many are aware. See, for instance, the recent slashdot.org article
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/10/03/2131247/Interview-With-Jeremy-Howard-of-FastMailfm?from=rss
I appreciate that the article needed editing to remove some advertising-like content. However, the removal of the article in total was a mistake. --58.8.248.130 (talk) 10:45, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Please reconsider
Hello-
You deleted a stub I was starting for TSPTALK.COM, citing that is was spam or advertising. that is not the case. The website cited meets Wiki criteria for publication. I have drafted a start- so that you may judge for yourself. Here is the text I am trying to begin:
'''TSPTALK'''
TSPTALK is a web communications bulletin board established by former IRS Computer Specialist Tom Crowley. The topic of the board is a discussion group surrouding the investment of Thrift Savings Plan retirement funds by federal workers.
Established in 2004, it became a leading center of investment learning and information for Federal employees, retirees, and military members.<ref>http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1106/110206pb.htm</ref> Federal Employees share discussions of investment strategies, allocation theories, and compete on a member invented tracking listing showing daily returns. TSPTALK.COM first appeared in major Government employee press article in a November 2006 article published in GOVEXEC.COM.<ref>http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1106/110206pb.htm</ref>
Since that time, the number of participants has grown, and people learn differeing investment stypes and strategies. Web tracking shows an average of rougly 9 thousand people a day visit. <ref>http://www.quantcast.com/tsptalk.com</ref>
TSPTALK members are known as TSPTALKERS, and post a wide range of information, everything from investment chart theory, to political commentary.
The website became controversial in 2007 and early 2008, when the FTRIB (Federal Thrift Retirement Investment Board) cited frequent reallocation of savings by members of the group, and issued a ban on trades of more than 2 moves per month. TSPTALK members responded by creating a petion and submitted more than 4,000 signatures opposing the move. <ref>http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0408/042408ar1.htm</ref> However, the Board limited moves despite shareholder opposition, and as a result, issued changed to Federal Regulations.
The site can be found at the web address htp://tsptalk.com[2]
Image
Why did you delete my image File:Fort Lowell Historic District Building.JPG? Please send me a talkback if you reply here-- iBentalk/contribs 03:59, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- Please see WP:NFCC#1. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:59, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- The point is? I created the image...-- iBentalk/contribs 02:32, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- Alright..how about this. If you can explain why a free version of File:Fort Lowell Historic District Building.JPG is unavailable, I'll restore the file for you. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:34, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- If you restore the file, I'd be happy to release it under a different license. If you reply here, please place {{talkback}} on my page.-- iBentalk/contribs 01:10, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
- Which license tag do you wish to use? -FASTILYsock(TALK) 01:18, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
- Perhaps the {{attribution}} or {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}.-- iBentalk/contribsIf you reply here, please place {{talkback}} on my page. 01:21, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
- Which license tag do you wish to use? -FASTILYsock(TALK) 01:18, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
- If you restore the file, I'd be happy to release it under a different license. If you reply here, please place {{talkback}} on my page.-- iBentalk/contribs 01:10, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
- Alright..how about this. If you can explain why a free version of File:Fort Lowell Historic District Building.JPG is unavailable, I'll restore the file for you. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:34, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- The point is? I created the image...-- iBentalk/contribs 02:32, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Found a better one! {{User:IBen/imagetemplate}} which I created. Any suggestions?-- iBentalk/contribsIf you reply here, please place a talkback notification on my page. 04:51, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
- Erm....sorry? -FASTILY (TALK) 06:38, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, that's a {{tlp}} bug. The template is located at User:iBen/imagetemplate. It looks like this:-- iBentalk/contribsIf you reply here, please place a talkback notification on my page. 21:46, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
- Mkay, looks good to me. I have restored File:Fort Lowell Historic District Building.JPG and adjusted the file's description page accordingly. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 08:10, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello Fastily, IBen has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
-- iBentalk/contribsIf you reply here, please place a talkback notification on my page. 01:30, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
IBen has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!
Cookies and a smile!-- iBentalk/contribsIf you reply here, please place a talkback notification on my page. 01:32, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Deletions per "NowCommon"
Hi! Do you remember to check all of that Wikipedia:CSD#F8 before you delete? As you might have noted then the tag was added by a bot and that means that the only check that was done is the one you made. --MGA73 (talk) 21:40, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
- I was beginning to wonder when someone was going to ask. Yes, I do check if the files are actually on Commons by the same name. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:42, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
- That is good. But I think you also have to check if all information is transfered correct and if image is fair use on enwiki if it can really be free on Commons. --MGA73 (talk) 21:49, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
- Dear Fastily, you have to check a lot more before you can delete an image here as F8. If it were this easy we would have a bot do it. Also see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Nowcommons, be careful. multichill (talk) 22:08, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
- That is good. But I think you also have to check if all information is transfered correct and if image is fair use on enwiki if it can really be free on Commons. --MGA73 (talk) 21:49, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
RFA
 | Hello Fastily. You are receiving this notice because you have either supported or posted constructive suggestions during my recent self-nominated RFA, submitted on 18-01-2010. Please do spend a few minutes to read my comments on the nomination, and feel free to respond on the relevant talkpage for any further comments or questions. Thank you for participating. Regards. Rehman(+) 15:11, 25 January 2010 (UTC) |
Anon editor vandalizing Planned Parenthood again.
Same editor, different IP. See this edit [36]. I supposed we could go through the warnings again. Your assistance would be welcome.Mattnad (talk) 16:14, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Never mind. The editor was blocked by another admin. Thanks. Mattnad (talk) 16:39, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Deleted MetaMetrics Page
Hi. You deleted the MetaMetrics page I started due to "Unambiguous advertising or promotion." I am new to Wikipedia-so I am still getting the hang of it. Could you please let me know which part exactly was advertising? Any advice/ suggestions are appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jensmith81 (talk • contribs) 20:46, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- I can't actually see the old article, as the google cache of the article has already expired- but based on what we usually see, it was likely written more like an ad, or a company homepage, outlining the company's achievements, chipper staff, great products, and low, low prices.
- See Microsoft for an example of a well-written, encyclopedic article about a company. --King Öomie 20:55, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
deletion of jchoice
23:16, 25 January 2010 Fastily (talk | contribs) deleted "Jchoice" (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)
i have written a few articles for wikipedia. it is not clear to me why you deleted this latest one. advertising and promotion - there are hundreds of non-profits listed in wikipedia, and ALL of them are about advertising and promotion......it is a shame not to list non-profits so that people can know about them. this new one, jchoice, is very newsworthy and is fast becoming quoted around the internet and in the printed press. not clear why you think it is advertising and not just an article about a non-profit. what's the difference? arnie draiman - (user name soosim) Soosim (talk) 07:38, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Please help with CSD F8
The now commons category is severely backlogged 10000+, please help with the deletions.--IngerAlHaosului (talk) 11:20, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
rfa/abhisjain
In the tally there is this RfA, which was created by this person. Abhisjain is blocked, so should the person who nominated him also be blocked as a likely sock? (Because why else would he even know about abhisjain, let alone start an RfA for him?) -- Soap Talk/Contributions 01:27, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, I just noticed the "he's also my cousin" part. Well, I think the RfA should be deleted at least, since I've seen other RfA's for blocked users be deleted on sight. -- Soap Talk/Contributions 01:28, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Cleaning users rights
Hello Fastily,
When you granted me the Rollbacker role, you asked me to warn you should I no longer wish to use it. That gave me the idea of searching a sample of the account listed as Rollbackers and founded that a significant number of them are no longer in use.
No contribution in months or years :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Celarnor 02:32, 19 March 2009
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Darkspots 20:27, 23 November 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Introductory_adverb_clause 15:54, 9 June 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Doulos_Christos 18:48, 9 March 2009
The four of them are still listed as legitimate Rollbackers.
Should their privilege be removed ?
I can search the list and return you all of them over a certain threshold (inactive for 9 months or +). I can do it with simple shell scripts and do not have to search them manually.
If you think that would be a good thing, I will do it. Otherwise, I will limit my cleaning effort to articles.
Regards,
Heracles31 (talk) 03:43, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Heracles31. Thanks for your interest. There currently isn't a policy in place that dictates that inactive accounts with the rollback right should have that right removed. Although removing the right from inactive users would certainly help to clean up the Special:Statistics list, from a maintenance standpoint, it really isn't required at this point. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:53, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Copyrighted elements?
I see you've removed "copyrighted elements" of my image of Google Chrome 4. Those elements, are according to you, the buttons in the title bar of any Windows screen. However, haven't you noticed that all other images have those things? And there's no problem with it. --WKMN? Later [ Let's talk ] 22:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
- I'd really appreciate it if you could help me crop to those out. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:01, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
- Really? They're not allowed? But they're in thousands of articles! --WKMN? Later [ Let's talk ] 23:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Clearing up copyright before nom @ WP:FSC
I know you are a picture person, but maybe you know enough about copyright to help clarify this. I ran across File:Ussrgymn.ogg. Then i talked to zscout370 (talk · contribs) who is a contributor over at http://www.hymn.ru and had a high quality recording of two versions of the anthem. Both are featured quality over on commons, and one could probably be featured over here. However, we are not sure how the licence tag Template:PD-RU-exempt fits in. It excludes the anthem from copyright, but it is a recording on a CD. We don't want to upload to commons if it in fact does not meet these criteria. What is your take? Best Regards, NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 04:54, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi NativeForeigner. Well, if the anthem is in the Public Domain to begin with, then there is no way a record company or individual band/artists would be able to claim copyright over the song. I would say that the file can be uploaded to Commons as long as the artists/record comapny/orchestra/ect. are listed on the file description page as sources. Hope that helps to answer your question. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:48, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
File:Traffic Officers.png
Why did you delete this? The image was from a UK Goverment website: s29.—(1) Fair dealing with a literary, dramatic, musical, etc, work, for the purpose of research or for a non-commercial purpose, does not infringe any copyright in the work, provided it is accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement of the source. The image does not infringe on copyright that I could tell, there was a link to the website, and no author was provided.--The Navigators (talk)-May British Rail Rest in Peace. 15:39, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
- I can restore the file, but first please explain what the file's intended use was and why the file is irreplaceable (as far as I can see it fails WP:NFCC#1)? Thanks, FASTILY (TALK) 23:02, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
InkHeart
It's been a while, but she is back at Special:Contributions/95.172.4.142. Ωphois 18:00, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
- 95.172.4.142 (talk · contribs) blocked for 3 months. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:55, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
File:BigSnooze.JPG illustrates what's being talked about. It's one thing to describe it. It's another to see it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:31, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I failed to read the third paragraph of The Big Snooze#Plot. Although it would be nice if you could change the caption to something along the lines of "Elmer dressed as a woman so/and/...". It was the caption "Elmer talks to the audience" that prompted me to tag the file. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:40, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- OK, I just wondered why it suddenly became a target after almost 2 years. So when posting a fair use photo, it's best to be clearer about its relationship to the text? Actually, one user, I think called Silvershrek, is apparently very much amused by that cartoon, as he has made many, many edits to it. Somewhat overkill, frankly. But pretty much harmless, except when he gets a little gushy. (To me, Elmer as a woman isn't that much more interesting than Elmer as a man, but there's no accounting for taste.) I'm just surprised he never caught this subtle problem. I could go farther, actually, by posting the comment referenced in the article, the words Elmer is saying to the audience at that moment: "Have any of you giwls evew had an expewience wike this?" ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:51, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- I changed the caption. See if you like. Or Silvershrek will, probably. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:27, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- Looks much better! And yes, when uploading/using any sort of non-free content, it should always be mentioned in the context relevant article and be used where words alone would not be enough to give a reader a full and thorough understanding. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 01:43, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- I changed the caption. See if you like. Or Silvershrek will, probably. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:27, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- OK, I just wondered why it suddenly became a target after almost 2 years. So when posting a fair use photo, it's best to be clearer about its relationship to the text? Actually, one user, I think called Silvershrek, is apparently very much amused by that cartoon, as he has made many, many edits to it. Somewhat overkill, frankly. But pretty much harmless, except when he gets a little gushy. (To me, Elmer as a woman isn't that much more interesting than Elmer as a man, but there's no accounting for taste.) I'm just surprised he never caught this subtle problem. I could go farther, actually, by posting the comment referenced in the article, the words Elmer is saying to the audience at that moment: "Have any of you giwls evew had an expewience wike this?" ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:51, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Dais Page
I spoke with another editor about the Dais Analytic Corporation page. I was told that the issue with the page was notability, which could be addressed by adding references. I hope these changes address the problems. If not, please let me know and I will make further alterations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alcorta2 (talk • contribs) 00:38, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Trumbullseal
Hello, was wondering how an image (File:Trumbullseal.jpg") of a civil seal used on it's own page could run afowl of F7[1]? After all, the page is a discussion of the town it represents. Thanks, Markvs88 (talk) 00:52, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- Because you uploaded the file with the wrong license tag. File restored and relevant issues resolved. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:15, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
1885 Reinhardt College Administration Building Picture
A free use rational was given... the same one used on Emory University's describing it's Emory College Oxford.jpg. I deleted your tag. Please, however, if there is something I'm missing, let me know. Thank you. Carsonmc (talk) 03:57, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Portion Used and Low Resolution Tag
Fastily, I'm not enitely sure what I should put in those spots, can you help? Carsonmc (talk) 04:53, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Come on, Fastily, take it easy
- Oh come on, Fastily, learn to take a joke. My little comment on the notice board ("Blast you, Fastily sock! This is the second picture I've uploaded you want to delete.") wasn't serious at all. Who even says "blast you" in real life? Eugeneacurry (talk) 04:55, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Camino logo
Hi, just noticed that you deleted the Camino logo because a copy exists on Wikimedia. I think the image being on Wikimedia in the first place is a mistake. I'm pretty sure the Camino icon is not copyleft. http://caminobrowser.org/legal/ AlistairMcMillan (talk) 02:44, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi AlistairMcMillan. I think you may be correct; judging by the information provided at Camino, I honestly doubt that the logo is licensed under the Free art license. I have adjusted the licensing information of the file accordingly. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:41, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry but I still don't think that is right. Check the Legal page at http://caminobrowser.org: "The Camino logo is a registered trademark of the Mozilla Foundation and is used with permission." I don't think their logos are covered by the GPL. That's why Debian re-brands Firefox etc. See Mozilla Corporation software rebranded by the Debian project AlistairMcMillan (talk) 03:39, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Not sure ...
If I should go to you again, or to the general noticeboard. 70.179.93.254, who you blocked recently, is again deleting RS-supported information from the Esam Omeish page (he claims to be Omeish), saying it is slander. It's not (sourced to the Washington Post and the like)-- and I've tried to be polite, and raised it on the article talk page, and invited him to comment there -- but he keeps on deleting. So, as you've blocked him recently for the same activity, I raise the issue to you again. Tx.--Epeefleche (talk) 14:49, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Epeefleche. Thanks for the message; I'll keep an eye on Esam Omeish and block 70.179.93.254 (talk · contribs) as necessary. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:56, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
- BTW, the IP has now moved to a new user name (User_talk:EsamOmeish), and is engaging in the same blanking (four series of blankings today) -- despite warnings by me and a bot.--Epeefleche (talk) 04:22, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- Yes I saw it, but thanks for letting me know anyways :) I have blocked EsamOmeish (talk · contribs) indefinitely; I'll be sure to get the IP too if the vandalism from it continues. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:50, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- You've been reverted by a new editor, in its second edit ever -- see this. What to do? Omeish claims it is not him, but the edits look the same as his--is a check in order?--Epeefleche (talk) 07:57, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- It's likely, per WP:DUCK that Abuzzzubair is in fact EsamOmeish. I have watchlisted Esam Omeish and will make blocks/protects as necessary. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:15, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- You've been reverted by a new editor, in its second edit ever -- see this. What to do? Omeish claims it is not him, but the edits look the same as his--is a check in order?--Epeefleche (talk) 07:57, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- Yes I saw it, but thanks for letting me know anyways :) I have blocked EsamOmeish (talk · contribs) indefinitely; I'll be sure to get the IP too if the vandalism from it continues. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:50, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- BTW, the IP has now moved to a new user name (User_talk:EsamOmeish), and is engaging in the same blanking (four series of blankings today) -- despite warnings by me and a bot.--Epeefleche (talk) 04:22, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Reinhardt College 1895 admin. pic.
Fastily, I added all the info. you required before deleting the tag. Thanks for your help. If you spot an error, would you let me know. Thanks. Carsonmc (talk) 05:31, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Andrea Ritter (talk) 17:29, 28 January 2010 (UTC) Please review the editing I have made this morning on the page WORLD WAR II FICTION which was under deletion threat for SPAM? The change I have made to my Andrea Ritter, author, page and the World War II Fiction page, is to combine all into a new page that I called Sunflower of the Third Reich, A Novel This work took me 5 years of research and writing, and I do not consider it SPAM. Perhaps, since I am new to Wikipedia and its guidelines, I was not successful in creating a neutral, fair listing of my title. This time, I have included evidence such as Library of Congress number, ISBN number and publication year. I own the copyrights. I would like to add a picture of the titel page but perhaps that would be too difficult to do or else it might be construed as advertisement? I really appreciate your assistance on my page in the hope that it will be included as a Wikipedia listing. Thanks, AR Andrea Ritter (talk) 17:29, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Crown copyright
I only seem to come here when I have a question so I suppose it's not really a surprise that I have another one, but hopefully it's not a completely stupid one. I was wondering about the image used in Brian Burridge, namely File:Burridge.jpg. I believe a non-free image cannot be used in a BLP because it's considered replaceable, but I was wondering if the rules were any different for Crown Copyright and if the use in that article is in compliance with the policy. I ask because I've written a similar article on another British military officer and know of a Crown Copyright image of him but I was under the impression I couldn't use it on WP. If you could clear that up for me, I'd be very grateful! All the best, HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 19:23, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- HJ Mitchell, there are no such things as stupid questions; it would only be stupid to refrain from asking and make mistakes. But yes, you're correct, a non-free file of a living person, as a rule of thumb, cannot be used anywhere on Wikipedia. In the case of File:Burridge.jpg, the file's subject, Brian Burridge, is, according to the article on him, still alive. Since that is the case, the file violates WP:NFCC#1 and should be tagged for deletion as, it is likely still possible to obtain a free photo of Brian Burridge. Hope that helps to clarify things. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 23:23, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- Cheers Fastily. As ever, that's very helpful. I've done a little more poking around looking for other living British military officers and there are quite a few who have Crown Copyright photos in their articles. I'm certain that these aren't "free" images (because HM Government doesn't release its works into the public domain like the US Government does) but with the number of them (apparently not with common contributors) and the length of time (varying from a few weeks to several years) some of them have been here it just makes me wonder if there is (or, more likely, if there's a perception) something that allowed these... Thanks for your help, HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 00:06, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi Fastily, I've restored this image as we just (as you were deleting it) received valid OTRS permission - Peripitus (Talk) 04:19, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
MTX jackhammer
One of the last articles I though would get deleted. And without a warning. Give me a copy of it. Daniel Christensen (talk) 05:40, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
If it was so bad how did it last over a year and even get nominated for deletion; which means it was well known about by admins and such; and they decided to keep it. Daniel Christensen (talk) 05:43, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
One quick question... photo
I don't know the exact date, nor does the original source state specifically... if you look at the actual photo, it says Reinhardt College 1910-1913 in the bottom left. I know the building came down in 1911, so the pic. had to have been taken in '10 or '11. Is that cool, or do I need to add some more info.? Carsonmc (talk) 06:23, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of article about Calaméo
Hi! I do not see why you deleted the Calaméo page i've created. There is absolutely no promotional content. Only facts about the company. 2 competitors (at least) have a page (Scribd & Issuu) with way more "promotional content" than what i've written for Calaméo. I've added reliable references like [20 minutes] (an european printed newspaper with millions of readers everyday). I can provide many more "reliable" references like Techcrunch article, etc. if you'd let me. Can you please explain the deletion (what's incorrect and what's missing so I can correct the article) ? Thanks. MathieuQuisefit (talk) 11:40, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks.
Thank you for granting me the rollback privilege. Getting used to Huggle now and it's certainly going to make things easier. I appreciate the trust. Mordgier (talk) 14:52, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello, yes I still intend to become an administrator.
--KRSTIGER (talk) 16:58, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
RfA
Hello, yes I still wish to become an administrator.
--KRSTIGER (talk) 17:01, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Reinhardt Thanks
Thank you. I wondered about that. I'm adding one more (and last) historic photo taken in the same time period. I'll try to get it right this time.Carsonmc (talk) 22:29, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Again, thanks
Fastily, thanks again for all your help. I'm slowly learning the rules. I added the second historic pic and think I have all my ducks in a row. Cheers. Carsonmc (talk) 22:50, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Atlassian
Hi there!
Looks like Closedmouth deleted and then restored the Atlassian page. Then you deleted it again. Just wondering why? I saw your explanation, but that doesn't explain it. Afterall, companies from Sony to Jive Software have Wikipedia listings, why not Atlassian?
I work for Atlassian, I've been updating the page here and there for the last four years, and I'm confused/miffed/upset it was deleted. If the issue was that some pieces were too salesy, then those parts could have been modified. Please let me know why it was deleted and if/how we can restore it.
Regards,
Jon Silvers (jon@atlassian.com) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.75.233.106 (talk) 00:23, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Disruptive user.
Hi Fastily,
You recently warned Heqwm2 (talk) about some disruptive editing reported at AIV. I'm sure you don't have time to follow up on warnings left on talk pages, but this was their response to you. [37] If you have a moment, can you take another look at this user? They've just come off of a one week block (after many previous blocks) for the same thing and pretty much every post they make is equally abusive. It's starting to get disruptive on some of the talk pages I watch. Thanks for your time. --Loonymonkey (talk) 01:40, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
I made my admin request about 3 days ago and I still would like to become an admin —Preceding unsigned comment added by Venomcuz (talk • contribs) 02:25, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes please that would be very kind of you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Venomcuz (talk • contribs) 04:05, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Venomcuz (talk • contribs) 04:15, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Audi Logo
I'd just like to notify that I have reverted your logo change to the Audi article. The SVG is incorrect from the current logo of the company, and I feel the right one should be used. I have listed the SVG at FFD, for now, but if anyone can update the SVG to show the current logo, I'm all fine. Thanks. Connormah (talk) 04:19, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Fastilysock tagging
It appears there was a source. I don't have the name of the specific book but I certainly have all of the copyright owners.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:30, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Image
So okay?--Beat 768 (talk) 06:51, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Eternal lands non-free
see license
File:Eternal lands screenshot 1.jpg File:Eternal lands character creation screen.png --IngerAlHaosului (talk) 17:19, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
- The link you provided doesn't specifically give state licensing of the game... -FASTILY (TALK) 23:16, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- I say its specific enough and really simplistic as far as a EULA go, clearly not made by a attorney but no less clear, its freeware proprietary but gratis.--IngerAlHaosului (talk) 11:57, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
me again
RE: Atlassian rant
Sorry, should have ranted *after* I logged in.
Jsilvers (talk) 00:34, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
- Jon
- Hey Fastily , I wonder if you might restore the Atlassian article too. As Jon pointed out , it's not a new article by any means, and the speedy request was the only edit of the user who did it. The article did need a lot of work, but the company is extremely notable as far as software companies go. Their products, such as JIRA and Confluence are popular with developers, and they're even considered a competitor with Microsoft in some respects, and a top Enterprise social software company for sure. A quick Google News search shows tons of hits in reliable sources, and the article really just needs work to be less promotional-looking, which I'm willing to do. What do you think? Steven Walling 01:00, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Thanks for offering to clean it up. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:50, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks! Steven Walling 19:23, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Thanks for offering to clean it up. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:50, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Newport railway station image deletion
Hi. Could you please explain why you deleted this image - I'm not familiar with the dr process on en.wp, but on commons, deleting admins are encouraged to add a closing statement if there are arguments on both sides. -mattbuck (Talk) 01:04, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
NASA images
Gotta be careful with the CSD tags in relation to anything from/about NASA. Just about anything from NASA is going to be PD, so even if the file is missing a source it's very likely that one could easily be located.
— V = I * R (Talk • Contribs) 14:40, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
File source problem with File:Daniel I Sultan.jpg
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Re. RfA
Yes, that would be great! —Preceding unsigned comment added by KRSTIGER (talk • contribs) 19:07, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
This file was at a lower resolution on Commons and possibly shouldn't have been deleted here. Stifle (talk) 19:15, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
- I have uploaded the full resolution version to Commons. But I also saw your nomination at WP:PUF, and I think you may be right. Perhaps a DR at commons should be started. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:21, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Re. RfA
How long does it take to become an administrator after what my application is on now? —Preceding unsigned comment added by KRSTIGER (talk • contribs) 19:18, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Livemercial
Hi! Just a quick query - I was wondering why you speedied Livemercial, given that it is currently at AfD, and that it had previously survived an AfD attempt. Normally that would make it ineligible for speedy. :) - Bilby (talk) 19:42, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I'm not sure why I deleted it earlier, my bad, the page is not a blatant advert. I have restored the article. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:55, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
RfA transclusions
Hello. If this is your standard for supporting an RfA, what exactly is your rationale in assisting (twice today) a clueless newbie in completing a nomination without even hinting that the chance is nil?--Tikiwont (talk) 20:18, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
- Not to be rude Fastily, but I think you could be a lot kinder to these newbies by making it clear that they have zero chance of passing an rfa rather than asking them if they want to go for it--Jac16888Talk 20:55, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thirded. It's closed. I happen to think some of the standards people have are too high and ridiculous, but the kind thing to do in these situations is give them a realistic appraisal of their chances.--Chaser (talk) 22:10, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
- Noted. Please see my original reply here. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:44, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thirded. It's closed. I happen to think some of the standards people have are too high and ridiculous, but the kind thing to do in these situations is give them a realistic appraisal of their chances.--Chaser (talk) 22:10, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Response
About a month ago, you declined an unblock request that I believe I properly completed. Your grounds were that you believed that I still did not know that the reason I was unblocked. This seems odd given that I gave almost the same request previously, and the administrator believed that my understanding was there but was reluctant to unblock me because he/she (mistakenly) believed I used a sock puppet. The main difference between those two requests is that the last one included an explanation that I never used a sock puppet. My explanation was ultimately accepted and I was unblocked.
Though I was surprised to see your answer considering I had taken each and every step necessary as per WP policy (namely, Appealing a block), what I had taken issue with you was regarding your conclusion that I was canvassing. There is no truth to that. As I explained, my first request was too long and never read in the first place, the second one was declined not on the basis of my appeal but as a result of misinformation, so I thought it appropriate to make a last and final appeal that correctly that briefly explains one of the incidents. I did not email you asking to unblock me; I emailed you because the extension of the block to include my talk page was unjustified. I believed I was clear in my message but for the record, I was just addressing the extension of the block that I kindly asked to remove, not the block in general as it seemed you thought I was asking per your response on my talk page.
In any case, though we may disagree, I appreciate your taking the time to have read and at least consider my appeal and my subsequent message. I respect you as an administrator and the insight you have to offer. --Shamir1 (talk) 01:31, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Deleting "NowCommons" type images
Hi! You deleted File:157th Air Refueling Wing.png on enwiki after it was transferred to Commons, but you failed to check the file on Commons to make sure everything was in order. This is a pain to parties involved because we have to go through deleted versions (if a sysop on enwiki) to get the appropriate license, etc. Perhaps take a bit longer to check each one? That'd be great! Killiondude (talk) 07:25, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Low quality?
I'm curious why you think this file is low quality?--Rockfang (talk) 00:43, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
This one as well.--Rockfang (talk) 00:46, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
If you have a moment, could you please respond before this gets archived?--Rockfang (talk) 08:00, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
- File:Komnenos mosaic.JPG deleted per F8 as being on Commons. File:Komnenos mosaic.JPG reason for deletion fixed. -FASTILY (TALK) 08:29, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
RfA
I'm still intended to run for the adminship. Thank you Saj2009 (User talk:Saj2009|talk]]) 18:25, 31 Jan 2010 (UTC)
Who gave you the right to delete my page on wikipedia?!!!! It was NOT commercial and is not different then those of other authors. Wikipedia Israel has a long article about me written by a professional wikipedia member. Check it out: http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A2%D7%A8%D7%9F_%D7%9B%D7%A5
Please return my page a.s.a.p Eran katz erankatz@netvision.net.il —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.218.152.27 (talk) 14:46, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Who gave you the right to delete my page on wikipedia?!!!! It was NOT commercial and is not different then those of other authors and seminar leaders who mention there books. Why don't you erase Dan brown, tony robbins and others for mentioning their work? The fact that you don't know me doesn't give you this right. I am well known in several countries, mainly in Asia. In addition, Wikipedia Israel has a long article about me written by a professional wikipedia administrator. Check it out: http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A2%D7%A8%D7%9F_%D7%9B%D7%A5
Please return my page a.s.a.p Eran katz erankatz@netvision.net.il —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.218.152.27 (talk) 14:59, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 | This page 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. |
from Eran Katz
following my previous email ( and sorry for the harsh reaction) kindly return my article a.s.a.p. You are welcome to google my name and discover for yourself the countless articles, websites and popularity of my books and work. Deleting my page is creating lot's of damage. Thank you. Eran Katz —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.219.123.110 (talk) 12:03, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
InkHeart
She's back at Special:Contributions/61.19.243.11 and Special:Contributions/222.166.160.22. The semi-protects that you placed on the pages have expired. Ωphois 20:27, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Image on Valkyria Chronicles
Yo! Saw the warning you placed on the image to have it deleted due to not following NFCC #8. I placed it there to support the gameplay section of the article and I'm convinced it would help visualize how combat tactics would work in the game. Thanks a lot, mate. Ominae (talk) 20:50, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
File:MayersonPortrait.jpg and File:MSMlogo.png
I've gotta run, but please read the discussion at User_talk:PhillyPartTwo#File:MayersonPortrait.jpg_and_File:MSMlogo.png. The user says he's sent an email to OTRS. Shubinator (talk) 23:28, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
- Noted. Thanks, FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:31, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
File:RoumSci BukPDFOkPicts.pdf listed by you with intent to delete
Reply: This is not a redundant file as stated in your deletion intent message. Moreover the file serves as a direct source of information for Wikipedia articles where this information could not be made available without the availability of a permanent PDF file that is now unavailable elsewhere on wikipedia. Therefore, this file is not available elsewhere in the PDF format as incorrectly stated here. Because the file is needed for quick reference use in several Wikipedia articles and should not be deleted. Please do not delete file. Furthermore there are several problems often encountered on Wikipedia in the books sectionm with converting the XML files to the correct format and with correct content as in the assembled PDF document provided.
RE:An image or media file that you uploaded File:RoumSci BukPDFOkPicts.pdf, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. FASTILYsock(TALK) 04:32, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
'Summary:' This is not a redundant file as stated in your the deletion intent message.
Copyright questions
Hi, I'll try again tonight, thanks for the the second chance. My file downloads are all album covers. J04n(talk page) 11:17, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Deleted article
I just discovered that the article for Runbox (an email service provider) has been deleted for "unambiguous advertising" after having been marked for speedy deletion by what appears to be an anonymous user.
This was somewhat surprising since the article was previously accepted by another administrator and had, to my knowledge, not been changed since. In any event I was not notified by email when this happened and therefore missed the chance to contest the decision.
I regret that the article was no longer found to meet the Wikipedia standards, although it was properly referenced with independent sources and modeled after other, similar articles on established email providers.
Since Runbox is verifiably a notable email service provider (see e.g. http://www.thewhir.com/web-hosting-news/run030405) I would appreciate a chance to correct or recreate the article, adhering to the Wikipedia guidelines and in a consise and objective manner.
Thank you.
GeirThomasAndersen (talk) 02:21, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
- This message is brought to you by a friendly talk page stalker: Looking at the IP user who nominated, the only other contributions have been the speedying of another Email provider which was contested, and ultimately prevailed. NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 02:49, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks NativeForeigner. I have restored the article; thanks GeirThomasAndersen, for offering to clean it up. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 06:58, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you both -- the article is now cleaned up significantly, and better referenced. Regards, GeirThomasAndersen (talk) 21:58, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks NativeForeigner. I have restored the article; thanks GeirThomasAndersen, for offering to clean it up. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 06:58, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Unipoly Bowers plate...
Would what I've added to File:Unipoly Bowers plate 1.png be suitable? 4 T C 04:35, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
- Not exactly. I hate to tell you this but, the files fail WP:NFCC#1. Free versions of diagrams, charts, ect. (especially those of geometric shapes) can just about always be created. I'm afraid that these images aren't suitable for Wikipedia. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 04:40, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
- Would linking the page to where the images came from instead of uploading the images be suitable? 4 T C 04:45, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
- Do you mean as a source in an article? -FASTILYsock(TALK) 04:47, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
- That's what I'm thinking of. The table format in User:4/Uniform polyhedra may be slightly useful though. I think that could be generated using other means.
- Do you mean as a source in an article? -FASTILYsock(TALK) 04:47, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
- Would linking the page to where the images came from instead of uploading the images be suitable? 4 T C 04:45, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Please do not delete this file.
Respected Fellow,
How do you support the existence of the article Facial yoga, which has got no reliable sources, no references, no notability and seems to be completely an advertisement.
The article consists of two sentences (which are actually false) and seems like has been entered by the creator itself.
Request you to look into this matter.
Bhuto (Talk | Contribs) 09:31, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
- ....you should have said that earlier...anyways, page deleted. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:40, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Request for undeletion
Hi, I think you may have deleted a page I created. It was 'The Rock Triangle'. I am new to Wikipedia and at the minute my town is undergoing massive change and this warrants an entry in the encyclopaedia. If you think that it's an advert I will double check the rules for creating a page and make the necessary modifications. Please re-insert my page, thank you. Paul. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pauljamestaylor (talk • contribs) 15:06, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Autoreviewer
Excuse me, but I think you made a mistake. According to the User Rights Log, you made me into a confirmed user, not an autoreviewer. Has there been a mistake? Thanks. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 17:45, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hey Fastily, I saw this mentioned on permission, so I've fixed it for you. Don't worry, I've nearly made a couple of users confirmed users when I meant to add rollback or autoreviewer. Best. Acalamari 20:14, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Article deletion
Why did you delete MTX Jackhammer with no warning; that page has been around forever and no one has had a problem with it; it even got nominated for deletion right after I made it and it was kept. Daniel Christensen (talk) 20:50, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
New Brunswick county maps
My original maps have been usurped by those created by Canadaolympic989.Plasma east (talk) 21:33, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
InkHeart again
She is now using Special:Contributions/SuresStage. BTW, there's a user named Special:Contributions/Fastilysock who signs their comments as you. Wasn't sure if it was you or not, so just letting you know. Ωphois 22:19, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
- SuresStage (talk · contribs) blocked indefinitely. Yes, Fastilysock (talk · contribs) is my alternate account (see User:Fastilysock for an explanation). Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 22:24, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
- She's back using anons. Can you semi-block Style (TV series)? Ωphois 01:13, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
File:OSM-highlevel.png, File:OSM-comps.png
User: JanaGanesan
I am posting an article (Organic Server Management - OSM) on behalf of my company Sabre Holdings.
I have received the following messages while uploading the images. Please don't delete the images,
and let me know if you have any questions.
File:OSM-highlevel.png (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Appears to be a photo of a diagram of some kind. Likely copyrighted. No reason given to suggest that uploader is copyright holder. FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:00, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
[edit] File:OSM-comps.png File:OSM-comps.png (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Appears to be a photo of a detailed diagram of some kind. Likely copyrighted. No reason given to suggest that uploader is copyright holder. FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:11, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks,
Jana
FYI
I identified a source [38] but it says (c) all rights reserved. Maybe it was available at the time under the cc-by-sa but with no way to verify this, perhaps the file should be deleted. –xenotalk 00:02, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Xeno. Erm...sorry, but which file(s) would you be referring to? Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:25, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
AIN
Hi Fastily, if you have a few minutes, could you take a look at WP:AIN#Incident with User:Nothughthomas? Since you're an uninvolved admin it'd be interesting to know your thoughts. Thanks, XXX antiuser eh? 07:44, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
From Eran katz again
I have sent you several messages and you haven't replied. Please return the article you deleted... and reply to my messages. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.177.63.95 (talk) 18:22, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
I answered your question about the pictures. Please check it. Im not good with the symbols so I couldnt write my username but the thing in parantheses is the answer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkim4007 (talk • contribs) 19:30, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
I took the image of Maureen Herman - either way - I want it deleted - I am tired of having to constantly prove that I was the photographer - I want the image removed - and all of my other work. You've finally done it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 5b3TnY (talk • contribs) 21:53, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Maureen Herman photo
I took the image of Maureen Herman - either way - I want it deleted - I am tired of having to constantly prove that I was the photographer - I want the image removed - and all of my other work. You've finally done it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 5b3TnY (talk • contribs) 21:55, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
File:Polls Nov08-Jan10.png
Assistance and patience requested. As I'm new to uploading images - the image File:Polls Nov08-Jan10.png that you have taken the time to iNform me may have copyright concerns - I need to rely on your expertise & advice. As discribed, I created this file with Excel using data from Opinion polling in the 41st Canadian federal election. It is a graph of the data compiled in the article, as well as the average of the data. I am the creator of this image and there are no copyrights associated with the image. How do I express this in order to be in compliance with Wikipedia rules?? Please advise.
Can-eh-dian Redhead (talk) 23:05, 3 February 2010 (UTC) 400px
im confused
i know this will take some time...
but how come, my archives are not just 2010/January, but then go on like 2010/January/2010/January, then 2010/January/2010/January/2010/January and keep on making new subpages ;(
and even though you deleted them they are still there! is this some bug with ClueBot? o.O —Preceding unsigned comment added by Happyland123 (talk • contribs) 00:16, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
- That's strange...you used the template correctly. Give it a day or so. If the bot does that again, drop me a line and I'll look into it. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 01:30, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
User:The Sabbath Day
Hi there. I noticed you recently blocked User:The Sabbath Day. One of his edits was to Jeffrey Hatrix; diff here. Several minutes ago, a user by the name of User:Ned Nesbitt also made an edit there (diff: here) that closely resembled an earlier edit by The Sabbath Day. Additionally, Ned Nesbitt made an edit to Waylon Reavis, an article The Sabbath Day had edited earlier, with a similar edit. I'm no expert on sock puppets, but that seems like an interesting pattern to me, and I wanted to bring it to your attention. Thanks. C628 (talk) 01:16, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
- Clearly a sock. Blocked per WP:DUCK. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:32, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
This is a new one:
No one's nominated Rebecca Chambers (Character) for deletion, so this must be some sort of preemptive !vote. I'm thinking there must be some CSD that would cover this; right? An MfD would be silly ;) Cheers, Jack Merridew 03:20, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
- Ok....now that's just strange. It's almost as if our friend here is anticipating the article's AFD. Anyways, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rebecca Chambers (Character) deleted per WP:CSD#G6. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 05:55, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
- Something like that, I guess. Lots of messes from this fellow who's been here awhile but has made most of his edits in the last few days. Seen the old article on Rebecca Chambers? I love the bottom-caption of the infobox that says "Fictional information". Thanks, Jack Merridew
Hello, you recently deleted my image Ellis Sign.jpg and I got the right from my friend who took the picture to upload it to wikipedia. Why was it deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jordan199311 (talk • contribs) 02:05, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
- You uploaded the photo as a copyrighted photo of an exisiting building. As a rule of thumb, these photos are deleted because they fail WP:NFCC#1. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:08, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
MTX pages
No thanks for your deletion of mtx jackhammer. and now you requested mtx audio. Why? Daniel Christensen (talk)
- Adding time stamp. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:36, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
reduced images
Hi. I've seen you delete a bunch of old revision of images I've uploaded NFCC reduced versions of; thanks. I've noticed that a user, Smalln, has started reverting back to the large version. This is, of course, unacceptable. As he's not keen on me, I'd rather avoid getting on his case about it. So I'd like to pass it to you ;)
Most of his image uploads are unsourced and missing FURs and I've tagged 'em. He's not reverting that. (They're video game character images off Wikia and the like.)
Thanks in advance. Cheers, Jack Merridew 01:32, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
Re: File permission problem with File:Drew curtis 2007 photo.jpg
The image in question was copied from this link, and that page states clearly, right underneath the photo, "This photo is licensed under a Creative Commons license. If you use this photo within the terms of the license or make special arrangements to use the photo, please list the photo credit as "Scott Beale / Laughing Squid" and link the credit to laughingsquid.com." I have added a link to that from the photo's info page. WTF? (talk) 12:41, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
- Laughingsquid? Flickr? Specify which link is the actual source. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:13, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Dais Analytic Corporation
An article that you have been involved in editing, Dais Analytic Corporation, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dais Analytic Corporation. Thank you.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. andy (talk) 14:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
Help!
You took down an image of mine that was sitting on my User page, Can you help me make it free use, I created it, using some of my movies and Images from Gamespot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smalln (talk • contribs) 14:44, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
File:Polls Nov08-Jan10.png
Thank you for your advice! When you have a moment, can you check File:Polls Nov08-Jan10.png again to see if it's correct now? I want to post it at the end of the article: Opinion polling in the 41st Canadian federal election. Thanks!!
Can-eh-dian Redhead (talk) 16:15, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
- No problem! File:Polls Nov08-Jan10.png looks much better. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 01:12, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
User redirect
How do we handle a user redirecting both his user and talk page to an article about himself? User:Mhsanabary9 redirects to Mohamed Helmy Elsanabary which looks like it fails notability. I was tagging File:Mohamed Elsanabary.JPG when I noticed this oddity. ww2censor (talk) 00:20, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Mohamed Helmy Elsanabary appears to be an advert - I've deleted it per WP:CSD#G11. As for the redirect, I've deleted it per WP:CSD#G8. That should solve the problem. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 01:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Question
Hi there. When you write User has been incorrectly or insufficiently warned. Re-report once the user has been warned sufficiently, does that mean that I will have to revert his edits on the said article up to 4 times, each time placing a warning on his talk page? Isn't that Edit War? Amsaim (talk) 01:00, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- You are never violating the three revert rule if you're reverting vandalism. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks for the info. Amsaim (talk) 01:03, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Exactly as I feared, another admin has now appeared, and placed a "you are engaged in an edit war" message on my talk page, simply because I reverted disruptive edits from the BLP article. To avoid being accused of edit war I brought the issue to both AiV and RfP. This is why I asked you also what to do, and after your reply I reverted the disruptive edit. It appears as if there is no clear guideline when it comes to fighting off a persistent editor who is bent on vandalism by adding disruptive edits into a BLP article. Amsaim (talk) 02:18, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, now that I look at it, it seems that you are having a content dispute with Zencv. Please try to discuss with Zencv or on the talk page of Ayaan Hirsi Ali. If Zencv reverts your edit on Ayaan Hirsi Ali, feel free to report them here or on Explicit (talk · contribs)'s talk. If Zencv is not discussing civilly or outright refusing to discuss, consider making a report at WP:ANI. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:23, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Exactly as I feared, another admin has now appeared, and placed a "you are engaged in an edit war" message on my talk page, simply because I reverted disruptive edits from the BLP article. To avoid being accused of edit war I brought the issue to both AiV and RfP. This is why I asked you also what to do, and after your reply I reverted the disruptive edit. It appears as if there is no clear guideline when it comes to fighting off a persistent editor who is bent on vandalism by adding disruptive edits into a BLP article. Amsaim (talk) 02:18, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks for the info. Amsaim (talk) 01:03, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Image removal:File:SS Formal Uniform of Obergruppenfuhrer Werner Lorenz.jpg
This is absolute bullshit! Do you knowe what I went through to get GNU permission for that photo? I forwarded the entire email series with the copyright-holder to permissions on 27 January. I even noted it on the image file page, and on 29 Jan wrote to permisions again, asking why receipt had not been acknowledged nor a ticket number issued.
And now you take this action upon yourself. It is you who should be wearing Lorenz' Hakenkreuz brassard, you bloody self-important Junior Assistant Scoutmaster. Wiki is becoming another bloated, incompetent jobsworth bureaucracy.
Why couldn't you have the common decency to make inquiries? Nope. Some other jobsworth hung up a Feb 4 tag, and more incompetent jobsworths failed to process my correspondence, and now you can carve another deletion notch on your keyboard.
Prat. Solicitr (talk) 02:38, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Please be civil I'm sure that we can get in touch with permissions and get it all worked out. (Images can be undeleted) NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 03:17, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
SS formal dress img seletion
I'm not sure why I should assume good faith, given no attempt on your part to contact me, nor, to all appearances, any exercise of due diligence to find out whether in fact permissions rules had been complied with. Solicitr (talk) 03:35, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- If you want me to help you, please stop being rude. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Image deletion
I was given permission to use all of those; all of them. Daniel Christensen (talk) 04:08, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I agree with your approach here Fastily. I haven't reviewed all 30+ images you nominated for deletion or speedy deletion, but perhaps engaging Daniel Christensen before making him defend 30 or so apparently good faith photos would have been a better tactic. It's an awful lot to dump on a single user's plate at one time. AniMate 04:43, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- I try but can't seem to get things right often. I am probably in the wrong most of the times even when I argue. Daniel Christensen (talk) 04:46, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
FfD Actions
Hi Fastily, may I inquire as to why you deleted this file, when the discussion tally was identical to the file after it, to which you closed, per no consensus? Thanks.—DMCer™ 21:33, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
- Now how could I have managed to do that? My bad, file restored and discussion re-closed as no consensus. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:11, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Screenshot
Dear Fastily,
I saw you deleted a screenshot i uploaded of GoodSync. I'm new with uploading images. Could you help explain / show me a page of what screenshots are allowed? PizzaMan (talk) 10:20, 5 February 2010 (UTC) PS i've now made my own snapshot and saved it as a PNG file. Is this legit? 20px
- Actually, yes it is. Everything checks out except for the fact that the file's resolution was a bit high for a non-free screenshot. Per the non-free content criteria and the image use policy, images of copyrighted media files must of a reduced resolution. Not to worry though, I've already taken care of that so you are now good to go! Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 23:48, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Understandable
Please delete all the low resolution pictures you found at the end; those are the first I uploaded and are no good at all. But I see with some you put a "copy to Commons" candidate thing on them; which I understand is where i should have uploaded them in the first place; also did you mean by lacking copyright that I was supposed to upload them under Public Domain or GNU instead of CC 3.0 some rights reserved as I did; cause I have no problem with them being public domain. Daniel Christensen (talk) 20:18, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- I can certainly do that. So files uploaded from which dates? -FASTILY (TALK) 23:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Go ahead and delete any of the "my own work" images that are under 1024x768 resolution. And how do I change the license on MY images that are nominated for deletion due to lack of license. I want them to be free or whatever. I thought I put a CC 3.0 license on ALL my images when I uploaded them; did someone take that off? Daniel Christensen (talk) 00:21, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- Well I don't think I have any that are exactly that, I just mean all the low res ones could be deleted, and what about the copyright thing on my images; I KNOW I put a CC 3.0 thing on them when I uploaded them. you have to or it will say you forgot to. Daniel Christensen (talk) 00:43, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- Like this; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mast_1-1.jpg that's my image, I took that. How can it be deleted for copyright reasons? Daniel Christensen (talk) 00:44, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, but, I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say. File:Mast_1-1.jpg is not listed for deleted per copyright issues, if that's what you mean. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:46, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- Like this; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mast_1-1.jpg that's my image, I took that. How can it be deleted for copyright reasons? Daniel Christensen (talk) 00:44, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
It would help if you explained that this file has been nominated for deletion as a duplicate of File:Aerial antenna.JPG, although I don't see any such active nomination. However, although it is a worthy task to remove such duplicates, and indeed, copyright violations from this encyclopedia, I am concerned that your invocation of process to do this is sometimes suspect (in that removing images from articles as "unencyclopedic", and then tagging them thereby as orphaned, is a deliberate attempt to bypass normal routes for consideration of the merits of images that users post here. In this, I am also worried by the actions of User:Aspects in this regard. Let me just say this; when I first began editing here, and adding images to articles, I learnt the hard way, and quickly got used to our policies, and followed them. Since then, as an Admin myself, I've seen over-zealous admins lose not only their Bot privileges, but also their Admin bit. I cannot disagree with the block of your alternate account, because at least it should have given you clue that your actions, although perhaps correct within the rules, might be seen as a deliberate attempt to bend the rules and also flood WP:FFD and user talk pages with fait accomplis. I find this inimical to the purpose of a collaborative, although free, encyclopedia, and urge you to reconsider your approach before this reaches WP:RFC or WP:ARBCOM. I don't currently have the time to collate the full picture, but if I need to, I shall find it. Rodhullandemu 01:05, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- You must have missed my earlier statement; I'll say it again for you. I'm finished with mass nominations. Savy? -FASTILY (TALK) 01:08, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- Point taken, but I remain to be convinced, and that is up to you. Mass nominations are only part of the picture; it's the apparent tag-teaming when one user deletes an image from an article as "not encyclopedic", without discussion, and another (yourself) nominates for deletion as "orphaned". I would hope that that practice ceases forthwith. Rodhullandemu 01:13, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Organic Server Management Article images
Hello,
I have posted an article called Organic Server Management on behalf Sabre Holdings.
I have also uploaded the following images under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licensing (Allow non-commercial use, commercial use and modifications as long as others credit Sabre Holdings).
- File:OSM-highlevel.png
- File:OSM-comps.png
So, please don't delete these images and let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks, JanaGanesan (talk) 22:01, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Comment requested
I recently initiated a discussion on WP:ANI about a long term banned IP vandal who is IP hopping with AOL, continuing vandalism, and what to do about it. I'd appreciate your input, if you have time. Thanks. Connormah (talk | contribs) 23:30, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Shane Osborn photo
I am trying to add State Treasurer Shane Osborn's official photo to his wikipage. Any help would be appreciated. Husker93 (talk) 01:23, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
good enough permission?
Every image I took I had permission for. Look at this; is this good enough? File:Wikipedia Flickr photo permission.JPG Daniel Christensen (talk) 03:30, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- I've commented on this message on your talk page. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 11:12, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Going back
I wish you hadn't deleted MTX Jackhammer. It is fairly notable as the biggest of what it is. Daniel Christensen (talk) 08:10, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Aconitum
Vandalism? pitta means 'fire' in Sanskrit; this dosha IS fire, as well as bile. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.175.182.57 (talk) 00:32, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
- Terima kasih (Indonesian for thank you;). Cheers, Jack Merridew 01:45, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
Cheers, Jack Merridew 14:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
- I saw that he'd reverted and expect he saw this section. And I saw that some have been deleted and the rest probably will be when they're ripe. I've not looked today at any of that but will, next. Thanks for taking this on. Cheers, Jack Merridew 23:45, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Detial COlo-new-new.jpg
Hi, just wondering about your view that File:Detial COlo-new-new.jpg should not be tagged with {{npd}} because it is sourced. But I don't see any source indicated. The uploader claims that he is the copyright holder and has released the image into the public domain, but the image itself is an architectural drawing and has the sentence "Please register to remove this text" at the top left-hand corner, suggesting it has been ripped from a website. Furthermore, the uploader has a history of uploading images under a PD licence without properly establishing that he or she is the copyright holder (see "User talk:Dacial" – the other images have been speedily deleted). In fact, "Detial COlo-new-new.jpg" is very similar to the other architectural drawings "File:Interior COlo-new-new.jpg" and "File:Grotto Entrence-new-new.jpg" that have already been deleted. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 04:29, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- The user provided a source when they used the license template, {{pd-self}} ("I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby release it into the public domain. This applies worldwide."). Bascially, the user cites themselves as being the copyright holder, giving permission to use the file for any purpose. The no evidence of permission tag only applies when a user cites someone other than themselves as the copyright holder of a media file, claiming it under a free license. Before tagging with {{subst:npd}}, attempt to verify the link/source provided first if possible (If no source is provided, tag with {{subst:nsd}}) to see if the source and licensing check out; if you find you are unable to verify the copyright status of the file with the provided source(s), tag with {{subst:npd}}. I agree with you that the file is probably a copyvio, but there really is no evidence to back that assertion, which is why I listed the file at possibly unfree files. Hope that helps to answer your question. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:26, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
User:backup1
Go ahead and delete it I forgot the password and can't even sign into it. Daniel Christensen (talk) 20:46, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Youtube
Are you Fastily on YouTube. You have friend block on if you are; I can't even send you a message. Daniel Christensen (talk) 22:32, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
http://www.youtube.com/user/fastily
- Uhhhh... lolwut? -FASTILY (TALK) 22:35, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- That's not you? Daniel Christensen (talk) 23:38, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Copyright speedy declination
Re: [39] The image in question is used at Popstar Online (it's about 6 down on the page), which is apparently using flickr as an image storage repository. Popstar Online asserts copyright. I was unable to find a direct Flickr account with the photo, either.—Kww(talk) 22:32, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi
I don't know if you can help out here. I've been trying to explain to this user why he should not have removed speedy deletion templates from pages he creates. He has now posted on his talk page demanding that he is unblocked. As I've never been blocked before I'm unsure how to request unblocking, but in all honesty I don't think his unblock request would be granted anyway. If it's possible, could you please have a word with the user? --5 albert square (talk) 23:06, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hi 5 albert square. I don't think there's anything here for me to do right now; you've done a great job explaining to that user. But I'll watch Mp242424's talk page and comment as necessary. Thanks for letting me know about it. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:34, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Fastily, thanks. I've had a word with the user again and again explained why the speedy deletion template shouldn't have been removed and why that has led to their subsequent blockage. Hopefully this will have done the done the trick! --5 albert square (talk) 00:04, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Aconitum
Vandalism? pitta means 'fire' in Sanskrit; this dosha IS fire, as well as bile. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.175.182.57 (talk) 00:33, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
User:Venus Video/Venus video
Since when is tagging a userspace draft considered vandalism? 76.102.12.35 (talk) 00:45, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Question
Hi,
What is wrong with the edit? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.148.224.110 (talk) 00:47, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Vandalizing
Instead of talking about vandalazing, can you describe what it wrong with the edits? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.148.224.110 (talk) 00:55, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Cruyff Turn
How is that an unconstructive edit, Cruyff Turn is the accepted English language terminology. This isn't a Dutch encyclopedia, it's an English encyclopedia. Please revert to my last edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.22.220.61 (talk) 00:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm not vandalizing the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_to_Harrisburg_Main_Line#Stations_and_interlockings Philadelphia to Harrisburg Article, genius. Just trying to update it. SEPTA is expanding the R5 rail system to Stratsburg. That's all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.114.208.68 (talk) 01:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
IP edits at Scott Lee Cohen
You warned an IP editor about an edit at Scott Lee Cohen. That editor has reverted you, and in doing so violated 3RR. I am not neutral, so would you please look into it? -Rrius (talk) 01:11, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
latest change
I was the one who changed spongebob, and I just wanted to say, it was correct, and, I am a user, but I have since forgotten my password, I will change it again, and I hope that you do not change it back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.24.129.172 (talk) 02:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
reminder
This is just a friendly reminder that only 1 day is left in Otherlleft's RfA and it's a real cliffhanger. I obviously !voted support, but I hope that doesn't influence yours or anyone else's opinions. -- Soap Talk/Contributions 03:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reminder Soap. However, at this time, I'm not particularity inclined to change my !vote. But I'll watchlist the page and make any changes as necessary. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 07:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Did your robot revert my edit?
"Thanks" for your canned response/reversion to my edit. Per WP guidelines, please justify your edits. We have enough 'bots roaming around. I put my justification in my initial edit. I would kindly ask you, or your 'bot, or--as you say--your "friends," to justify their edits.
Thanks much. 72.192.220.36 (talk) 03:46, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
i answered your question about images. Please check it out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkim4007 (talk • contribs) 05:46, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Unblock request of Trunks719
Hello Fastily. Trunks719 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards, Sandstein 07:45, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
- I don't mind the user is unblocked; if you trust the user, please feel free to unblock them. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 07:59, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks; unblocked. It's not a matter of trust, but I believe we may AGF and extend a second chance. 12:25, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
RE: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Adyniz
Hi Fast, I am still interested in being an admin and I want that page to stay there. But whenever I change my decision, I will inform you. Thank you. --♫♪Adyniz♪♫ 07:07, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Adyniz. Your request was never formally submitted for review. I can transclude (i.e. submit) it for you, but please bear in mind that there exists the possibility your request may not be granted. Please let me know now if you're absolutely sure you want to go ahead with RfA. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:33, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, thanks a lot for the help. But can you please explain RfA thingy in your words so that everything should be cleared to me. --♫♪Adyniz♪♫ 09:52, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Basically, once your request is transcluded (aka submitted for review), other users will !vote and discuss on your RfA for seven days and decide whether you should be an administrator or not. Please let me know what you decide. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:42, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Last question, is there any kind of danger/ban/copyright thingy/terms and conditions for an admin? I want to know about that before taking the decision. Thank you. --♫♪Adyniz♪♫ 05:54, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- Adyniz, I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "danger/ban/copyright thingy/terms and conditions". Perhaps you might like to read WP:ADMIN for a detailed explanation of the role. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 22:08, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- Last question, is there any kind of danger/ban/copyright thingy/terms and conditions for an admin? I want to know about that before taking the decision. Thank you. --♫♪Adyniz♪♫ 05:54, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- Basically, once your request is transcluded (aka submitted for review), other users will !vote and discuss on your RfA for seven days and decide whether you should be an administrator or not. Please let me know what you decide. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:42, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, thanks a lot for the help. But can you please explain RfA thingy in your words so that everything should be cleared to me. --♫♪Adyniz♪♫ 09:52, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
CSD F4
Hello Fastily, about these two removals: [40], [41]. My understanding of Wikimedia licensing is that author and source information is required for all images (no matter what their licensing is). What is your rationale for removing the tags? Thanks, Blurpeace 03:16, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
- The uploader did actually give the source/author information by affixing the {{pd-self}} tag to the files - "I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby release it into the public domain. This applies worldwide." That in itself is perfectly sufficient as both a licensing tag and as a source. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 07:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
- No, the tag affirms that they are the copyright holder of the work. It does not inherently mean that the author and source are the uploader and {{own}}. Blurpeace 09:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
- Pictures with unknown authors can be perfectly fine, for example File:Rosaparks.jpg, or File:Helen KellerA.jpg which are both Featured Pictures. Knowing the copyright status is sufficient. --GRuban (talk) 16:17, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
- Those images have fallen into the public domain via expiration. To verify that the copyright has expired is sufficient for their inclusion. An uploader who has released their copyright to a work via {{PD-self}} must be verified in a different manner. The project requires author and source information to verify that the original publisher has transferred copyright or agrees to the licensing (which even then may be verified via OTRS). Blurpeace 22:21, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
- Pictures with unknown authors can be perfectly fine, for example File:Rosaparks.jpg, or File:Helen KellerA.jpg which are both Featured Pictures. Knowing the copyright status is sufficient. --GRuban (talk) 16:17, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
- @ Blurpeace. If you believe the files are unfree or should be deleted, list them at WP:PUF or WP:FFD respectively. But please note that {{pd-self}} is sufficient as a source. You are correct in that {{pd-self}} is not sufficient to identify an author, but we have no speedy deletion criteria for "no author". -FASTILY (TALK) 00:56, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
- No, the tag affirms that they are the copyright holder of the work. It does not inherently mean that the author and source are the uploader and {{own}}. Blurpeace 09:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Big Bear Foodmart Inc.
I would like to make a new page for Big Bear Foodmart Inc. but I am afraid it will be deleted once again. I would like to know what the previous article looked like and what was wrong with it so that I do not make the same mistakes (label the mistakes if you can)
Sincerly,
Memoi567
P.S. be specific —Preceding unsigned comment added by Memoi567 (talk • contribs) 18:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
request for adminship/witeink
i do plan on becoming an administrator. thank you for the warning and please let me know if i can be of assistance in any way.regardsWiteinkρεβῼ Μιλάω/Κοτσάνι 20:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Cricut
Please tell me, in what way was Cricut "unambiguous advertising or promotion"? And how should it have been different so as not to be such? - Brian Kendig (talk) 03:45, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Brian Kendig#Cricut -FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:46, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Help Please
Thank you for your messages, I uploaded a lot of images but I still can't understannd exactly how to do those stuff about copy rights So If you don't mind tell me more about how to edit information about an uploaded image (the exactly needed fields to be filled) the last few downloads was for old Egyptian currencies - not used - so what shall I do about them.. Thank you in advance --M. Abuhelwa 04:15, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
- You need to provide a source for your files. You may state this anywhere on the page, but preferably do so in the "|Source=" parameter of the "Information" template. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 04:18, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Re: Tax return
Hey. Thanks for the notice on my talk page that you reverted the edit I made to the Tax return (United States) page. I disagree with your assessment that the edit was "unconstructive" and thought the guidance to leave an "informative edit summary" was particularly asinine. The sentence I deleted was "The forms have been described by BBC journalist Greg Wood as "a work of outstanding complexity" and having been "compiled by a cunning, but ultimately stupid, specialist in the art of torture."" I left the edit summary: "Editorializing on the "stupidity" of tax return forms isn't very encyclopedic." -- and I meant it. The statement is clearly hyperbole and I expect any reader would understand that, but it's neither true nor fair and seems out of place in the first paragraph of a Wikipedia article. Certainly there's a reason to talk about how tax forms have been received in popular culture, but I'm suspicious that the head of the article is the place for it.
I resent being treated like a vandal and being lectured to do the very thing that I'd just done. I don't know if you're running a robot or if your talk page comment was just templated and unconsidered, but I wish you'd think harder about your comments.
Thanks, 24.85.233.242 (talk) 06:44, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Darvas
Some weeks ago someone wrote me, that's why the license looks like, how it looks like. Check my talp page, only three-four message above. I put that thing to the pcture, what could I do now? --Eino81 (talk) 09:09, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey...
The subject of the picture I uploaded is deceased, and no free alternatives can be found. Yet you act like there is a free picture of Robin Harris. If you do know where a free picture of it is, why not tell me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Evilbetty1991 (talk • contribs) 09:45, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Participation at my RfA
|
Thank you for taking the time to weigh in on my RfA. It was successful, in that the community's wish not to grant me the tools at this time was honored. I'm taking all the comments as constructive feedback and hope to become more valuable to the project as a result; I've also discovered several new areas in which to work. Because debating the merits of a candidate can be taxing on the heart and brain, I offer this kitten as a low-allergen, low-stress token of my appreciation. --otherlleft 13:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC) |
User Nicholasweed's photos
The copyrighted images of inanimate objects do not fail WP:NFCC#1. Per the non-free content criteria. They cannot be replaced since many are of vintage Second World War era photos that are in private collections. You also tagged images that were entirely created by myself, or I had permission to use. Those with permission had it stated in the photo info. These photos illustrate markings on the Julleuchter, use of the Julleuchter by the SS and modern originations, and the slave labor workers that were forced to create these items. I am now forced to try and undo your butchering of the article. I intend to go and address all the tags that you created on the photos that are used in the Julleuchter article, as well as the rest that you tagged. For example you tagged the images in the Havic: The Bothering article which were created by me. I took photos of my cards and the box that they came in to show the reader of the article what would be difficult to describe.Nicholasweed (talk) 23:50, 07 February 2010
I also ask that you untag the photos so I can have time to fix any issues you may have with them. I am only one person doing all this work and I might not get everything worked out before things start to be deleted. I just work on my articles in my free time.Nicholasweed (talk) 00:01, 08 February 2010
- I forgot to mention that the images also fail non-free content criteria #8 and non-free content criteria #3a. I'll get to that shortly. Sorry for the confusion. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:29, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Copy vios
Copy vios hi Fastily I noticed you deleted one of this users pictures, he appears to have multiple copy vios, I have tagged a view and they are on his page, hes also claiming copyright on some of then now to otrs like this one, he is the person in the picture so he is clearly not the photographer who would usually retain the copyright and I have found the picture here on a web site , it looks like a press newspaper photoshop to me, what do you think, all his uploads appear suspicious to me, if you get chance have a look, regards. Off2riorob (talk) 10:02, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Off2riorob. It's likely that those files are copyvios, but since no explicit source (i.e website/external link) was provided, it's hard to confirm that. You did the right thing tagging those files with {{subst:npd}}. On a related note, caveat at User talk:MBernal615#My advice. If it escalates, do let me know and I'll back you up; as far as I can see you haven't done anything wrong. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 01:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, I had just seen that, I am ready for that too, as you say I am pretty certain I am all good with this one. Off2riorob (talk) 01:43, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- There are some clear facts , here are a couple.. this from here and notice the copyright in the bottom corner of this pic also claims of copyright to pictures of himself appear very weak indeed, he is in them all for a start and so he is not the photographer who the copyright would usually belong to and the pics he is claiming copyright at otrs all look like newspaper scans to me, all this editors photo uploads require a good checking. Off2riorob (talk) 02:36, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
undeletion
You deleted Pierce Biotechnology on the 23rd of Jan. t's a major company, famous even in its field, and it does not necessarily meet G11, because it can be rewritten to make it less promotional by normal editing. Please restore, & I will do that editing. I know I can restore it by myself, but I always like to ask first. DGG ( talk ) 18:21, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Restoration request
Hi, you deleted "Angelfood McSpade" as a (uncontested) prod today. Plenty of gbook-previewable academic sources exist on the precise themes covered in the article content. Please would you restore it to mainspace, and I shall insert some in the article. Thanks. –Whitehorse1 20:55, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Rollback request
This is an alternate account of Connormah to be used in public places, like airports, schools, internet cafes, etc. Could I please get rollback enabled for this account, so I may revert vandalism swiftly while on this alternative account? Thanks in advance, if you do have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. CMAH (talk) 01:24, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
please undelete images of Charles Fane and Francis Fane
they date from 1720 and 1630 respectively and thus I think deletion may have been mistaken. They should be ok under PD-art licence. Thanks in advance. Rodolph (talk) 02:39, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
rationale for deletion
Could you please clarify why you deleted File:HugoPratt.jpg. Thanks. Hiding T 14:39, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Your speedy reversions...
...are so speedy, methinks you're an auto-bot. At any rate, here's some good reading for you. [[42]]
72.192.220.36 (talk) 15:18, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Requested help in transferring my photos to Commons
An administrator encouraged me to move my photos to Commons. I tried the first one and think I finally got it there. Here is the link [[43]]
But, it appears that got reverted back to en.wikipedia. Here [[44]]
I may be wrong, but does that mean you kicked it back from Commons, to en.Wikipedia?
I am making a good faith attempt to transfer over my photos to Commons, as requested by Admin, but not at all sure about how to do it. If you reverted this one back, does that mean I did it wrong? If so, I would love for you to explain the correct way, so that I won't cause anyone problems. Thanks, EditorASC (talk) 15:50, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
PUF you closed reopened
Just a quick note to let you know I have reopened (as it were) a PUF you closed (Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2010_February_9#File:Agar_Rodney_Adamson.jpg) at Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2010_February_9#File:Agar_Rodney_Adamson.jpg). On a mere "consensus gauging" exercise, I'm sure any administrator would have closed it like you did (especially since I wasn't able to reply to the points raised). So yeah, I just wanted to let you know it was most definitely nothing personal, and, if we weren't talking about the difference between legal and illegal, it would have remained closed. Thanks, - Jarry1250 [Humorous? Discuss.] 16:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
About Account Creator rights
Hi Fastily! When I referred to needing account creator rights, I meant I needed to create the editnotice pages such as this one. Yes, I know it's a redlink, but it's because I can't create it. But, it gives me a message that says, "This is the page notice for Wikipedia:WikiProject Zoo/Bulletin Board. This editnotice can only be created or edited by administrators and accountcreators." So, that's why I would like those rights. The Arbiter★★★ 17:28, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Message
Hi fastily. Um the article is semi protected, so I cant upload the image! Is there any way I can upload a (free) image to a semi protected page????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkim4007 (talk • contribs) 19:05, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Yup. You need to meet the requirements outlined here. Once you're Autoconfirmed, you can edit semiprotected pages. --King Öomie 19:57, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Admin
I still plan on being an adminastrator --Mager123 (talk) 20:59, 9 February 2010 (UTC)Mager123
Closed PUF renominated.
I wanted to inform that a discussion you recently closed was opened again. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 21:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
whoops! permission was granted
Hello, Fastily. I do not know whether it was you who granted my permission under "Confirmed" to edit semi-protected pages or not. If so, thank you. However, I unfortunately did not know that permission was granted before I re-submitted my request for permission on the appropriate page. Alas, I do not know how to remove said, now-unnecessary, second request. I do not wish to anger the powers-that-be.
Hope you had a good superbowl weekend. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paisan1 (talk • contribs) 21:11, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Somewhat ironically, your edit to request confirmed was what pushed your edit count over the threshold for autoconfirmed. I've removed your request. –xenotalk 21:16, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Sounds like a damn good request to me. --King Öomie 21:36, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Indeed. self-fulfilling even. –xenotalk 21:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Sounds like a damn good request to me. --King Öomie 21:36, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Please reinstate GuardianEdge entry
The page for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GuardianEdge was approved with enough evidence/sources that it is not advertising by an admin, can you please restore this page or give me some direction on how to edit the page? Thank you. Floptimusprime (talk) 02:36, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily's not available right now. I'm not an admin but I did a quick Google search on the company and didn't find any notable sources. If, however, an admin "approved" it, then that admin would be the one to undelete it. Based on your other contributions, however, I suggest you review our conflict of interest policy to see if you're unintentionally violating it by writing entries on, and introducing mentions of, the products of a company with which you have a close relationship.--otherlleft 03:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you otherl for your reply, I'm not sure where I can find the name of the original admin's name. Checked under "My Contributions" and since the article was removed it is not showing in that list. The company in the article is well known in the industry, is an Inc. 500 company with articles from a number of major tech sites as well as coverage by notable bloggers in the industry, links to these sources were included in the original article. Do I need to list these sources here? Thanks again for your assistance. Floptimusprime (talk) 03:11, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Regarding My last Article
Dear sir please can you help in telling me the issue of my lats edit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integration_Marketing_%26_Communications , please note that i am trying to introduce the company and it products which became famous as like the other companies like symantec please waiting your advise .
--Jhabib (talk) 13:27, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi there. 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)
Thanks for your RfA Participation
Fastily/Archive 1 - Thanks for your participation in my recent successful RfA. Although you did not express confidence or trust in me, the community did and as you are an equal part of that community, deFacto your confidence and trust in me is much appreciated. As a new admin I will try hard to keep from wading in too deep over the tops of my waders, nor shall I let the Buffalo intimidate me.--Mike Cline (talk) 10:02, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of Page
Hi,
You deleted my page 'The Rock Triangle', I am new to Wikipedia and a resident of the hometown that this page was about. Please can you provide me with details on how I can get my page up and running again please?
Thank you,
Paul —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pauljamestaylor (talk • contribs) 23:59, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for your advice so far but can you let me know how I re-submit my page? I cannot find it anywhere, thank you.
Paul Pauljamestaylor (talk) 14:51, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Regarding File:IPod Touch (3G).jpg
Please restore File:IPod Touch (3G).jpg as the software depicted is COM:DM. NerdyScienceDude :) (✉ click to talk • my edits • sign) 01:38, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- You had 14 days to contest the deletion, so I'm not sure why you're doing this now, but either way, De minnims does not apply - especially since the ipod is the focused subject of the photo. If you need an image of an ipod with the software, consider using a non-free photo, like every other image in iPod Touch. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:50, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- Exactly, the subject is the iPod. The software is de minimis, especially since it is slightly out of focus and not perfect. Only portions of the screen are clearly visible. NerdyScienceDude :) (✉ click to talk • my edits • sign) 01:56, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- I think you misunderstand me, the software icons in File:IPod Touch (3G).jpg are visible and of high resolution - they do not qualify for De minimis. I recommend you re-read Commons:DM before making egregious claims regarding De minimis. File:Jailbroken ipod touch 1.1.1 firmware.JPG is a fine example of what constitutes De minimis. The copyrighted and non-free software icons are dim, in the background, and out of focus. Clearly, the ipod is the main subject. With File:IPod Touch (3G).jpg, sure, the software icons may be out of focus, but they're large and hard to ignore - not exactly in the background here. Wikipedia already interprets the law very loosely, and calling File:IPod Touch (3G).jpg a free file is pushing it. And frankly, It's beyond me why you'd even consider using a blurry photo when you can get a crisp non-free file. For simplicity's sake, if you want software icons in the image of the ipod, go to apple's website and get a non-free version. Alternatively, I can restore the file, but I will have to black out the ipod's screen. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:10, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- I will tweak the image if you restore it. A free image is better than a non-free image. NerdyScienceDude :) (✉ click to talk • my edits • sign) 03:03, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- I think you misunderstand me, the software icons in File:IPod Touch (3G).jpg are visible and of high resolution - they do not qualify for De minimis. I recommend you re-read Commons:DM before making egregious claims regarding De minimis. File:Jailbroken ipod touch 1.1.1 firmware.JPG is a fine example of what constitutes De minimis. The copyrighted and non-free software icons are dim, in the background, and out of focus. Clearly, the ipod is the main subject. With File:IPod Touch (3G).jpg, sure, the software icons may be out of focus, but they're large and hard to ignore - not exactly in the background here. Wikipedia already interprets the law very loosely, and calling File:IPod Touch (3G).jpg a free file is pushing it. And frankly, It's beyond me why you'd even consider using a blurry photo when you can get a crisp non-free file. For simplicity's sake, if you want software icons in the image of the ipod, go to apple's website and get a non-free version. Alternatively, I can restore the file, but I will have to black out the ipod's screen. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:10, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- Exactly, the subject is the iPod. The software is de minimis, especially since it is slightly out of focus and not perfect. Only portions of the screen are clearly visible. NerdyScienceDude :) (✉ click to talk • my edits • sign) 01:56, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Throttle Junkies TV logo
What license format am I supposed to use? I thought for sure the non-free logo was correct. ?? My husband owns the production and the logo, so this usage is within my rights. Thank you for the help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmkenefick (talk • contribs) 04:09, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- When you uploaded the file, you indicated that only Wikipedia had permission to use it. However, we cannot accept files that limit commercial use, derivatives, or restrict usage to Wikipedia/educational uses only. Such files are deleted on spot, per Wikipedia speedy deletion criteria F3. You are certainly free to re-upload the file, but please do not restrict usage of the file again. Otherwise, you run the risk of having the file(s) deleted again. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:54, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
InkHeart again
I'm pretty sure that Special:Contributions/NavalC is InkHeart again. The user has made a couple other edits, but all appear to be Korean-related. Ωphois 04:54, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of my article
Hi,
I had created an article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lime987/Mangalore_Club which got deleted for the reason that I am trying to promote them. I have read the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangalore_Club here in wikipedia which motivated me to write an article on Mangalore Club. This is not a promotion. If this article appears like a promotional article, please let me know how do I rectify it. As this is a popular place in Mangalore, I thought of putting it here. This will surely help the readers. Also, I am a beginner and I request you to help me get the article accepted here.
Thank you, Ashwin.
@$# 07:46, 17 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lime987 (talk • contribs)
Alam82
dear i have got your message. the thing is that i have thoroughly read the rfa help page. which says that due to wiki guidelines concerning adminship any user who have made more than 500 edits onilne and have been registered on wikipedia for more than 3 months can apply for adminship. i have done more than 500 edits. but most of my works were deleted as i did not knew much a year ago about editing policies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alam82 (talk • contribs) 11:10, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
PLEASE RESTORE
hi Fastily, please could you restore these images of paintings made c1720 and c1630...i.e. long out of copyright.
I had put a {PD art} label on them but I applied it to the wrong box, so must have been missed. Thanks in advance.
File:CharlesFanebyJohnVanderbank.jpg
File:FrancisFaneofFulbeck.jpg Rodolph (talk) 11:19, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/gobbleswoggler 2
I've done an arv on this user. I hope I've done the right thing - he/she is not a vandal but I don't know where else to report it (three RfAs in as many days now). I'm not an admin so there's little else I can do. I'm sure Gobbleswoggler is doing everything in good faith, but I'm equally sure we may be dealing with a child who is a football (soccer) fanatic.--Kudpung (talk) 09:15, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Deletion Review
Courtesy notice that I've listed the deletion of File:Melody maker-cover-april-8th-1995.jpg at deletion review. Hiding T 21:02, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Why did you delete my page?
You deleted my page "Charlotte Area Power Exchange" before I was even done creating it.
I didn't even get a chance to include the story behind the death of a National Icon in our community and tie this document in with the NCSF.
Please advise how I can get it back to finish.
Thanks! Mtilley3d (talk) 00:15, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
deletion of my rfa
you can delete my request if you want many thanks
User:Jac16888/vector.js
Bloody hell that was quick. I was actually testing to see if it would show up in the csd categories, didn't get chance to see, is that how you saw it?--Jac16888Talk 08:13, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, sorry about that. I knew something wasn't right there. Yeah, it does show up in the csd categories. -FASTILY (TALK) 08:15, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Stephenson Harwood
May I know why my page was deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shsing (talk • contribs) 09:05, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Re:Admin Coaching
I'm sory, but college is proving to be a lot more involved than I thought.... I will approach you back in the summer.... Sorry for the inconvenience, and thanks for all that you have taught me... Rkr1991 (Wanna chat?) 09:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Noman Alam here!!
Yes...i want to go for a bid about my adminship as i provide all requirements for it. if this time i will be failed i think that after gaining a little more experience i will bid back after a while... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alam82 (talk • contribs) 10:50, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
File:GuneySelale2.jpg
Hi Fastily! Thank you for your message. The above image had left me with the impression of that it had been either watercolored or in any case highly modified, which was why I did not upload the equivalent in Commons, where in any case there is a nearly identical image of the same waterfallls. I should have stated that as a reason here perhaps. But it is not that important, I can upload it in Commons under the same creator/copyright holder permission. Regards. Cretanforever (talk) 21:47, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Because I'm a fail...
Can you please show me how to "decline" without using a script? lol :) Thanks, DustiSPEAK!! 22:15, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
- Haha certainly. You can find all AFC templates at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Templates. Or, you can use my WP:AFC/R cheatsheet and do copy and pastes. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 22:19, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
File copyright problem
The image at File:Annulus-applied-to-metamaterial-cloak.gif, which I recently uploaded is acceptable under NON-free fair use, and I have such a template added to the image. I gave a detailed explanation following Wikipedia guidelines for Non-free fair use. As far as I can tell there is no information missing on its copyright status if you read the content that is part of this image. This also falls under that which is allowed by the "Fair Use" (sections 107 and 108) of the US Copyright law. At the moment it appears that you made a good faith error. Thanks for your inputSteve Quinn (formerly Ti-30X) (talk) 05:54, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- There's no need to get angry. All the deletion tag says is that you didn't include a license tag. Non-free file or not, this can easily be amended by going to WP:ICT/All, and pasting the appropriate tag into the file's description page. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:58, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- OK done. I see what you were getting at. I need to apply this to my three or four other images as well, See Category: Metamaterials. Also, I didn't think I came across as angry. I wasn't intending to come across that way. Steve Quinn (formerly Ti-30X) (talk) 06:16, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Images
As you can clearly see, I have written that the author allows the images to be used as long as both he and the publisher are credited. I don't know, however, which tag fits that. RM (Be my friend)
- Ah, I see that now. Go to WP:ICTIC (or if nothing there fits your tastes, WP:ICT/All for a full list) and select the proper license tag. Once you have selected a tag, copy and paste it onto the relevant files' description pages. Once you have done that, please feel free to remove the deletion tags. Feel free to let me know if you have any other questions or are in need of assistance. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 06:10, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
The problem is, Both are extremely long list, and I know nothing about things like "Creative commons attribution this and that". I definetely won't be able to finish today. RM (Be my friend)
- Have the author and publisher choose a license. Go to WP:PERMISSION and follow the instructions outlined there. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 06:31, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Actually, I read the author's conditions which he/she posted along with the photographs, so I already know that he allows use of the image as long as you credit Anuj Chopra, the brave photographer who snuck into the city as a tourist and snapped off photos with a concealed camera, and ISN Security Watch, who published the photo. Also, I have found the proper license for the photos. I read the creative commons licenses, and found which one suits this photograph best. RM (Be my friend)
User:Megh10
Fastily, I note that you indeffed Megh10 (talk · contribs) for vandalism. Was this the repeated recreation of Danielle campbell?
I'm not saying that there was anything wrong with the block, but per the thread at WP:AN#Danielle campbell it seems that the subject of the article may meet WP:ACTOR. I originally thought that user:Woogee had posted the request, and gave him some advice on his talk page - This is a little bit out of my area of knowledge, but if Danielle Campbell is the star of a new Disney movie the she probably meets WP:ACTOR. You have two chances here - either write an article in a user sandbox, or start it at the article incubator. Either way, once the article is in a fit state for transfer to mainspace, there is WP:DRV to get the salting of the title undone. A well-prepared article that meets WP:ACTOR, WP:V, WP:CITE etc will have a good chance of making it to mainspace. If you need help in creating a personal sandbox give me a yell.
Would you be prepared to unblock Megh10 if they agree to work on an article in either a personal sandbox or at the Article Incubator, and then go through DRV when the article is ready for release? Mjroots (talk) 07:25, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- I did indef Megh10 for the recreation of Danielle campbell and Danielle Campbell (Actress). If the user is willing to edit constructively, by all means an unblock of that user is fine with me. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 07:40, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll give the option to Megh10 and see what the response is.
Fair use images
Hi. Thanks for bringing the images to my attention. I am aware of the policies you have listed. I will look into these soon and see what can be done. With regards to History of BBC television idents, I have been trying to cut back on the amount of fair use images in use there for some time. Wikiwoohoo (talk) 13:28, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Ubisoft images
Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Attribution-Ubisoft 3 is on the verge of being deleted of the 700+ images on commons some of them are used on wikipedia and do qualify for fair use (when the Template:Attribution-Ubisoft 3 is declared unfree) if moved to wikipedia and re-sized.Some of the files ware once on wikipedia an deleted under CSD F8 can you please undelete them.
A partial list (i am 1/2 finished reviewing the commons category for images used here):
- File:Assassin's Creed II gondola screen.jpg
- File:Assassinscreed dna.jpg
- File:Atrus.jpg
- File:Call-of-juarez-bound-in-blood-screen1.jpg
- File:Chessmaster 10th Edition2 edited.JPG
- File:Chessmaster 9000 screenshot.jpg
- File:Darkmessiah dragonfire.jpg
- File:Darkmessiah undeadcyclops.jpg
- File:Driver-pl-nycskyline.jpg
- File:FarCry2 diamondcase.png
- File:FarCry2 env2.png
- File:Fisher camo-suit scpt.jpg
- File:GRAW5.jpg
- File:HeroesV ElfTown.png
- File:HeroesV Gameplay.png
- File:LOMAC - Su-27 Screen 1.jpg
- File:Mixed Breed.PNG
--IngerAlHaosului (talk) 11:59, 18 February 2010 (UTC) cont (3/4)
- File:Outfitting.JPG
- File:Petz.jpg
- File:Prince of Persia SOT Fighting.png
- File:Prince-persia-sands-time-2.jpg
- File:Princeofpersia-thefallenkingss.jpg
- File:Princeofpersialogo.jpg
- File:Ratman 2.jpg
--IngerAlHaosului (talk) 12:35, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
cont (4/4)
BTW, what is the recommended size for a non-free image 0.3 or 1.3 MegaPixels ? --IngerAlHaosului (talk) 12:56, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
- Done. The advised resolution for a non-free image is ~100x100 to 500x500 pixels max. -FASTILY (TALK)
- tx, by this time tomorrow all of them will have a rational,NoCommons, and a 0.25 Mpixel(reduced) version.--IngerAlHaosului (talk) 04:56, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- No prob. Mkay, sounds good. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 04:59, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry to bother you again but i made a mistake with File:Atrus.jpg with i added to the list by mistake can you please un-undelete it.--IngerAlHaosului (talk) 06:10, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- No worries. Done. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:22, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- Same story with this one File:Teledahn-Vista.jpg.Sry, this is the last one i already finished the list--IngerAlHaosului (talk) 12:24, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- No worries.
- Sorry to bother you again but i made a mistake with File:Atrus.jpg with i added to the list by mistake can you please un-undelete it.--IngerAlHaosului (talk) 06:10, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- No prob. Mkay, sounds good. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 04:59, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- tx, by this time tomorrow all of them will have a rational,NoCommons, and a 0.25 Mpixel(reduced) version.--IngerAlHaosului (talk) 04:56, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
hello there.. i need your help..you know that i have created a page Allah Abad there is another page Allahabad so I want to create a new page and list these both pages over there...so that people would not be confused... please tell me that how to create a new page listing some articles...?better send me the link to create a new page of that kind...will be thankful ...--Noman Alam Allah Abadi 13:35, 18 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alam82 (talk • contribs)
Article Deletion
G'day, i am astonished as to why on earth you deleted an article about the Country Club Casino in Tasmania, after it was only 24 hours old, sure it needed work being done, but i spend several hours of my time writing that and finding the co-ordinates to remove a redlink from several articles including Wrest Point Casino and Launceston, so i can contribute my small piece to this encyclopaedia(not sure it's so worthwhile now), i feel more time should have been appropriate and perhaps even a mention of "article for deletion"? or whatever it is, not straight away and rudely deleted, not very professional i think. thank-you and g'day Stony ¿/̵͇̿̿/'̿̿ ̿ ̿ 09:18, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- I'll agree that Country Club Casino might not have been a blatant advert, but it was getting there. If I were to restore the page, would you be willing to help clean it up? -FASTILY (TALK)
Please take a moment to read the detailed and reasoned discussion on the talk page, in particular the section Talk:History_of_BBC_television_idents#Images before powering in and removing images wholesale within 30 seconds of hitting the article.
This is an article specifically on the history of the BBC on-screen visual identity -- a topic well worthy of encyclopedic attention in an encyclopedia which is as important a source on popular culture as this one.
I am as aware of the NFC policies and the underlying rationales behind them as anyone. But let me draw your attention to the key phrase: non-free content is only used "if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic". That is our underlying goal here: to increase reader's understanding, about the topic they have looked up.
These images squarely pass that test. This is an article about these very images. Showing what they look like directly adds to reader understanding, squarely on the topic. Just as eg in our survey article on modern art, we show what modern art looks like.
The use is selective - far from all possible images are shown; and in detail the use of particular images has been discussed on the talk page, including by Black Kite (talk · contribs), who is no slouch when it comes to a restrictive interpretation of WP:NFC.
I have therefore reversed the wholesale removal. If you wish to discuss the use or not of particular individual images, please be very welcome to do so on the talk page. Jheald (talk) 15:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- If you hadn't reverted I would have done so myself. But fair enough. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:42, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
InkHeart
The new user Special:Contributions/클리어_워터 is following her MO of adding unsourced ratings to Korean TV articles. Ωphois 18:37, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Pharaway
You posted regarding Mike Allen. He is posting over and over again in the wrong spot on an investigation. He is responding in the accuser's area. He can not add comments on behalf of the accuser. He has been told and he keeps doing it. Pharaway (talk) 19:57, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Football positions
Where on earth did you get the idea that it is 'vandalism' to include several good examples of each footballing role? It is a good way for people to grasp each role better, as they can then relate each position to a player they know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.14.43 (talk) 20:06, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Aosta valley
Hello! i'm just correcting the articles about Aosta valley. Please, before deleting, pay attention to the fact that : - The name of the inhabitants in italian are incorrected for all the toponyms excepted for Aosta, which has a double version (italian-french); - All the coats of arms have been deleted from wiki:it because of copyright violation. The ones I have inserted have been designed for the wiki:fr and they are free ; - I have deleted the part "shield_alt" in the infobox, and inserted "shield_size" in order to correct the dimension of the coat of arms, as in the infobox of Aosta/Aoste. - Every commune in Aosta valley has a double version "Comune di..."/"Commune de...", which must be inserted, as for "Città di Aosta"/"Ville d'Aoste", because they are both official (for the two german-speaking communes of Gressoney-Saint-Jean and Gressoney-La-Trinité, the third version "Gemeinde Gressoney..." is official too).
Please, refer to my discussion page on wiki:fr to discuss about this project. I'll be back on Saturday. Thank you :) Simon --79.24.219.241 (talk) 20:18, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
ICU page
Hi,
I am a staff member of the Japan ICU Foundation in New York, working with ICU to improve its Wikipedia entry. Please let me know how I should go about this.
Thanks.
Phastings111 (talk) 20:20, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- Please see WP:COI, WP:YFA, and WP:MOS. If you have any specific questions, please feel free to ask them. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 20:42, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Gressoney-Saint-Jean
Explain me where I vandalized the article of Gressoney-Saint-Jean, I just inserted the names of all frazioni/hameaux of this commune. I wrote almost all articles on wiki:fr, wiki:it, wiki:ru and wiki:ukr about Aosta valley. I was born in Aosta/Aoste. --79.24.219.241 (talk) 20:25, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Heya Fastily, thanks for your help at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pharaway, however, please note that Pharaway reserves the right to make changes to their comments, such as this change (even if those changes make little or no sense 
)
Kindest regards, SpitfireTally-ho! 20:25, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
I got a message about vandilism. I did not do that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.217.52.227 (talk) 20:27, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- Consider creating an account then. Go here to request an account. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:01, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
explain
explain plz —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tremmaester (talk • contribs) 20:34, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
not that it is my sock puppet account sorry —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tremmaester (talk • contribs) 20:46, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Pekul7
I think dropping templates on User talk:Pekul7 is a tad harsh and unhelpful as they were legitimately trying to improve the encyclopedia, albeit they were unaware of the NOTDICTIONARY rule. The templates are nonspecific and imply that the improvement attempts constituted outright vandalism. --Cybercobra (talk) 20:35, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Berryz Koubou
What's wrong with my edit? -- 114.162.140.219 (talk) 20:35, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
152.3.249.31
Is this a mistake? I don't see whats wrong with the edit to Bernard Moullier--Jac16888Talk 20:49, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- Unfortunately yes :( I have noted that on the IP's talk. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:20, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Your threat to block me
Please explain - I really do not understand why providing an internal link can be a vandalization?! For God's sake it was not an external link to some terrorist site, but a link to a Wikipedia article. What's wrong with that? 217.236.201.18 (talk) 20:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- you shouldn't use vikipedia it is forbidden I guess (Tremmaester (talk) 20:56, 19 February 2010 (UTC)).
- I have replied here. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- sorry I didn't know he was a terorist .four tildes (Tremmaester (talk) 21:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)).
- I have replied here. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Slow down
You're going too fast with huggle, apparently rolling back legitimate edits and blocking good faith users. –xenotalk 20:55, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- He's trying, but his Huggle is a Toyota! --King Öomie 20:57, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- She is an admin so she can do whatever she wants I guess? (Tremmaester (talk) 20:58, 19 February 2010 (UTC)).
I'm wondering about this link [45], which I removed, two IPs squabbled over, and you then restored. Please see the discussion on the talk page. I'm pretty sure it isn't appropriate for the article, but I'd like to hear your opinion.
Please see Talk:Fred Dinenage#Weird_link. --TS 21:06, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, my revert never involved the link. I'll look into it anyways. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:12, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- Oops. I missed that. Sorry. --TS 21:18, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
reversion
Why did you revert my edit?[46] 75.62.109.146 (talk) 21:06, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm not Wikipedia staff of any kind, but I'd say it was probably because the reference is unconfirmed. DotKuro (talk) 21:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- DotKuro is right here. Sources should be cited in a way so that they can be verified by others. Regardless, it seems your edit was made in good faith, so I have struck the warning on your talk. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:17, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- What do you mean by the citation is not verifiable? The book info is listed in the reference section (Dawson 1997, "Logical Dilemmas", the main book-length biography of Gödel); the footnote refers to that reference, as do several other footnotes in the article. As the edit summary mentions, I didn't check the page number myself, but I read the book several years ago and it definitely discusses the Grandjean questionnaire at length in several places. Anyway, it's best to discuss that type of issue on the talk page instead of using a revert script. 75.62.109.146 (talk) 21:31, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- Looking more closely at that article, the references are a mess. I will try to clean it up. 75.62.109.146 (talk) 21:46, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- If you need a hand with the technical side of the referencing drop me a line (I'll be signing off shortly, but would be able to look over the article tomorrow afternoon if you wanted me to). Regards, SpitfireTally-ho! 21:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- Looking more closely at that article, the references are a mess. I will try to clean it up. 75.62.109.146 (talk) 21:46, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- What do you mean by the citation is not verifiable? The book info is listed in the reference section (Dawson 1997, "Logical Dilemmas", the main book-length biography of Gödel); the footnote refers to that reference, as do several other footnotes in the article. As the edit summary mentions, I didn't check the page number myself, but I read the book several years ago and it definitely discusses the Grandjean questionnaire at length in several places. Anyway, it's best to discuss that type of issue on the talk page instead of using a revert script. 75.62.109.146 (talk) 21:31, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Camp Canadensis revision
Hi,
I noticed you reverted my edits to the Camp Canadensis article earlier today. I attend the camp and have extensive knowledge of its history/structure and I can assure you those edits were accurate and beneficial to the article. Just wanted to give you a heads up about that.
Best,
Alex —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.98.217.175 (talk) 21:35, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
File:Glider Cockpit.JPG
In the discussion on 4 Feb 2010 you said "Keep for now, OTRS permission sent". Why therefore was the image deleted today from Glider (sailplane)? JMcC (talk) 17:34, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
- WP:CSD#F11. The file was tagged with {{subst:npd}} while awaiting OTRS permission, but apparently none was ever received. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:34, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- I have followed up with the owner of the image. I can see from the copy of the e-mail to me that he has belatedly sent his permission to OTRS. Please let me know if it will be possible to reverse the deletion. JMcC (talk) 09:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
- If OTRS permission is sent and received, drop me a line and I'll happily reverse the deletion. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:16, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- The copyright owner copied me the e-mail that he sent to 'permissions. It should have been processed by the OTRS team by now. Please reverse the deletion. JMcC (talk) 22:49, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- The file is available on Commons as File:Glidercockpit.JPG. Please consider forwarding another email to 'permissions'. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:30, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
- The copyright owner copied me the e-mail that he sent to 'permissions. It should have been processed by the OTRS team by now. Please reverse the deletion. JMcC (talk) 22:49, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- If OTRS permission is sent and received, drop me a line and I'll happily reverse the deletion. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:16, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Age of majority
I see you asked the latest admin candidate about age of majority. I only recently discovered (via a rather notorious site) that quite a few of the admins I know are quite young and likely got the bit when under that age. All of them are among the finest examples of admins I've ever encountered. My experience is admittedly limited, so I'm curious if there are any examples you know of where it an admin's minority status led to a perceived or actual problem? Thanks for your input.--otherlleft 13:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- Lol The Wikipedia Review? To be honest, I know of no specific incidents, but the recent arbcom ruling regarding childrens' privacy on the internet/Wikipedia is a reasonable backing for this question. I only asked the question because it seemed to me the admin candidate was a kid - obviously I was wrong, judging by the candidate's response. That being said, I don't have anything to add. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:14, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- You thought I was a child? Wikiwoohoo (talk) 20:25, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- No actually that place seems tame compared to Wikipedia Watch (and let's not even talk about Encyclopedia Dramatica . . . ), where I was browsing through quite the long page of TMI. The childrens' privacy question makes a lot of sense to me; I just didn't make the connection right off. Thanks!--otherlleft 00:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Unblock request of Bizpat72
Hello Fastily. Bizpat72 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards, Sandstein 22:44, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
And, Fastily, after the block of Bizpat72 is lifted, I'm considering blocking both of you for 24h for your edit warring at No Agenda (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Sandstein 22:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you Sandstein (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) for recommending to unblock my account. For the record, I was not aware I was taking part in an edit war on No Agenda, I was totally confused by what was going on. Of course now I know the warnings are not robotized processes. I'm a bit disappointed though by Fastily's reaction in all this because at one point I was even using Edit Summary to justifying my contribution. I don't understand why this was not taken into consideration by Fastily before blocking my account. Thanks again. --Bizpat72 (talk) 00:23, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
- While you have a point Bizpat72 you BOTH should have been blocked for edit warring but you both should have gotten the three revert rule warning as well I suggest you look at this page Wikipedia:Edit warring and when doing this try to discuss it calmly on the talk page of the article The Movie Master 1 (talk) 00:41, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Wikiwoohoo
Hi Fastily, I hate to nag, especially since you've often helped me out, but was it really necessary to leave 21 separate CSD template warnings for Wikiwoohoo? These things are quite unsightly, take up a lot of room on a talk page and all say exactly the same thing. Since nobody needs to read the same message 21 times in a row, might I respectfully suggest that you drop the template once and then manually list all the images/pages of concern below. Best, HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 00:21, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
- ^ This is the same reason Angus blocked your sock account. I've briefly blocked it again, and unblocked it. Please slow down with huggle and consolidate deletion messages where appropriate. Also, check your email. –xenotalk 01:07, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
- I realize that the number of messages is a obtrusive, otherwise I would never have left this message in the first place. Regardless, I have collapsed the section. Someone found it fit to block my sock last time nearly 10 hours after the incident in question for apparently not leaving a message to the user. You blocked 15 hours later after the incident in question, after I had left a message to the user. My friend, recall that blocks are meant to be preventive, not used as punishment. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:41, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
- The block was preventative as your response to my last urging to moderate your approach did not leave me with any confidence you were taking on board the various criticisms you've received over the past little while (noting that it was also done in part due to the reckless huggling - something you've been censured for in the past). However, the below lengthy introspective message does leave me with some enthusiasm that you will, indeed, slow down. You are not the only vandal-fighter on the site and some juvenile vandalism staying up an extra 30 seconds, or even an extra 5 minutes, is not such a problem that we should blindly and indiscriminately revert good faith edits in haste. Biting newcomers can and does cause irreparable damage; it remains to be seen whether the two users you erroneously blocked yesterday will continue contributing here. Please take this on board and consider it a final warning. The next time it won't be your sock that is blocked. –xenotalk 14:00, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
- I'll be frank. I really care about what I'm doing here to help Wikipedia and I know I'd have quit long ago if I didn't. All I want is to help Wikipedia to the best of my ability and look into it's best interests. But, I'm nowhere perfect, despite the fact that people liken me/admins to perfection - after everything, I feel like a nefarious criminal in my own domain. This isn't an excuse of any sort however and I'm not saying what I'm doing/done is right, but know I'm only here help out Wikipedia. Making nearly 500 edits and actions in roughly an hour and a half wasn't and isn't one of my best moves, but in the wake of a /b/ tard attack, I'm working to clean it all up. Again, not an excuse, as this really isn't excusable (but I care too much about Wikipedia to allow that libel to stick around and get in the newspapers and media - I know I got a lot of vandalism, but unfortunately, a high number of false positives as well. I suppose it's either me, or the 'pedia that has to go - but at any rate, I'll choose me.) I hate drama. I only want to use my mop and bucket to clean, not to dominate others. In an effort to cleanup some of our files (WP:NOTREPOSITORY and because Wikipedia is not an orphanage), I mass nominated files for deletion. This didn't sit well with some people, who have been haranguing me non-stop since then, claiming "disruptive editing" - but really, that depends on varying interpretations of what is deemed disruptive (I can find no policy pages nor guidline pages that specifically defines the term "disruption" on Wikipedia). Oddly enough, the crime it seems, was mainly being "unwilling to discuss", despite the fact that I had left a message on the user's talk page warning them of the possibility of being spammed with ~100 or so tags regarding low quality and orphaned photos. In hindsight, I feel bad for the kid, after methodically going through their contribs, attempting a cleanup job. Yet again, my sock was blocked today for the same "offense" a full 15 hours after the incident in question, in which I left a non-templated, personalized message, informing the user of the deletions. Wikipedia is becoming a very political place, and I suppose I've found out the hard way: it's awful hard to move around greatly without feeling the retributions of one's actions. If Wikipedia can be likened to a political senate/congress/house of reps/parliament, we've just as well become our very own political government - everyone must be politically correct. No doubt I've offended the all the wrong people it seems, and received nothing but hell in return. This place has changed so much since when I first joined. There's a lot I've done here that I'm not proud of, and for that, I am sorry - but I can happily say that for most of it, I am. This project has a beautiful mission and a great future ahead of it and no doubt it's going to go somewhere special. But the drama-mongering, and the infighting are going to ruin this Jimmy Wales' vision. I know I'm probably not the first to say this, and no doubt not the last. All this time I've probably come across as irrational, curt, and angry, but in all fairness, I want everyone to know this isn't who I am or wish to be as an editor. In ending, I just want to say that we have a high tolerance for newbie error, but when a an administrator royally f*cks it up, all hell breaks loose. A truism at best, but just some brain candy to chew on. Thanks for reading. Sincerely, FASTILY (TALK) 06:59, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
- I always appreciated your help, especially where the Americans refused (again) to respect British culture and try to get all the county coats-of-arms banned. But y'know Fastly, unfortunately far too many sysops come across as irrational, curt, and angry, because many of them really do become sysops for the wrong reasons, and so long as any idiots can vote on an RfA, we'll always keep getting some true idiots and ones with an agenda. That makes many people, particularly regular, mature non-sysop editors very skeptical, and then the good sysops suffer and get stigmatised.
Aye, even, the most law abiding citizens find policemen a pain in the ass, especially when they stop your and ask for your papers. If you as much as hesitate, or tremble while you're fishing your licence out of your wallet, they've got their hand on their holster and are already spitting fire and being rude. Power breeds contempt, and ironically also contempt for power. I am staggered at the mere possibility of being able to do 500 edits of any kind in just one hour, I wouldn't have thought it technically possible, and it smacks of my constant bickering about drive-past editors and admins. You're not being paid for it; nobody knows who your are, Jimbo isn't going to drop in and pat you on the knee and say what a good boy you've been; so it's no use on your CV. Take it easy, slow down a bit, or take a Wikibreak, Then come back refreshed and do your best for the 'pedia and its images again.--Kudpung (talk) 07:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
- I always appreciated your help, especially where the Americans refused (again) to respect British culture and try to get all the county coats-of-arms banned. But y'know Fastly, unfortunately far too many sysops come across as irrational, curt, and angry, because many of them really do become sysops for the wrong reasons, and so long as any idiots can vote on an RfA, we'll always keep getting some true idiots and ones with an agenda. That makes many people, particularly regular, mature non-sysop editors very skeptical, and then the good sysops suffer and get stigmatised.
- Thanks for changing the tags. Wikiwoohoo (talk) 21:58, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
File:Eva Rivas.JPG
Hi, i got a question.. first off all i would like to say that i do have a permission email of Eva Rivas to use this file on wikipedia.. (it is written in russian).., secondly .. is there no warning before deleting files? Thnxvm.--P i x i e talkiε! e-talkiε!! 11:03, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
- For a file to be considered free enough to be hosted on the Wikimedia servers, it must allow derivatives, commercial use, and not restrict usage to Wikipedia/educational uses only. You restricted file usage to Wikipedia only. Per speedy deletion criterion F3, such files may be deleted on spot. You are welcome to re-upload the file, but don't restrict usage to Wikipedia only. Othrewise, you run the risk of having the file deleted again. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:08, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey
Hey Fastily, thanks for your help, as you will see it proved usefull on my user page :). I have two more questions, is it violating any guidelines to take pictures of portraits/ paintings and upload them as pictures for articles? And; I took a few pictures were unknown people are also included, they are in public places. Is it okay to upload them without there consent? Whilst overseas I took a few that turned out okay, I can crop some of them. Thanks, Mruserbox (talk) 11:46, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
- No, you will not be violating any policies or guidelines if you upload portraits/paintings/statues. Just be sure that you tag the files with the appropriate license tags (See WP:ICT/PD#Art for a list of tags. If none of these tags appliesm, then the file is probably copyrighted/non-free, so go to WP:ICT/FU#Art and choose a tag there instead.) As for photographs of people in public places, yes, they are allowed (see WP:IUP#What are 'public' and 'private' places? for specifics. Hope that helps to answer your questions. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 20:27, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Harrison Thomas LaTour
You deleated the Harrison Thomas LaTour page, a descendant of an African Creole confederate soldier. Can you tell me why. An African American person of descent joining a national organization that is known for racial issues is notability. Also, this is black history month, and you have a current event. Harrison Thomas LaTour is the only African Creole descendant registered in the State of Oklahoma as a Sons of Confederate Veterans. We feel that you have been racist in your decision to delete this page.
Lgc2010 (talk) 16:22, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
- The reason given was "Expired PROD: unable to find independent coverage in reliable sources, no evidence of notability other than bare assertion"; the page was nominated for deletion for this reason, and nobody has added sources in the meantime. If you wish to have a copy of this article in your userspace to work on, I can copy it for you. But it isn't racist to delete improperly-sourced articles, and improper of you to suggest as such. Rodhullandemu 16:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
- Undeleted as a contested prod per Wikipedia:PROD#Objecting. However, you should work to improve the sourcing otherwise it may be subject to an AFD debate. –xenotalk 16:30, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
The page was full of references and sources. It had a reference to Harrison Thomas LaTour speaking at a Historical Society meeting, it had references to Harrison Thomas LaTour requesting to have a street named, it had genealogical and historical data attacked to it. It also had reference to President Obama honoring Black Confederate Soldiers. Instead of deleating the article, User talk:Fastily should have helped to improve the article.
Lgc2010 (talk) 16:51, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
- Next time you disagree with a prod, remove the tag; don't simply opine on the talk page. Seems Fastily missed your objection there. –xenotalk 16:53, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
When I logged in today, User talk:Fastily greeting was Bonjour, a French Hello. This told me that this person has some reation to the French term. Harrison Thomas LaTour is a French Creole descendant of a Louisiana African-Creole Confederate Soldier, who has just been recognized as a member of the Sons of Confederate Soldiers. I still believe that this user, because of the French relationship to thier knowledge may have been racist.
Lgc2010 (talk) 17:01, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
- Lgc, fastily also greets with 你好 and hello, you are looking for connections which are not there. Put simply, the page was deleted because nobody objected by removing the prod--Jac16888Talk 17:07, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Some pages created by Harrison Thomas LaTour and edited as a result of Harrison Thomas LaTour.
Lee Wilder Thomas
Jake Simmons Jr. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lgc2010 (talk • contribs) 17:13, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Quick request
Hey Fastily, can you delete Air arbison? An editor probably misread it somewhere and created an article for it (he meant air abrasion in a dentistry context). I've moved it to the properly spelled name and redirected it to Dental drill but the typo is now a double redirect. Cheers, XXX antiuser eh? 19:44, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Re: AIV/Sumbuddi
Re your comment:
"I just blocked 86.179.106.212 (talk · contribs) as a sock of Sumbuddi per an AIV report independent of this SPI investigation."
Trouble is that AIV report is not really independent, as it comes from User:Editor 410 a newly registered, but clearly vastly experienced user, who I suspect to be a sockpuppet of User:Wiki libs, who was previously indefblocked for massive sockpuppeting, following a report by User:Sumbuddi. Which is a rather neat circle, isn't it?
Details here: [47]
So it would probably be most accurate to say that that AIV report is not independent of this SPI investigation at all, in fact previous false reports by the same user, which now form the basis for subsequent claims of block evasion, are the proximate cause of this SPI. The details are in the SPI page. 86.180.169.62 (talk) 19:56, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Fastily, as I previously posted in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Sumbuddi if you look at 86.179.106.212 Contributions all he's been doing is defending himself there and on the User:talk pages of the parties involved -- although some of the edits by Sumbuddi on his own talk page are somewhat dicey, it's not like he's vandalizing (or even editing) articles or other people's User pages... Mojoworker (talk) 22:58, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Kingoomieiii
Whoa, are you sure about transclusion yet? :) According to the "Will expand later" comment, he's not done with Q2 yet. Best, JamieS93❤ 20:38, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, that was a smart move on my part - I thought he had finished the questions, but well, he didn't. Thank you for letting me know. Warm Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 20:45, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
N360 screenshot
What info is needed for the N360 screenshot so that it doesn't infringes copyright? --Tyw7 (Talk • Contributions) Changing the world one edit at a time! 01:17, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Sony Magic Link
Thanks for the feedback on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SonyMagicLink.jpg, I forwarded the email from the copyright holder providing permission to use the image file to permissions-en-at-wikipedia.org as requested. Please advise if there is anything further I should do, I want to get the image cleared before beginning a revision of the article on Magic Link ejly (talk) 04:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
- I have tagged the file with {{OTRS pending}}. If the email you sent to permissions-en@wikimedia.org is adequate, then the deletion notice will be removed, and an OTRS ticket number added in its place. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:54, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
- Ok thanks, fyi the text of the email is posted in the discussion section for the image at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_talk:SonyMagicLink.jpg. I understand that the deletion may occur after a week normally does tagging the file with OTRS pending postpone that? Or will the review (usually) take less than a week? ejly (talk) 03:35, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Can you please undelete Candace Otto
Hi, I saw you deleted Candace Otto as the result of an expired prod... I can't have been watching too closely because I missed it and would have improved the referencing etc on the article if I knew it was about to be deleted. Otto is notable as a state titleholder and Miss America delegate, and if you give me the chance I will be able to reference the article to show her notability. Cheers PageantUpdater talk • contribs 05:37, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
- Although I am not WP staff, I would think that permission of use would be required. [ dotKuro ] [ talk ] [ contribs ] 20:39, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
- At any rate, fair enough - I have restored the article. Thank you for offering to clean it up. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:56, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
- Cheers, I have now tidied it up and improved the referencing. I'm just curious as to why you deleted it as non-notable when there were clearly plenty of references at the bottom of the page? Sure the style was wrong and there were no urls but it was fairly easy to discover plenty of news coverage etc. PageantUpdater talk • contribs 00:54, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- At any rate, fair enough - I have restored the article. Thank you for offering to clean it up. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:56, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Koda Kumi Discography
why do you keep deleting the 2nd weeks sales and platinum certification from Koda Kumi's album "Universe" in her discography and say its unconstructive?!? -_- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Duphin (talk • contribs) 20:44, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Guestbook
Where is your guestbook? NerdyScienceDude :) (✉ click to talk • my edits • sign) 03:22, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Never quite got around to creating one. I guess I should do that sometime. :P -FASTILY (TALK) 03:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
unresolved unfree images claiming to be free
there are some images here at wikipedia that claim to be free but war rejected by the admins on commons.Discussions on commons(perma version), on wikipedia--IngerAlHaosului (talk) 07:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Low quality?
I'm curious how this file is low quality?--Rockfang (talk) 08:38, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Regarding File:iPhone.png
Hello again, Fastily. Please restore File:iPhone.png. I did some work to make it less copyright infringing. I will need to work on it some more. NerdyScienceDude :) (✉ click to talk • my edits • sign) 01:08, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hi NerdyScienceDude. Dimming the entire photo doesn't exactly work in terms of copyright - the file would still be non-free. No worries though, I have uploaded a new version of the photo, with the screen blacked out. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:10, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- All that needs to be done now is to restore the image's talk page. Could you please do it? Thanks. NerdyScienceDude :) (✉ click to talk • my edits • sign) 13:44, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Never mind. Xeno just did it. NerdyScienceDude :) (✉ click to talk • my edits • sign) 14:21, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Surely we can come up with a better picture, though. What about custom icons on a custom skin (all CC-licensed)? (Is that only possible thru jailbreaking?) –xenotalk 23:58, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Never mind. Xeno just did it. NerdyScienceDude :) (✉ click to talk • my edits • sign) 14:21, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- All that needs to be done now is to restore the image's talk page. Could you please do it? Thanks. NerdyScienceDude :) (✉ click to talk • my edits • sign) 13:44, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity
Why is a page consisting only of links to diffs, with no commentary whatsoever, considered an "attack page", but this is perfectly acceptable?—Chowbok ☠ 03:00, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- I deleted that page because obviously the community doesn't approve of it. The diff on Wildhartlivie's page isn't really any better. Although it looks like preparation for some ANI/RFC page/post, the offending text is no longer on the page. At any rate, the MfD is justified. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:16, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- How frigging disingenuous. You have to go back 10 days to find a version of a page that page does not exist in that form now, it has been hugely changed. Please look at the page as it currently exists: User:Wildhartlivie/Sandbox. Because your pages have been deleted does not give you free license to misrepresent something as your post does. Couple that with the fact that you nominated it for deletion 4 full minutes after your attack page was deleted reflects poorly on intent here. Can we say retaliation? Wildhartlivie (talk) 03:21, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- So by your logic, blanking that page I had would have been acceptable?—Chowbok ☠ 03:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- No dude. You must be wearing out your mouse clicking back and forth between all these pages and making posts designed to flay me. My logic is to ask Fastily if he can please blank the history on that page, since it is titled a sandbox page that would be at risk of being deleted again if were deleted as recreation of a deleted page. Is that possible, Fastily? Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:31, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- If that is not possible, and the article was deleted, and then you used the same namespace for unrelated purposes, I would not submit it for deletion. I realize "Sandbox" is pretty generic namespace, and I don't think it'd be fair to not ever let you use it again.—Chowbok ☠ 06:34, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Well, when a page that has the same name is recreated, the most valid reason to re-delete it is as a recreation of a previously deleted page. I've never not seen that be successful. I didn't say you would nominate it, that applies to anyone for any reason. Wildhartlivie (talk) 12:22, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, that is possible, per WP:CSD#U1. Would you like me to do that for you? -FASTILY (TALK) 06:40, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I would, thanks so much. Wildhartlivie (talk) 12:22, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- If that is not possible, and the article was deleted, and then you used the same namespace for unrelated purposes, I would not submit it for deletion. I realize "Sandbox" is pretty generic namespace, and I don't think it'd be fair to not ever let you use it again.—Chowbok ☠ 06:34, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- No dude. You must be wearing out your mouse clicking back and forth between all these pages and making posts designed to flay me. My logic is to ask Fastily if he can please blank the history on that page, since it is titled a sandbox page that would be at risk of being deleted again if were deleted as recreation of a deleted page. Is that possible, Fastily? Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:31, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- So by your logic, blanking that page I had would have been acceptable?—Chowbok ☠ 03:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
File:Blackpool-GKER.JPG
Dear Fastily, I think you might be over-interpreting the US copyright law with respect to old anonymous photographic material. The work in question was created prior to 1923 - the subject matter proves this. It was subsequently published in 1938 in a European magazine. I believe therefore that in both US and European law, the image is in the public domain.
Regards Oxonhutch (talk) 12:24, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Log
- The result of the discussion was: Delete; the work was not published prior to 1923, as the uploader states. For an image to be in the public domain in the US, it must have been published prior to 1923. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:41, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
File:Blackpool-GKER.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).
- "Although published anonymously in 1938, and thus in the public domain in the EU, the photograph itself predates 1923 as the locomotive does not bear the mark of the successor company (the London Midland and Scottish Railway {LMS}". The way I see it, you say so yourself that the file was not published prior to 1938. So I'll ask you again: where was the file first published and in what year was it first published? -FASTILY (TALK) 00:17, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- It's the first time you have asked me by-the-way. Except with a (PD-US) template - which was not the right one, I now see - I did not, in my text, state that it was 'published' prior to 1938, I merely stated that it was created by an anonymous photographer some time between 1909 and 1922 - more than likely, looking at the clothes worn, the former. None of this precludes it from having been published between these dates after it was photographed. Oxonhutch (talk) 07:20, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- "Although published anonymously in 1938, and thus in the public domain in the EU, the photograph itself predates 1923 as the locomotive does not bear the mark of the successor company (the London Midland and Scottish Railway {LMS}". The way I see it, you say so yourself that the file was not published prior to 1938. So I'll ask you again: where was the file first published and in what year was it first published? -FASTILY (TALK) 00:17, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Video Converter Max
Thank you for speed deleting the article. Unfortunately, the same user inserted the article again. --CE 62.178.80.242 (talk) 14:25, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- The page was deleted again, this time by NarlinWiki. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:08, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Mary Hood
Fastily, I left you and another editor a message in re: Mary Hood images on my talk page (see Image Deletion). Thanks for your continuous efforts to make Wikipedia great. Carsonmc (talk) 17:32, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Reverse 911 Page
Hi,
You recently deleted the Reverse 911 page. REVERSE 911(r) is NOT a generic term although it is sometimes used as one. Much like Kleenex and Coca Cola, it refers to a specific product owned and trademarked by one company.
I work for the company that owns and actively patrols the trademark for REVERSE 911(r). I was reading some of the links here and, after discussing the matter with our Legal department as well as the Marketing VP, we would like to request that the page for REVERSE 911 be locked so that no one can create a page for it.
Is this something you can do for us or can you direct me to someone who can assist me?
Should you need to reach me, I would be happy to supply my name and contact information but I hesitate to post it here.
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kalindria (talk • contribs) 17:52, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Please send an email to "info-en@wikimedia.org" and tell them what you just told me. They may be able to assist you or answer any questions you may have. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:46, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
File source problem with File:Nightmarebeforexmas200px.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Nightmarebeforexmas200px.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 23:12, 22 February 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:12, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey,
I saw you deleted File:Wynton Marsalis 2009 09 13.jpg. The uploader told me he sent the permissions in vai e-mail when the deletion tag was added (See my talk page). Any idea if these permissions were ever received? Thanks!--Gordonrox24 | Talk 01:33, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the message. I have asked an OTRS volunteer to look into it. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:56, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- Sounds good. Thanks!--Gordonrox24 | Talk 02:00, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
AFC/R
I always use that template for article submissions, but I'll admit I've never even considered using it for simple redirects- I'll try and remember. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 02:32, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, I don't use the script so I often forget. I'll try and use it more often from now on though. fetchcomms☛ 13:49, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Reinhardt College
Fastily, I think someone is vandelizing the Reinhardt College page. See latest edit about a Cobb County baseball player. It appears this ip made another vandelized comment on the "Death" page. Can you do something about this? Thanks, Carsonmc (talk) 03:34, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you to consider my message
Hello,
I am a newbie in posting info on Wikipedia, and I really need your help man.
I have seen from the deletion log that you deleted the post "Popfax (internet fax service)" because of (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion).
I wanted just to present the company as many other companies do, please consider the following service competitors that are listed on wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EFax_%28fax_service%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efax_%28software%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RingCentral
Could you please suggest me some ideas, how to publish info about the Popfax service, not to be considered an unambiguous advertising or promotion.
Thank you in advance for your help.
Best regards, Iulia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iulia e (talk • contribs) 09:55, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Question re. WP:SELDEL
Hi Fastily, I was wondering if [48] and [49] would qualify for either WP:SELDEL or WP:REVDEL due to the nature of the content they introduced to the article (diff here). I had initially emailed User:Alison about oversighting it but she hasn't replied yet. User:Ronhjones and myself have searched for any coverage of this in the news and have found nothing, so it's pretty obvious that it's a hoax, and a pretty bad violation of WP:BLP at that. Cheers, XXX antiuser eh? 01:43, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- Wow, that's quite the BLP violation. Yes, per Oversight Policy, if applicable, the diffs can be removed. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 02:00, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- So what is the proper channel to go through to get this done? Or do I just message an oversighter? I was under the impression you didn't need oversight permissions to do a selective deletion or revision deletion. XXX antiuser eh? 03:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- To request oversight, send an email to oversight here (process detailed at WP:RFO), or contact an oversighter directly. Hope that helps to answer your question. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 02:27, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- Cool, thanks for helping. User:Ronhjones ended up doing a WP:SELDEL on those diffs so they're gone as far as regular users are concerned now. XXX antiuser eh? 03:52, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- To request oversight, send an email to oversight here (process detailed at WP:RFO), or contact an oversighter directly. Hope that helps to answer your question. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 02:27, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- So what is the proper channel to go through to get this done? Or do I just message an oversighter? I was under the impression you didn't need oversight permissions to do a selective deletion or revision deletion. XXX antiuser eh? 03:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
[50] This user is indefinitely blocked, and has abused his/her talk page privileges. I was restoring the block template, are indef blocked users allowed to remove block templates from their talk pages? Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:31, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, I see what happened here. A user noticed that CheeseFacedLlama kept abusing their talkpage privileges and reported it to WP:RFPP, then you saw it and assumed that I was vandalizing their talk page. I'm going to go ahead and undo your edit now if you don't mind. Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:45, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hey, take it easy - I'm on your side here! I neglected to go through the diffs, so my bad, but surely, there's no need to get angry!! :\ At any rate, I have disabled talk page access for CheeseFacedLlama (talk · contribs) so I don't think we'll have any more trouble from them anymore. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:58, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Durham Image
Could you please undelete this image? I would like to add licensing info to it. File:Durham, Ontario Location.png... I'm not sure if I was ever informed that it was missing. DMighton (talk) 03:43, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- Of course! Done Thanks for offering fix the copyright status of the file. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:54, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Rollback
Hey, Fastilly- the rollback request page has severap new entries that hoven't been answered. When you have a moment, could you check it out? Thanks E2eamon (talk) 21:25, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hi E2eamon. It looks like Acalamari already filled most of the requests.....oh well. Thanks for letting me know anyways. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 02:03, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
New Photos and question
Fastily, added new photos you might want to consider for the Commons at Rufus M. Rose House, Baltimore Block, and on National Register of Historic Places listings in Fulton County, Georgia. Question, too: If you look at the Rufus M. Rose House page, last external link, you can find a 1903 picture of the house. I know this is before 1923 copyright restrictions, could this photo be added to the page? It would be a great addition, showing what the house originally looked like. I tried to link the photo to the page, bypassing the copyright issue, but cannot figure out how to do that (or to source, if I uploaded it to Wiki) -when I tried, it linked to the home page, rather than the photo page. Are we, Wikipedians, not allowed to post that picture as it's part of the Vanishing Georgia archives? How does that work with pre-1923 photos? Make sense? Thanks, Carsonmc (talk) 23:25, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- Will do; I'll tag the applicable files for transfer to Commons. Before 1923 and taken in the US? That should be just fine. I recommend uploading directly to Wikipedia - last I checked, the mediawiki interface does not support external linking of files (to display). That being said, feel free to upload the file. If you run into any trouble, or need assistance, please don't hesitate to contact me. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 02:20, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
File:Wynton Marsalis 2009 09 13.jpg
A photo was taken down because Wikepedia did not have the proper permissions to post it. My coworker released it into the public domain so that it could be used by Wikipedia. This appears to have been verified (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wynton_Marsalis_2009_09_13.jpg)
Gordonrox says that I should ask you about restoring the photo to Wynton Marsalis' page. I could certainly do it myself, if that is okay.
Thanks!
BMW (talk) 23:34, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
TIME Ethernet Leased Line
HI Fastily,
Regarding the TIME ethernet leased line page that i have created, i have no intention on promoting or advertising the product.I created it just for knowledge and information for all user to read. Hope that you can recreate or undelete it as i am redirecting the page to the Internet In Malaysia page. I think it would be more appropriate if all the reference are from wikipedia itself. That is the reason i created it. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanhenry14 (talk • contribs) 02:00, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Final discussion for Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:
- Proposal to Close This RfC
- Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy
Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 02:17, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
TIME Ethernet Leased Line
Hi Fastily,
Thank you so much for replying immediately. I will change the text on the article as not to look more on advertising or spam.Thank you so much for your advise on this.Peace be upon you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanhenry14 (talk • contribs) 02:17, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Why was EPiServer Deleted?
Check here http://www.itjobswatch.co.uk/default.aspx?page=1&sortby=2&orderby=1&q=&id=0&lid=2618 You can see it's about the 25th fastest growing tech It exists it's real
Starfleet rank pictures
Can you help me. I need my files to be undeleted. They should not have been. The person that marked them for deletion never responded to my message about why they should not be. Can you please help me out here? --Flans44 (talk) 01:10, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- Certainly, I'd be happy to help you out. But first, could you please provide me with the name(s) of the deleted/affected file(s)? Thanks, FASTILY (TALK) 02:06, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I think I just need to change the copyright information. The files are:
STTOS Starfleet Vice Admiral rank.jpg STTOS Starfleet Rear Admiral rank.jpg STTOS Starfleet Commodore rank.jpg STTOS Starfleet Captain rank.jpg STTOS Starfleet Commander rank.jpg STTOS Starfleet Fleet Admiral rank.jpg STTOS Starfleet Lieutenant Commander rank.jpg STTOS Starfleet Lieutenant rank.jpg STTOS Starfleet Lieutenant Junior Grade rank.jpg --Flans44 (talk) 03:24, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, I see what you mean now. Yes, I deleted your files because they were listed at WP:PUF for 14 days and the deletions were uncontested at the end of the 14 days (see here). You should have contested the deletions on the PUF page when you had the chance. No worries though, I can restore the files, but could you please tell me which license (see here for a full list of licenses compatible with Wikipedia) you intend to use for them? -FASTILY (TALK) 03:34, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your help on this. I thought I was contesting it with the person that submitted them for deletion on my talk page. I wasn't aware that it had to be done elsewhere. I'm not much of a pro at this obviously. The licensing that I will use would be "non-free fair use" as are other images from the article. Please let me know if that will work. Thanks! --Flans44 (talk) 03:46, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- I have restored the files. Please see #Request to restore deleted images. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:22, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
restore deleted page?
On February 17 at 23:57, you deleted a page I created, Wikipedia:WikiProject Baseball/Negro league baseball task force, at my request. I requested deletion because no other editors had expressed interest in participating in the proposed new task force. Recently, however, some editors have expressed interest in the task force, so I wonder if you could restore the page? (If that's difficult for you, I could also recreate from scratch.) Thanks. BRMo (talk) 04:08, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Cameraflage
Dear Sir, Please replace the cameraflage entry at your earliest convenience. It is not an advertisement as you have described. It is a unique patented system of camouflage and all the content that was submitted did not over state anything that could be interpreted as advertorial.
66.188.133.134 (talk) 04:10, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- Could you please log in (makes it easier for me to reply)? Thanks, FASTILY (TALK) 04:10, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Request to restore deleted images
Can the following images be undeleted?
- File:STTOS Starfleet Fleet Admiral rank.jpg
- File:STTOS Starfleet Vice Admiral rank.jpg
- File:STTOS Starfleet Rear Admiral rank.jpg
- File:STTOS Starfleet Commodore rank.jpg
- File:STTOS Starfleet Captain rank.jpg
- File:STTOS Starfleet Commander rank.jpg
- File:STTOS Starfleet Lieutenant Commander rank.jpg
- File:STTOS Starfleet Lieutenant rank.jpg
- File:STTOS Starfleet Lieutenant Junior Grade rank.jpg
They were deleted on 8 Feb 2010 (Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 February 8) as unfree images. This was correct as they were mis-licensed as public domain works when they are actually derivative works. However, with the correct licences, they should be appropriate for the article Starfleet ranks and insignia. For example: File:STTOS Starfleet Admiral rank.jpg. The images represent only detail of the cuffs of the costume, a very minor element of the franchise as a whole, and so should not cause any commercial harm to Paramount or the Star Trek franchise. Thanks, AdamBMorgan (talk) 13:28, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, this relates to #Starfleet rank pictures above (I didn't notice that request when I made my own). - AdamBMorgan (talk) 13:55, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- Done. Thank you for offering to fix the copyright status of these files. On a side note, I think I should tell you that even the smallest and most insignificant of non-free content can limit a vendor's ability to sell a product/service, especially if used improperly (hence WP:NFCC#2; non-free content is not to be taken with a grain of salt! Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:21, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Would you please unprotect this? The bot is getting it's job done, even with people turning it off every other day. Myself and others are watching closely. The bot has done a wonderful job despite the interruptions. This list used to routinely be 900-1400 entries long, despite efforts by many people to reduce it. You can see now that it is down to 211 as of today. The bot is doing just fine. Plus, if you protect the page, nobody can shut off the bot if it does go haywire. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:42, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- I don't think that'll be necessary; this whole turn off, turn on thing is incredibly disruptive. At any rate, User:DASHBot/image should have been protected in the first place. Standard procedure also dictates that if the bot is malfunctioning, sysops are to turn it off (in the case of DASHbot, through User:DASHBot/image) or block it. Tim1357 has not objected to the page's protection, so I don't see a reason for you to. Hope that makes sense. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 04:58, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
PUF (again, sorry...)
Your close has left me in a bit of a pickle, I'm afraid. What would you suggest as the best course of action? I'm pretty sure you're a lot more familiar with the ebb and flow of PUF than me, so I was hoping you could advise. Thanks, - Jarry1250 [Humorous? Discuss.] 19:51, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, now that I look at it again, the discussion was 3:1 in favor of deletion. My mistake, reclosed as deleted. Sorry about that. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:03, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Just a question
Hey I just uploaded this image via the whole WP:FLICKR guidelines. However I'm wondering whether this image would be a potential copyvio, if so please could you tell me why, since I'm unsure of the guidelines. Cheers in advance :) + ThermoNuclear ☢ 21:08, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- It's unlikley the file is a copyvio; judging by the reputation original uploader to flickr (LG Group) and the licensing of the file, there is no evidence suggesting to the contrary. It's always a good thing to be cautious when uploading files from flickr, and I think it was wise of you to double check and ask me. Very few flckr photos are incompatible with Wikipedia (most are in fact copyrighted, if not restricted legally in some way) and of the few that appear to be compatible, a number are pure copyright violations. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 06:01, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of Zurlain2.jpg
Nobody really contributed to a discussion when it was listed, and this image was of an old stuffed animal. Of curiosity, could I get some details on why you deleted? Thanks. Connormah (talk | contribs) 03:46, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- Lots of images of stuffed animals can be found at commons:Category:Teddy bears, also, of presumably newer teddy bears, that could be deleted under the same circumstances that this one. Connormah (talk | contribs) 03:48, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- Connormah, I'm not quite sure what to tell you. You had a full 14 days to contest the deletion, but yet, you did not; a few minutes after deletion you come and ask me. The file was listed uncontested at WP:PUF for 14 days, so I deleted. An editor with your breadth experience should know this full well! I will restore the file on the premises that you will contest XFD nominations you disagree with on the relevant discussion page in the future and not assume that an administrator will come by and keep it. I don't mean to come off as gruff or anything (actually, I've been considering nominating you for administrator for quite some time), but I'm surprised you would come request something like this. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:58, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- I posted a comment, waiting for some further responses, but, obviously nobody had commented further than just the nominator, and myself. Yes, I do agree that I should have known better (another one of those embarrassing moments), but, since the image was unused, (and I don't think it was going to be used anytime soon) we should just leave it as deleted. I've got another version on Commons. ;) Thanks for the response. Connormah (talk | contribs) 04:05, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- Connormah, I'm not quite sure what to tell you. You had a full 14 days to contest the deletion, but yet, you did not; a few minutes after deletion you come and ask me. The file was listed uncontested at WP:PUF for 14 days, so I deleted. An editor with your breadth experience should know this full well! I will restore the file on the premises that you will contest XFD nominations you disagree with on the relevant discussion page in the future and not assume that an administrator will come by and keep it. I don't mean to come off as gruff or anything (actually, I've been considering nominating you for administrator for quite some time), but I'm surprised you would come request something like this. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:58, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- Also, since you touched on the subject above, by the way, do you have a suggestion for when I should open up another RfA for myself? I understand my last one failed because of a lack of knowledge of policies, mixed with some mistakes. I'm currently thinking about last to mid April, but I'm still not all that sure. Thanks. Connormah (talk | contribs) 04:23, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- The recommended amount of time between RfAs is 5-6 months (some editors oppose simply because chronological closeness of user's RfAs). Personally, I don't think there's much you can do specifically - all you need is more time on the project. Just continue the great work you've been doing all along. Ping me sometime in the summer regarding RfA and I'll take a look at your contribs, ect. again. If all looks good, I'll write you a nom. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 04:33, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Looks like it's getting taken care of now. Connormah (talk | contribs) 04:52, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- Another optional question, no rush, but in your neutral vote at my recent RfA, you said some of my answers to questions were giving a pause. Could you possibly specify some of the pauses so that I may improve upon them? Thanks, no rush for this question, by the way. Connormah (talk | contribs) 04:55, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Why was HarvestMark deleted?
I wrote the entry on Traceable Produce (which is an emerging technology and is rapidly growing here in Silicon Valley) and one of the companies that is developing this technology is HarvestMark. This was not written as an advertisement but simply explained how HarvestMark works. Why was it deleted? And how can it be restored?Kipknight (talk) 04:34, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Image deletion: Deerhound Kendra
Please restore this image, or at least have the courtesy to explain why it appears (see Deerhound page box with name still present)has been deleted, please read carefully the history and status I supplied below. There has been no "debate". We cannot, despite repeated efforts, contact the original photographer. If against all odds we do - given that she may well be deceased - what are the requirements to prove her acquiesence? If she has died, what then? Thank you--Richard Hawkins (talk) 13:36, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
<<File:Deerhound Fernhill's Kendra.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs). Delete; licence and author claimed by uploader are disputed because the source clearly gives credit to Linda Lundt as the photographer, which is neither the uploader or author as claimed and no permission has been given by the photographer. ww2censor (talk) 05:59, 8 February 2010 (UTC) Perhaps it was originally incorrectly entered (under the wrong category?) by me personally. The photo has been (unchallenged) on the Wiki Deerhound page since July 2008. It was cropped, distorting the proportions and changing the colour by a third party, September 2009. I reposted it shortly after that. The original photo of Fernhill's Kendra has been in our possession since the mid 1990's, and has been on our website since 2001. It has also been in at least one book, and a number of magazines in that period. We (at Fernhill) always credit material to the original author - which we have done on our website, to which the Wiki file refers. We have tried to contact the photographer years ago without any luck, as we will be using this photo in our own book on the Deerhound. I would strongly suggest that this photograph is in the public domain and has been properly credited.--Richard Hawkins (talk) 14:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)>>
- "We have tried to contact the photographer years ago without any luck, as we will be using this photo in our own book on the Deerhound. I would strongly suggest that this photograph is in the public domain and has been properly credited." You suggest, but you don't know for sure. That was the why the file was originally listed at WP:PUF; the copyright status of the file was uncertain/unverifiable. If you had known for sure, I wouldn't have deleted the file. On Wikipedia, we cannot openly host/store/dispense files whose copyright status we are unsure of. Should you ever hear back from the original author, please feel free to re-upload the file. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:13, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
You didn't answer my question, if she has died, what then?--Richard Hawkins (talk) 23:34, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- Author dead and with no way to verify a free license? Well Richard, I don't think we can use the picture (not now at least), as Wikipedia cannot (zero-tolerance) accept files with unverified copyright status. Per US copyright law, in about 50 years, we will be able to use the file (the copyright, if any, will have expired by then, assuming the photo was created in the US). Sorry, FASTILY (TALK) 04:14, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Rufus M. Rose House 1903 Pic
Fastily,
I added the 1903 pic we discussed yesterday. Are you sure it's okay to pull from Vanishing Georgia? Take a look at how I have it set up. Their site will not allow me to paste in the "Source" section the link directly to the pic. It always goes to the main page, where you have to type in "Rufus M. Rose residence." Please let me know if this is okay. If not, delete the pic. I don't want to tread in Vanishing Georgia's territory, albeit, nowhere did they say anything about posting photos to other sites that I could see. FYI, the pic looks a little dif. than it did on their site as I cropped a number/black band off of one side. Concerned, Carsonmc (talk) 01:28, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
oops... I actually saw, just now, where they say to contact the repository for "reproduction and usage." Do you think we should remove this? If so, can we revert this page back to what it looked like before I added that pic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carsonmc (talk • contribs) 01:53, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
You are going to think I'm crazy. Just found were it said I needed permission to upload pic on the Vanishing Georgia site. Wish I had seen it to begin with. Therefore, removed pic. and reverted to what page looked like before I uploaded the pic. Sorry for all the craziness. Carsonmc (talk) 01:59, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
FYI... I sent the GA archives a request to post the pic. and sent them a link to the Wiki page on the house, therefore, help me, please, keep the 1903 photo off this page until I get permission to post. Sorry for all of this. Thought the pre1923 would prevent all this, but to play it save, I'm asking for permission. All my ramblings make sense? Carsonmc (talk) 02:22, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, yes that did make sense, a lot actually :) And I must say, well said! A surprising number of editors on this project aren't aware of half of what you told me just now. I'll tag the file with {{OTRS pending}} (to indicate that permission has been requested and will be forwarded to "permissions-en@wikimedia.org" - see WP:PERMISSION) and {{subst:npd}} (indicating that the file is missing evidence of permission and that the file will be deleted in a week - a week should be long enough to obtain and verify the permissions for the file; if OTRS permission is recieved after the file's deletion, me or an editor with OTRS access will restore it). Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 06:14, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
File:Thabeet.jpg
Hi, I'm a little confused about your edits at File:Thabeet.jpg. The image is obviously copyrighted; see [51]. Regardless of whether the uploader asserted pd/cc/gfdl, there's no way we could use it, is there? Zagalejo^^^ 05:57, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Zagalejo. You are correct, File:Thabeet.jpg is copyrighted. However, a copyright violation does not exist until the uploader or another editor claims that the file is of their work (e.g. Public Domain, Creative Commons, GFDL, ect.) when it clearly is not. We can in fact use non-free content on Wikipedia; although we rarely use files from press agencies Getty Images or Reuters, it's not unheard of (especially when the file/photo in question is the subject of the article), just generally discouraged. Hope that helps to clarify things. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 06:23, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Country Club Casino
Hi again, i see you have yet to restore the article about the Country Club Casino, i'm sure i can get soem help rewriting it and adding more information. Stony ¿/̵͇̿̿/'̿̿ ̿ ̿ 14:10, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- I can help. Wasn't I the one that created the article? —Aaroncrick (talk) 04:01, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Harvestmark article
Thanks for getting back to me...yes, if you could send what you deleted on Harvestmark, that would be great. Could you send it to kipknight@gmail.com? I'll revise it....any chance I could get anyone to review it first to make sure it passes muster so I don't get caught in a do loop?
Thanks
Kip
Kipknight (talk) 23:43, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
Just wanted to drop by and say thanks for accepting my request to semi protect the Bill Kaulitz page. Hopefully it'll deter vandalists (is that even a word?). Thanks much! FlipsidePro09 (talk) 23:53, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Please advise as to what you are concerned about in regards to edits to page African-American Civil Rights Movement (1955–1968)
Dear Fastily,
I noted that there was a comment from with reference to 'vandilism' which I would like to ask you about.
I am working very closely with developing a presence on the Internet regarding the history of an important group here in Atlanta. I have undertaken the addition of historically significant details in the very specific section of an article of the Civil Rights Movement ... specifically: African-American Civil Rights Movement (1955–1968)
While I am fairly new at editing Wikipedia pages, I looked up and found the following listed for the term vandalism
... Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Even harmful edits that are not explicitly made in bad faith are not vandalism. For example adding a controversial personal opinion to an article is not vandalism, although reinserting it despite multiple warnings can be disruptive (however, edits/reverts over a content dispute are never vandalism, see WP:EW). Not all vandalism is obvious, nor are all massive or controversial changes vandalism. Careful thought may be needed to decide whether changes made are beneficial, detrimental but well-intended, or outright vandalism.
There is no intent to cause any harm to this page but expand actual historical information with references.
Thus, if your comment was directed at my edits, I do beseech you to consider that these were certainly made as carefully as I know how, in good faith, and with references to the materials posted, specifically which regarding event in 1960 in Atlanta in regards to the Civil Rights Movement, the Atlanta Student Movement, the Appeal for Human Rights, and the Committee for the Appeal for Human Rights ... all of which I have added and am currently continue to further develop.
I am very open to your input but would like an explanation as a newbie of what I may have done incorrectly, if those comments were directed at my additions.
Please advise.
Most Respectfully, Erik Voss erik@erikvoss.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Erikvoss (talk • contribs) 06:20, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Erik. No, the page protection (it's not actually a comment, but evidence of an administrative action) was not directed at you, but several IP editors, who have been relentlessly plaguing the page with vandalism. I semi-protected the page per a request that was filed at WP:RFPP (see talk|history|links|watch|logs)|here). Just on a side note, if my protect (or a block for instance) was directed at you, you would not be able to edit the page. Hope that helps to answer your question. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 06:31, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Why was Damien O'Kane deleted and redirected to Kate Rusby?
Damien is a valid, working, award winning musician from Northern Ireland, he has been touring for 3-4 years. He has recorded various albums and is releasing his debut solo album in April I didn't realise straight away what had happened as I am new to the site, but I would like to re-instate the page Thanks Ccc3030 14:28, 26 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ccc3030 (talk • contribs)
Hello FASTILY, I appreciate your help on my page PHIL HENNY Would it be possible to ask you to upload those to my page. I am afraid to mixed up.
Thank you sincerely yours, Phil Henny
http://www.myf5000.com/drivers_phil_henny.html
http://www.legendsofriverside.com/philhenny.htm
http://alex62.typepad.com/imsablog/2007/04/phil_hennys_bea.html
http://www.racingsportscars.com/driver/results/Phil-Henny-USA.html
http://www.mustangmonthly.com/thehistoryof/mump_0903_shelby_mustang_history/shelby_employees.html
http://www.worldcarfans.com/10607176656/ford-reunites-1966-le-mans-winning-gt-mark-ii
Monttendre (talk) 16:35, 26 February 2010 (UTC)) Monttendre February 26 2010 8.33AM
- Monttendre, sorry, but could you please clarify your question? I'm not sure what you're asking for here. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 02:38, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Ranges
All are here.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:17, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Could you just extend/reset the blocks on the four currently blocked ranges now? If he's going to come back in four days on the ranges that he used the most, I think it'd be best to reblock them for six months as well.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:21, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Jake Hovin is a ****
Just thought I'd point out what you may not have seen in that vaginal diagram you declined as an attack speedy. :) --Fred the Oyster (talk) 02:30, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
- Alright, well, if you put it that way. Personally I didn't make the connection there, but nothing good comes from such photos anyways. File deleted. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 02:34, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
From Pi_exp
Very sorry, I am skilled in picking up after others, but I did not understand that this is slightly different. At where I work, I am used to not minding others, and just doing what they say. Thank you, in about 10 years, I will ask again. Pi exp (talk) 02:57, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
No, no, thank you Pi exp (talk) 03:06, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Green Party of Nevada
What needs to change about the entry?
I dunno who posted it maybe Billy?
David Curtis —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.1.8.128 (talk) 02:59, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Rolled Alloys
I am attempting to setup a company profile with external references. I have seen many similar company profiles for metals companies. I marked this page to be reviewed before deleting. Could you please let me know the proper way to create a page that is acceptable? Similar pages are Allegheny Technologies, Outokumpu, and Sandvik. Rolled Alloys (talk) 03:13, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion decline
Thank you for declining my request at File:JamboToday93.jpg. On a second inspection of its use at 1993 National Scout Jamboree, I see that it is a valid fair use. I just recently began working on the backlog at Category:Non-free Wikipedia file size reduction request when I came across the file. I'm fairly new to fair-use file work, so I appreciate the help in learning this area. Jujutacular T · C 04:21, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Green Party of NV
Hey, Fastily, I am the Chair of the Green Party of Nevada. Recently I updated our page with our current logo and list of the Executive Board of the Green Party of Nevada. I added a Creative Commons license for the image. I saw that a copyright something or other had been placed on the image, so I then added a clause with the copyright being Billy Howard, 2010, no restrictions. What more do you want?
Then I see the entire article--which was first generated by the US Green Party--has been deleted.
Can you please restore and let us know what is offensive? Hope it's not b/c of a politics, LOL!
-Wm (talk) 19:08, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Hiya Fred, i took this picture of the artist myself, from my own camera, it is definatly not copyrighted and you will not find it anywhere else on the internet., how do i cite this so other administrators do not think it is copied aswell and delete it, thanks for your help xx —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smiless--xo (talk • contribs) 23:28, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Picture i uploaded
Hiya Fred, i took this picture of the artist myself, from my own camera, it is definatly not copyrighted and you will not find it anywhere else on the internet., how do i cite this so other administrators do not think it is copied aswell and delete it, thanks for your help xx —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smiless--xo (talk • contribs) 23:29, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Mistake?
I read the notification you placed on someone's talk page in reference to File:Diana de Vere Beauclerk.jpg and it confuses me. The notification says the "description page currently doesn't specify who created the content" yet the description page quite clearly identifies the painter as "Edward Byng, 1690". The notification says "if you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken" and yet the description page already includes this link. There can be no copyright issues involved with a two-dimensional representation of a painting that is centuries old. If you are suggesting that we need to know who made the two-dimensional representation, [1] the notification should be more clear that that is what is wanted, and [2] it's totally irrelevant to issues of copyright. I cannot help but think that these sorts of tags in which the recipient is forced to play the game of "guess what I want" alienate more users than an actual specific request showing evidence of having been written by a human being would. - Nunh-huh 04:43, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- There was no mistake. Public domain or not, the copyright status of any file must be verifiable by any other editor by means of a specific source. Providing a generic source such as "www.thePeerage.com" is not specific enough of a source for the copyright status of the file to be verifiable by others. Think about it logically: the same thing goes when sourcing articles, so why should it be any different for images? If a more specific source is not provided, the file will be deleted in 7 days per WP:CSD#F4, which it completely qualifies for right now. -FASTILY (TALK) 10:16, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- It does alienate users. I spend half the afternoon fixing up images only to have someone else follow behind threating to delete things for whatever reasons. Yesterday I spent a few hours restoring a single civil war era image. You really think I want to donate my time for that only to have someone toddle by and say it's going to be deleted in a few days because even though its from the civil war it needs a source saying its from the civil war? I understand there are rules. But try to understand, not all of us are rule jockeys. If your thing is knowing the rules, then help out instead of spewing out deletion flags. Fix whatever you think is broke, then let people know what you fixed. Have a little respect for other people's time and effort. JBarta (talk) 11:55, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- Look. I'm just doing my job here, I don't make up the rules. It's quite simple: "www.thePeerage.com" is insufficient as a source; if you do nothing to change that source, then the file will be deleted in 7 days. If you wanted my help, you could have at least asked nicely. Good day. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:13, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- I don't want your help... it's just that your efforts in this regard merely add to the problem rather than add to the solution. Your area of expertise is the rules. Fine. Apply it rather than simply trailing behind pointing out something is not right. If you want others to get up to speed on YOUR particular area of expertise, then you're going to have to understand that to many, the rules are an overly complicated and confusing mess. And while most people would love to help make sure everything is in compliance, simply slapping around warning templates and threats of deletion is just not helpful. As it is, there are image related tasks that I could do quite easily, but don't simply because of the fear some t isn't crossed or some i isn't dotted somewhere along the line and my efforts and the efforts of others will simply be wasted. And one more thing, it's not a job. It's a collaboration. You're not a meter maid, you're supposed to be a partner. JBarta (talk) 23:07, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- How can someone spend a few hours cleaning up an image, yet not spend a few minutes reading up on the rules of the website they intend to upload that image to? So the argument so far is that you shouldn't have to follow the rules because you've worked hard on an image. Would that be voluntary work that no-one asked you to do? Or work you did because a) you wanted to b) because you wanted to add to the encyclopaedia? I'm guessing that the answer is a and b. For that to happen you must have some sort of pride in the project one way or another. So what do you think would happen if every uploader was given a pass every time they uploaded a file that didn't meet the rules. How long do you think it would be before the project was sued into the ground? Or is what you are asking merely a pass for yourself as you've put in so much hard work? Everyone else should have to follow the rules to protect the project, but you are a special case? --Fred the Oyster (talk) 23:21, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- I don't want your help... it's just that your efforts in this regard merely add to the problem rather than add to the solution. Your area of expertise is the rules. Fine. Apply it rather than simply trailing behind pointing out something is not right. If you want others to get up to speed on YOUR particular area of expertise, then you're going to have to understand that to many, the rules are an overly complicated and confusing mess. And while most people would love to help make sure everything is in compliance, simply slapping around warning templates and threats of deletion is just not helpful. As it is, there are image related tasks that I could do quite easily, but don't simply because of the fear some t isn't crossed or some i isn't dotted somewhere along the line and my efforts and the efforts of others will simply be wasted. And one more thing, it's not a job. It's a collaboration. You're not a meter maid, you're supposed to be a partner. JBarta (talk) 23:07, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- Look. I'm just doing my job here, I don't make up the rules. It's quite simple: "www.thePeerage.com" is insufficient as a source; if you do nothing to change that source, then the file will be deleted in 7 days. If you wanted my help, you could have at least asked nicely. Good day. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:13, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- It does alienate users. I spend half the afternoon fixing up images only to have someone else follow behind threating to delete things for whatever reasons. Yesterday I spent a few hours restoring a single civil war era image. You really think I want to donate my time for that only to have someone toddle by and say it's going to be deleted in a few days because even though its from the civil war it needs a source saying its from the civil war? I understand there are rules. But try to understand, not all of us are rule jockeys. If your thing is knowing the rules, then help out instead of spewing out deletion flags. Fix whatever you think is broke, then let people know what you fixed. Have a little respect for other people's time and effort. JBarta (talk) 11:55, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- This is too much nonsense. The painting itself is copyright free on account of its age and would qualify as {{PD-art}} on Commons. That leaves the photograph of the painting, which may be copyright of its photographer, but only if it is more than a "slavish reproduction" so as to amount to a new work involving some creative input by the photographer. Looking at the image, it would appear not to involve any creative input so does not create a new copyright for the photographer. I suggest you tag this as {{Move to Commons}} where it can get a {{PD-art}} tag and live there forever more. It would also be a good idea for some to review what is meant by "free" in relation to images. Rodhullandemu 23:49, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Peachy. A whole slew of ancient images that have been cleaned up have been tagged for deletion. I have officially wasted my time. Anyone taking the time to fix those images has officially wasted his time. I'm fast running out of things to do around here that aren't an utter waste of time. I hope you're pleased with yourself Fastily. Good riddance... I've had enough (hopefully for good this time.... this is really not worth the aggravation). JBarta (talk) 04:24, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
How do I keep my images
Fastily,
These images are from the Civil War. How can they possibly NOT be public domain?
File source problem with File:Col Harrison H. Jeffords.jpg File source problem with File:Col Edward E Cross.JPG File source problem with File:Col Edward E Cross.JPG
I captured them from the documentary Civil War Combat: America's Bloodiest Battles (1998) produced by the History channel.
Actually, if you Google, you can find these same images on several websites.
What is the easiest way for me to keep them from being deleted? I was sort of expecting this email to come.
Thanks, Scott —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seisfeldt (talk • contribs) 06:05, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- Please provide a specific source(s) for the files. "Unknown" is not a valid source. Public domain or not, the copyright status of the files must be verifiable by others, by means of a specific source. -FASTILY (TALK) 10:17, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
I added the source content, can you check now? Thanks, Scott —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seisfeldt (talk • contribs) 02:14, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
I deleted this before seeing you indicated it was kept. I found the image at http://photos.aip.org/quickSearch.jsp?group=50&qsearch=institute with a copyright notice, so I did not see the claim that the uploader made of "own work" as valid. Can you help me? Dlohcierekim 14:38, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hmm, I read the discussion at which this was kept. There was no credible reason to believe the uploader did not simply download the image, maybe photoshop it, and then upload here. It's troubling to me that someone can do this so easily with a copyrighted image. If you compare the two, you see that someone simply cut off the attribution at the bottom of the image. The copyright holder charges money for copies. Dlohcierekim 14:46, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- You are very welcome. Dlohcierekim 22:41, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
File:CDTA_System_Map_2010-03.png
I've updated CDTA_System_Map_2010-03.png to include a link to the source, which specifies its public domain status. Please let me know if this is sufficient. --Youngtwig (talk) 17:59, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- I have adjusted the license tag to reflect the changes you made. Everything should be good to go. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 22:31, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
How to delete 1 image within a file history?
Hello Fastily, ty for your work here. I created/uploaded a graphic, then later uploaded a new version. However in my haste I uploaded the wrong graphic! This image is Not my original work and the Copyright tag does Not apply! I would like to delete it from the file history. I can't find an option or a help topic which allows me to do so. Can only admin delete it? The file is located at Tripleareleasemodel.png. The image in question is the one posted at 19:02 on February 27, 2010. There is also a tag on that file page which advices me to upload an SVG version of the file. I believe it is speaking to the erroneous upload?? AWhiteElk (talk) 18:52, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- Oops here is working link to the file... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tripleareleasemodel.png AWhiteElk (talk) 18:55, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, only administrators can deleted pages. Non-admin users can request deletion of pages they created by adding the text "{{db-g7}}" to the page they want deleted. No worries though, I have deleted the page. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 22:23, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Block of User:Mayurvg
I've been having decent luck lately with give 'em enough rope unblocks, and was thinking of doing one here, but I'm consulting you as blocking admin first. Rest assured I will make it perfectly clear to them that this is absolutely the last chance and they can be blocked without further warning if they ever vandalize again. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:26, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- I have full faith in your judgment, Beeblebrox. Do what you need to do. Kind regards, FASTILY (TALK) 22:25, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
What is the problem!!!!I
I do not understand why you are blocking my images, i have asked before, and you have ignored my post. You have replyed to evryone else apart from me which i find very offensive. I would really like to make a formal complaint about this as i have done nothing wrong, the images are all my own and the ones which are not i have cited the correct references. Please tell me what is going on? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smiless--xo (talk • contribs) 20:26, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- Oddly enough, I saw this user's post at Wikipedia talk:Requests for page protection and replied on their talk page. You may have more to add, but I think I covered the basic problem. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:32, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
lol yes it was him thanks i just realised xx —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smiless--xo (talk • contribs) 22:55, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Al Arian
Hi ... I was thinking of going through the al Arian docs here to see if there was anything worth reflecting in the article, or any corrections that had to be made to make sure the article was correct and precise. But I guess I can't do that now? Or is there a process I might avail myself of. No biggie if I just have to put it on hold.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:46, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- Not really... You can suggest the change on the talk page perhaps, or just hold off until the protect expires or an agreement is reached. Sorry for the inconvenience. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:34, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
It would be a sifting in of whatever is in the source docs that would be appropriate, so too difficult to propose on talk page. I see that now the IP has been blocked as well (as a sock; for a week), so I imagine that the page would have been quiet anyway. But I will wait the week, the IP will come back as the page is opened, and we can see what happens I guess. Thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:57, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Removal of Viocorp page
Hi there. I noticed you removed the Viocorp page and am unsure as to why. I copied the format on a similar page, thePlatform. I am wondering why that page is allowed and this one isn't? Could you please explain this so that I can have a Viocorp page up?
Msavanis (talk) 22:11, 28 February 2010 (UTC)Msavanis
Could you help me ?
First let me say that I have been on Wikipedia for a while, but there are still some things that I don't know how to do
I am trying to set up a page (File:Coat of Arms Trans.gif) to serve basically the same function as File:Rotschilds arms.jpg
I went ahead and made the page as identical as possible since the Rothschild one is well established.
I didn't make any change to the "no source information" tag that you added, since I don't think I have enough know-how to know when one of those can be removed
Is there any other way to improve the page to make it as legitimate as the Rothschild crest page?
Thanks Andrewsthistle (talk) 22:22, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, that'll do. I have done some tidying up and removed the deletion tag. Other than that, you're good to go. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 09:38, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Friends School
You might want to consider making this indefinite - the article has had a history of vandalism going back as far as I can remember. Noodle snacks (talk) 09:27, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Page Deleted
Hey Fastily, I logged in today to Wiki to see that my company page is gone. I do the editing of the page, once in a month. So was shocked. There is no advertisement material on the page. It is a simple page with company details and the history of the company.
If you could please let me know which were the sections which you felt are not relevant or are promotional material and I will remove them and resubmit the page. I had also included the references for most of the mentioned points. Did I tamper the formatting? All the images on my page were own images which belong with Mindfire Solutions and I am using with written permission of usage and there is no restriction at all.
User:MarkFire2009 (talk) 02 March 2010 —Preceding undated comment added 05:08, 2 March 2010 (UTC).
Deleted Swissotel Quito
Dear Fastily!
On February 27 you have deleted an article i placed on February 26. Please permit me to put that article about Swissotel Quito. It is not advertising - you can appreciate a created and approved article of Swissotel Hotels and Resorts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss%C3%B4tel) here in wikipedia. This company authorized me to put a small informative article about their franchised hotel in Ecuador. I followed each one of the steps, and I obeyed all the rules. I hope to hear soon from you. Thanks in advance for your time! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swissgost (talk • contribs) 14:42, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
My RFA
Thank you for your vote of confidence. I really didn't expect it to pass, and in the end I did better than I expected. After a short break (I have 100 of these messages to write), I expect I'll go back to pre-RFA life- blissfully stress-free. --King Öomie 18:27, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello
I suggest protection for that one I articulate a lot of vandalism reiterated, imaginary news on boomerang 2 which fails to match but they keep on inventing you are like fraud, also the boomerang for favor has insults toward the canal that page should be protected in order that they quit of vandalizar and insulting everything those imaginary news and insults I have erased it but they go back to put it.--Hugo Felix - Messages Here 00:00, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- Boomerang (Latin American TV channel) semi-protected for a week. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:13, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Rollback
Many thanks to you Fastily. I have one question for you. You did say that I could request that the feature be uninstalled as a facility. If all has gone well, is there any particular reason that a user may wish not to have it? It is granted as an honour but is there an advantage for not having it? Does it slow things down elsewhere etc.? User:Evlekis (Евлекис) 00:28, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- No problem! Yes, you can ask for the right to be removed, but the reason given by each user who requests removal of rollback varies. But policy-wise, there is no reason a user would ask for removal. Likewise, there is no advantage or disadvantage politically in having rollback. At any rate, the right is a tool, used to revert vandalism, not to lord over other users. As far as I know, it should not affect your browsing speed on Wikipedia. Hope that helps to answer your questions. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:29, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- Does do indeed! Here's to good vandal-policing!! :-) ----User:Evlekis (Евлекис) 02:30, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Re: Young Money Entertainment
Thanks for reminding me, looks like somebody inadvertingly removed the licensing template. I reverted the edit with the licensing template and everything should be in order now. Taylor Karras (talk) 01:47, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Pan-Arabism
Pan-Arabism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hi Fastily, you fully protected this article, the protection is expiring day after tomorrow and the same editors are carrying on as previous, without any chance of agreement, the talkpage discussion is awful, please fully protect for another couple of weeks and then perhaps they will get bored and move away, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 01:53, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- I don't believe that will be necessary at the moment; you have a little more than 3 days to discuss before the protect expires. But I'll keep an eye on the page and reprotect on March 4 as necessary. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 02:12, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- I am not involved in the discussion there, in fact there is no actual discussion there, no worries, thanks, I have unwatched the article. Off2riorob (talk) 02:27, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- The problem is that an awful lot of awful content has been added there recently by the editors currently raving on the talk page - one of whom for example believes this to be an appropriate addition to a separate article. Protecting the article - while probably necessary in the short term - of course maintained and secured a lot of that content, and can't be a long term solution. There needs to be some form of resolution on the content issue, probably with a lot of it being removed or rewritten (without edit-warring this time of course), or dare I say it, education for some of the participants on how to write a page according to policy, and without screaming "Nazi! Fascist!" on the talk page every two seconds. Note, my contribution there has simply been to make one post asking for calm and rule-compliance, and I have no plans to do any more myself. N-HH talk/edits 10:35, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- I am not involved in the discussion there, in fact there is no actual discussion there, no worries, thanks, I have unwatched the article. Off2riorob (talk) 02:27, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Help
Can you just tell me which tag I need? This is infuriating. There is no debate about the usability of this image. It just seems there is no wikipedian willing to help me. The hangon tag is to prevent it from being deleted. Commons apparently do not reply to emails. Timneu22 (talk) 11:39, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
You previously deleted File:Melody maker-cover-april-8th-1995.jpg following it's listing at WP:FFD. This deletion was challenged at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 February 17. The deletion review resulted in a consensus that the deletion be overturned and relisted. Accordingly the image has now been renominated at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 March 2#File:Melody maker-cover-april-8th-1995.jpg where you may wish to comment. Thryduulf (talk) 12:07, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Please remove CSD template on this image, as i have provided a source, thanks. :) Koman90 (talk), A+ (Verify) 04:05, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Koman90. I applied the tag not because of a faulty source, but because of a faulty license tag. You indicated that the file was non-free legal tender/currency, when that was clearly not the case. On top of that, you linked the file to two articles, when you provided fair-use rationale for only one. By any standard, the file is completely eligible for deletion under WP:CSD#F7. I don't mean to be gruff or bitey, but I think it's only fair that you know what was wrong with the file. I'll restore the file once you indicate that you have seen this message. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 10:09, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- The image is of digital currency, and the card itself is copyrighted thus the currency tag applies. then why would a similar card File:Tapcard.jpg be using the same license tag? the immage was deleted under G7 overnight, pleas revert it and remove the CSD template unless you want to delete all of the images of the Compass Card , TAP , and all other Contactless smart card tat ARE capable of storing up to $300.00 USD of digital currency. Thank You Koman90 (talk), A+ (Verify) 14:09, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- Er...yeah, about those - they also satisfy the criteria for WP:CSD#F7. I believe the license you are looking for is {{Non-free fair use in}}. Let me know if that's right and I'll restore the files and add that as the license tag. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:40, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- The image is of digital currency, and the card itself is copyrighted thus the currency tag applies. then why would a similar card File:Tapcard.jpg be using the same license tag? the immage was deleted under G7 overnight, pleas revert it and remove the CSD template unless you want to delete all of the images of the Compass Card , TAP , and all other Contactless smart card tat ARE capable of storing up to $300.00 USD of digital currency. Thank You Koman90 (talk), A+ (Verify) 14:09, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
hello, we have been documenting the trayectory of the band kokolo and ray lugo for some time now. the images you marked as well as the ogg audio files were provided courtesy of the group, in addition they can be found free in many websites, blogs etc that center on their genre of music please advise as to how to resolve the issue. thank you (FunkyNYC (talk) 04:16, 28 February 2010 (UTC))
- Courtesy of the group? Do you know the exact license/copyright status of these files? Is it possible for you to ask the group? If not, then these files cannot be used on Wikipedia. -FASTILY (TALK) 10:12, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Robin Brims
Many thanks for declining the speedy on Robin Brims. I understand why the editor applying the tag was seeking the deletion but at the same time I don't think the picture does much harm especial as the subject has now retired. Much appreciated. Dormskirk (talk) 22:39, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Non Free Files in your User Space
Hey there Fastily, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot alerting you that Non-free files are not allowed in the user or talk-space. I removed some files that I found on User talk:Fastily/Archive 3. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.
- See a log of files removed today here.
- Shut off the bot here.
- Report errors here.
Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 00:03, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi there
You have flagged an image on my page kingoftrash as copyrighted. I own the copyright to the image. Please can it be put back?
kind regards martin sawyer tln.management@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinips (talk • contribs) 08:51, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry but could you please specify the name/title of the image? Thanks, FASTILY (TALK) 23:08, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Autoreviewer question
Hi there Fastily, I was hoping I could have your help on something, as I see your name frequently when giving out permissions and what I need your input for is related to that. Anyway, there's a request on the autoreviwer requests page that hasn't been answered despite being there for a few days (though there is a note that I left there asking for other admin input). However, I declined the user in question's request last time around, and I'm still not sure about it this time around. As I don't want to decline this user twice, I was hoping someone else could weigh in for me. Thanks in advance! Acalamari 17:40, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Acalamari. I looked into it and had to agree with you and the comments on the user's talk. The user needs to work on their ability to source articles. Despite that, they seem to be genuinely here to help the project, so I have AGFed and given them the right. I hope my decision was for the best. Kind Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:08, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
- I have no objections whatsoever to your decision, rather, I'm grateful for the input! Thanks for handling the request: I appreciate it. Best. Acalamari 23:13, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
I just got your message, but the first time I've even visited that page was to see what it was about after your message to me about reverting my post there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.184.119.253 (talk) 20:46, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi I am new in posting article to Wikipedia, and my article has been deleted by you. If you can give me some suggestions, I would like to modify the article. Thanks for your time . Volkan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Volkansevilgen (talk • contribs) 23:21, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Hey
Hey there. I didn't know who else to ask, but I remember you helped me out with images a long time ago. On this page Nicki Minaj's First Studio Album, features the file File:Nicki Minaj - Harajuku Barbie World.png and I don't really think it should be there. It has no fair use rationale information anyway, but it's not even the official cover as I found it is a fan made cover here at this link. I wasn't sure how to nominate for deletion, so I thought it best to ask you to deal with it.RAIN the ONE (Talk) 03:18, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Raintheone. The file is indeed missing fair-use rationale; I have tagged it as such, using the tag, {{subst:nrd}}. I think that should solve the problem. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 01:28, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Help to load those on my page
Hello Fastily, regarding my last talk, FASTILY (TALK) 02:39, 27 February 2010 (UTC) I don't know how to load those websites on my page - Phil Henny - Would you put then there for me. When I do it they take a lot of space on my page instead of being in a small square number...like the ones already there. If you would, really appreciate it. - montendre Thursday March 04 2010 [Monttendre 16:41, 4 March 2010 (UTC)] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Monttendre (talk • contribs)
- Ah, I see what you mean. Save the files you want to use in the article to your computer, then go to WP:UPLOAD. Upload the files there, but make sure first that they are compliant with WP:IUP and/or WP:NFC/WP:NFCC/WP:PERMISSION as necessary. Once you have uploaded the files you use them in the article - see WP:FILE for a detailed set of instructions of how to do that. Hope that helps to answer your question. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 01:37, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello
An anonymous user keeps on doing false information in List of programs broadcast by Teletoon Retro a lot of vandalism and insults I suggest the blockage for that one I articulate I erase it and you go back to put it. --Hugo Felix - Messages Here 01:10, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
- Looks like some of our anti-vandal patrol was reverting your edits on accident. An honest mistake on their part. No worries however, I have removed the unsourced material. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 01:42, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kirkoconnell
Hello there Fastily,
Thank you for inquiring about my Request for adminship. I still intent to keep my request in. I have read all of the documents associated with my request. I have been editing for a fair amount of years now and have grown as an editor to the point where I decided to make this request. So please do not delete it.
-Kirkoconnell (talk) 02:07, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Adminship
I am still trying t become an admin. I believe I am fully qualified. 4 PAGES CREATED TO DATE. User:KingofFilm, the mighty Wikipedian. 14:16, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, this is unlikely to happen at this time. While not a perfect metric of your experience, you only have 150 edits on that account. Most administrators have upwards of 5,000-10,000, and others significantly more. A direct link to your talkpage on your userpage displays somewhat of a lack of technical knowledge of the workings of Wikipedia (piped links, and your talk is already linked to your user talk via the tab at the top of the page) which is also a big part, along with knowledge of policy. I expect your RFA to be closed under WP:NOTNOW. Keep in mind this doesn't mean you'll NEVER be an admin- just not now. --King Öomie 14:45, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
I intend to update myself on my wiki-knowledge on the help desk. Sometimes the best admin is someone who doesn't know anything at all. (I don't mean that neccesarily). IF I AM ASSISING YOU, VISIT Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/KingofFilm TO GIVE POSITIVE FEEDBACK! 21:29, 5 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by KingofFilm (talk • contribs)
Images
Fastily,
I would like to speak to you about my two files Brodess.jpg and John_means.jpg, which have been scheduled for deletion tomorrow as they have no source information. Please tell me how to add this! The images come from A History of Ashland Kentucky 1786 - 1954, which was published between 1923 - 1963. According to this website, their copyright is expired if it has never been renewed. I checked here and found that it never was. Please help me! --Parodist (talk) 22:20, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- It would seem you seem to have resolved the issue yourself. Convenient eh? :P -FASTILYsock(TALK) 09:14, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Edit reverted
I am slightly new to editing here on Wikipedia but I feel you made an error in reverting an edit I made a little earlier on the 9/11 truth movement. I believe I added "conservative/libertarian radio host and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones" as one of the adherents to that specific conspiracy theory. Either you are unaware or his prominence in that theory (he is essentially the most recognizable and vocal figure there is), or I simply do not understand how to properly edit and you can inform me as to what specifically I did that is wrong, and then I can make the corrective steps to enter that information properly into that entry. If you were mistaken then feel free to not respond, otherwise please clarify things for me. Thanx for the help.
Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.119.97.118 (talk) 05:04, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
- You need to source your contributions. If you do not, they will be removed. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 09:12, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
I see that on January 28th you tagged File:281675083133 0 BG.jpg for FFD, but never created the discussion. I have just removed the tag. Feel free to nominate it for deletion if you still think it should be deleted. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:48, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, my bad. Thanks for letting me know; I have renominated the file for deletion. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:33, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
- You're welcome. I've been going through CAT:FFD to confirm that all images there currently have open WP:FFD discussions, and deal with any which don't. As far as I can tell, there are 3 reasons why there may be problems in this area:
- The discussion had been removed from the FFD page - these I relist on the current FFD page, with a comment making it clear what happenned. A lot of these seem to be yours! (I see you've commented on one which isn't)
- The discussion had never been created - these I remove the tag and inform the nominator.
- Incomplete closure by admins - these I finish handling.
- עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:10, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
- You're welcome. I've been going through CAT:FFD to confirm that all images there currently have open WP:FFD discussions, and deal with any which don't. As far as I can tell, there are 3 reasons why there may be problems in this area:
- I have just found File:Alero-OSV-4.JPG, File:Alero-OSV-8.jpg, File:BNmanchester.JPG and File:BagelWorldForYorkie.JPG, where you appear not to have created the discussion either. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:14, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hey, thanks for going through the trouble to find these; your detective work is much appreciated! I've renominated the files. Best, FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:28, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
- I have just found File:Alero-OSV-4.JPG, File:Alero-OSV-8.jpg, File:BNmanchester.JPG and File:BagelWorldForYorkie.JPG, where you appear not to have created the discussion either. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:14, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello!
Hi, Fastily! I wanted to ask you for advice. I wanted to request for rollback, as i did earlier, so it was agreed to wait few more months, and then re-ask! You may remember me per my block log, that is here only because of Sarandioti (talk · contribs) and his numerous highly WP:DE socks. All i did was reverting him. So, my question is should i ask now, or wait more. You may ask Moreschi or Prodego for more explanations regarded sarandioti, or Dab, or any of related editors regarding me. This permission will mean a lot to me, and i will use it with big honor and care. All best, --Tadija (talk) 22:39, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Tadija. Thanks for your message. Unfortunately, I'm currently in a position where I'm unable to access my admin account securely (and will be unable to for some time), hence my editing from my alternate account. I recommend you request rollback via WP:PERM/R, where another administrator will be able to process your request. In the request, state exactly what you told me, and wait and see if an administrator there is willing to fill your request. Best, FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:45, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Removal of image "Robot Chemist.jpg"
I have been told, and have confirmed, that you removed the image referenced above, including the link to the article "Hans Baruch."
I have made several unsuccessful attempts to send email to the appropriate authorities at Wikipedia notifying them that the photograph was taken by me and that I have always considered the image to be in the public domain. The photograph was taken by me well over 40 years ago and Research Specialties has not existed since 1965.
I hereby release all rights to this image to be used by Wikipedia for any purpose whatsoever.
I would very much appreciate it if the image were restored to the biographical article as well as the image by itself. This photograph is an essential part of the story of the development of the Robot Chemist.
Am I doing this correctly? If not, would you please send me the correct methodology for accomplishing the requested restoration?
Thank you for any help you can give in this matter.
Siincerely,
Hans Baruch (ex CEO of Research Specialties Company)
Hbaruch (talk) 00:15, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Mr. Baruch. Yes, I did delete File:Robot Chemist.jpg on the grounds that the copyright status of it could not be confirmed. I am sorry to hear that you have been having trouble getting the copyright status of your file verified. If you are still intent on having the file on Wikipedia, email "permissions-en@wikimedia.org" again, following the instructions outlined at WP:PERMISSION. If the file is copyrighted, be sure to familiarize yourself with WP:DCM before sending the email. In the email, be sure to specify the name of the file ("File:Robot Chemist.jpg" in this case) and which license you are releasing the file under. Be sure to note any special circumstances surrounding the file as well (e.g. history, copyrighting, author). Please let me know once you have done that, and I'll ask an OTRS volunteer to look into it so we can get this file verified asap. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:31, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Tags
Hi... I've removed the tags from the page on P90X because it's been repeatedly vandalized, including with tags by anonymous users who apparently have something against the topic itself. Yours tag seems to have been the only legitimate one -- and I apologize if removing it goes against protocol -- so I wanted to ask you what you think needs to be done to this page to make it acceptable to you. It's undergone multiple edits, including a major one I did a few weeks ago to deal with exactly the problems some people were complaining about (a neutral point of view and lack of legitimate sources). This topic is clearly notable -- there are articles about it in major publications nearly every day -- and judging from the nearly 5,000 page views it gets per day, users clearly want this information. There are also apparently quite a few interested users who are willing to put the effort in to improve it. So I think it would help a lot if, as an administrator, you would state what specific changes you think it needs. Thanks! BHealthy (talk) 18:11, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
- It's not out of process to remove maintenance tags, as long as the concern noted by the tag has been resolved. At any rate, thank you for doing the good detective work! Your contributions thus far look alright. Keep it up! -FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:42, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello FASTILY,
I saw that you deleted my Misfortune, Inc. entry based on G11. I've tried to make this article as neutral/balanced as possible by also including non-favorable content as well but the page may have seemed promotional since I'm a fan of the company. I'm open to suggestions on how to make the article more neural and on how to get it back up. Any insight would be appreciated.
Thank you, Elle —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elle.elka (talk • contribs) 22:51, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Ref removing vandal
As predicted, he's returned to editing from the ranges that were recently unblocked. The IP 75.36.137.167 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is within this range which just became unblocked. SBC does not bother responding to my inquiries. The ranges that you did not block that this guy now has access to are 75.36.136.0/21, 76.200.100.0/22, 76.204.76.0/22, & 76.205.24.0/22.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:15, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Ryulong. I'm currently in a position where I'm unable to access my admin account securely (and will be unable to for another week), hence the editing from my alt account. At any rate, you may want to seek immediate but short-term intervention at ANI. Alternatively, you may wish to hold out for the week, after which I will put the vandal away for a very, very long time. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 09:07, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
- And he's active again on 75.36.139.180 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). My request got ignored at ANI, except for zzuuzz who said that an edit filter would be more effective.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:00, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up. I'll take care of it as soon as I am able to. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 04:52, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- And he's active again on 75.36.139.180 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). My request got ignored at ANI, except for zzuuzz who said that an edit filter would be more effective.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:00, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Bonnie-Bailey.jpg
I took this Picture Myself. As you had mentioned I do work for Yanni as an Engineer, Both Audio and Video, as well as the Company's all around Media person doing the album cover layouts and DVD designs. As such, I was asked by Ric Wake, Yanni's partner at Yanni•Wake and Bonnie's producer, to build a Wiki page for her using this photo. This is one the Photo I took and used for promoting her single Millions of Milkshakes in her Manager Bath Tub [52] TravisMeck (talk) 22:58, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah right... --Fred the Oyster (talk) 23:05, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response, Actually you just made my point. Look at the photo in the link you added, It's the raw untouched and uncropped batch that she picked from all the photo's we sent her to pick from before we worked on them. She posted her untouched photo's all over her site's in fact as we were still working.Why else would I be doing any of this or give a crap other than it's what I'm paid to do?
I understand you need verification, But I'm not certain what qualifies? Don't know what other proof I can give you other than sending you the email chains from Ric and Bonnie asking me to do this, Or contact her yourself from that link and ask her? Better yet I can have them call you directly as they are 30 feet away from me right now. TravisMeck (talk) 23:33, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- You'll probably find what ou need to know at WP:DCP. Although I don't doubt what you say is true, there is a copyright on these images and from what you've said it sounds like you have actually given your copyright away to Yanni given that derivatives of those images are being circulated under their copyright, in which case written permission would be required via the WP:OTRS system. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 23:51, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Ok, I get what Your saying Now, Thanks for explaining it to me... I'll see what I can get. Thanks, TravisMeck (talk) 00:00, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:YANNI Nathn 016601 rt v1K.jpg & File:YANNI Chloe 017377 rt v2K.jpg
Same story as the Bonnie Pix.... Their Manager Bob Murray asked that I make something of their Wiki Pages as they are currently "Stubs", Specifically wanting those 2 pictures to be used, out of the literal Thousands that we have.[53] We are the copyright owners of the files, check out the Nomenclature in the Prefix (ReTouched Version1). I did the Photoshop work from the original shoot, one of many hats I wear along with Recording the singers, setting up mail servers, DVD Layouts, Running ProTools during the Live shows and what ever else needs done around here.
Truth be told, as I'm sure you have deduced, I'm the Digital Catch all guy here at Yanni•Wake (jack of all trades and master of none) asked to do all sort of things not because I know how, But simply because I'm told "you know computers!" I was a Post Guy that was brought in to help out on the 2005 Live Video and have been lucky enough to be here still working. I'm figuring it out as I go reading the tutorials, So If I'm going about it the wrong way I'd appreciate the nudge in the right direction. You can reach me TMeck@YanniWake.com if you'd like some other means of verification other than I have the User and Pass info for the Gallery?
TravisMeck (talk) 23:21, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
RfA
About that message you sent me about that RfA, I decided not to transclude it because I don't have a large edit count. You can probably go ahead and delete that for now, but I will be back later. Jack SchledererTalk Adds 04:41, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 00:02, 9 March 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Tucker talk 00:02, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello FASTILY,
Thank you for your quick response and for the clarifications. I was a bit confused since I wrote this article early January and didn't expect it to be deleted after being up for 2 months. Maybe because I removed the review tag??. I've read the guidelines and was under the impression that I was following them. I would appreciate any specific examples you might be able to give but understand if you're too busy to do so.
I will try to revise.
Thank you, Elle —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elle.elka (talk • contribs) 01:11, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Vandalism and insults in the I articulateBoomerang (Latin American TV channel)
They are writing vandalism in the I articulate Boomerang (Latin American TV channel) On something future of boomerang 2 which fails to match and please that page in order that they stop blocks insults and insulting and inventing información.Gracias and greetings.
- PD:An anonymous user is this insulting and vandalizando I articulate the mentioned.
--Hugo Felix - Messages Here 21:03, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- It looks like Ronhjones has already taken care of that by semi-protecting the page for another month. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:30, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Requested move
I would like to request that Unionville public school be moved to Unionville Public School, which is currently a redirect, my reasoning being that the words "Public School" are part of the name, and therefore are capitalised. Thank you. Brambleclawx 03:59, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
- Done - article now at Unionville Public School. Cheers, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 10:00, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi There! You have deleted Image:Krill666.jpg on EN:WP. Could you please have a look at what resolution the original file (by User:Kils) was uploaded? That would be great! Thanks! (There is a complaint that current file was not uploaded by his owner at that high resolution) --Amada44 (talk) 06:38, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
omen(American band)
why has omen been deleted?? several records released world wide on well known label www.metalblade.com Omen music included on Brutal legend video game sound track with Ozzy and Judas Priest this soundtrack shipped over four million copies world wide! www.brutallegend.com Omen is touring now www.lastfm.com/omen omen info available on many credible websites mtv, amazon, allmusic and omen's music is even available at wal-mart.com yet they have been completely erased from all wiki pages -Hagfish13 (talk) 06:44, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
http://www.districtlines.com/6043-The-Curse-Nightmares-CD/metal-blade-records
- Hi Fastily, just letting you know that this has been taken care of at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion#omen (American band) (although the article may still need AfD). Cheers, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 10:13, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Regarding images being uploaded from Government sites
I recieved messages from you regarding the images uploaded by me into wikipedia articles. I have taken all the images from the Govt. websites of Orissa that is being maintained by NIC. Please suggest me under which category of image liscense policy, these files come. As these files are freely available to public, I think, there should not be any problem uploading those. Kindly suggest me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bishupriyaparam (talk • contribs) 08:14, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
TeamDynamixHE
Hello. I'm new to Wikipedia and I contributed the TeamDynamixHE article. I did my best to follow all the directions -citations, copyrights, etc.- and I submitted the article for feedback. After two weeks without any feedback, I went ahead and posted the page out of my userspace and, when I was notified that it was being targeted for deletion, I posted the appropriate tags to be allowed to plead my case. I was not granted that request, and the page was deleted. I'm not hiding the fact that TeamDynamixHE is a company. AtTask provides software to address similar needs, as do all of the companies listed at Comparison of project management software. If any one of these companies is allowed to have a Wikipedia page, shouldn't they all be allowed? I'd appreciate your help so I can put the TeamDynamixHE article back up; I'll make every possible effort to make it Wikipedia-compliant. Jhuber08 (talk) 22:23, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
New page review
Fastily, I recently created a page which you removed. I have just created another listing that is unbiased and should conform the Wikipedia rules and regulations. Since I am with the company that the page describes, I am also attempting to contact separate organizations that can edit the content. Could you please review the current content or User:Rolled Alloys and let me know if there is anything I should change before moving it to Rolled Alloys. I would like to avoid a speedy deletion, but I am unclear of your previous requests. Thanks. Rolled Alloys (talk) 17:46, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks For Signing My Guestbook!
|
~Aragorn135's Guestbook Barnstar | |
| For signing my guestbook - I, ~Aragorn135 hearby present you with this unique barnstar. Thanks for reviewing my userpage and hoped you enjoyed it! ~Aragorn135 04:33, 9 March 2010 (UTC) |
Orphaned non-free image File:Ben10 Aliens.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Ben10 Aliens.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is 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).
PLEASE NOTE:
- I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.
- I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.
- If you recieved this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
- To opt out of these bot messages, add
{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}to somewhere on your talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 08:05, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Feedback on living person wanted
Hello Fastily. I see you've deleted an article Simon_Johnson_(security_expert) on March 2 and I wonder if I have a chance to recreate it. Actually, I've already created a page here User:Olgpa/Simon_Johnson_(security_consultant) and would love to hear your comments. This is not the final version and I will add more content and resources (I guess, the 3rd paragraph will be enhanced and maybe I can find some other information on this person. With what I currently have on the page, I would like to know your opinion as the administrator: does the article have a chance if I add more value to it? If so, what you think would be best to add. Thanks for your time. Olgpa (talk) 20:42, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
- I deleted the article as it was an expired and uncontested PROD. If you feel the article is compliant with WP:BLP, WP:N, WP:V, WP:NPOV, and WP:MOS, then feel free to resubmit the article. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:35, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
Permission Granted for use of Rufus M. Rose House
Fastily,
I got an email stating that I could post the old 1903 pic. on the Rufus M. Rose house to Wikipedia (I believe you had tagged it as awaiting permission. I think, however, it will need to be restored). Too, GA archives stated that we had to put the following with the pic: "Courtesy Georgia Archives, Vanishing Georgia Collection, ful0404. Permission for use and waiver of the fee for this particular article do not mean that we will automatically waive fees for other photos. If you wish to use other photos, you will need to request permission for those images as well." My questions to you: I have no idea where to put that language, nor what should really be in the "source" section, or the copyright section. Can you help? Too, when I email the permission email to Wiki, what all do I need to include with it? Carsonmc (talk)
- Hi Carsonmc. Yes, forward everything sent to you by the Georgia Archives topermissions-en@wikimedia.org to OTRS along with an consisting of everything that you told me just now. Once that's done, let me know and I'll personally ask an OTRS volunteer to look into it (they will archive the email in the OTRS system and confirm the status copyright status of the file). Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:41, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
RfA
I don't think it is up to you to remove the nom's support. A crat can discount it if necessary. Polargeo (talk) 07:34, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- Don't think? But can you say so for sure? -FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:48, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- Per the user's own request, I stand corrected. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:59, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
Why did you delete the EuclidVision article?
Was there a nomination? If so I would like a link. While it may be vaporware, I think it was a legitimate article. I had it on my watchlist since the day the article was created for new information on the product. I tried to check up on it today and found it gone. Why have you done this? May you burn in HELLLLL for this crime! Just joking, but yeah, why?--Spectatorbot13 (talk) 22:36, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
Reinhardt College Page
Fastily,
Can you help? Someone keeps vandalizing Reinhardt College's page by repeatedly adding a non-notable "famous baseball/softball player" that doesn't exist. Other admins. have warned whoever is doing this to stop. Apparently, this third or fourth vandalization was done from a new IP address. I tried to undo the edits, but must have been doing something wrong as it wouldn't let me "undo" a previous edit. In other words, it said I had to do it manually? Does this make any sense? I know there is supposedly some way to report this user (or the two IP addresses) to admins., but not sure how to do this. Too, I know that a "vadalization" tag can be added, but is this for the person, or for admins to keep a check on the page? In short, I'd like whoever this is to stop adding some non-notable figure to this page. Please let me know if you need more expl.
As for the Rufus M. Rose picture and permission email, I'll get that sent in tomorrow and let you know that I've done it. Thanks. Carsonmc (talk) 04:21, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- I've watchlisted the page; it looks like we have an IP-hopping vandal here. If the vandalism continues, the page can be semi-protected to prevent further IP vandalism. At any rate, I'll take care of it. Also, thanks for going through the trouble to get permission for the file. It's not terribly fun work to do, but know that your efforts and contributions are very much appreciated :) Best, FASTILYsock(TALK) 04:36, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily, I have to say, you have been most kind and extremely helpful. Thank you, thank you for the above. I'll keep an eye on the page, it's sorta my baby. :-) As for the Rufus M. Rose pic, I did as you said and sent the permission email to Wikipedia (the subject line of my email was "Permission to use picture for Rufus M. Rose House page from Georgia Archives" if that helps). I'm not quite sure what else I need to do. I'm assuming the file will be re-uploaded and then I'll have to figure out all the lang./permission/source, etc.? Sorry to be so demanding about this, just way above my Wiki knowledge. And, again, as always, thanks for your help, Carsonmc (talk)
- Actually, there's nothing left for you to do except wait for a bit. I have already asked an OTRS volunteer to look into it. If the permissions in the email check out, then they will restore the file and apply the relevant licensing tags/templates. That being said, I think we should have some results within 24 hours. I'll update you accordingly. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 04:58, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily, I have to say, you have been most kind and extremely helpful. Thank you, thank you for the above. I'll keep an eye on the page, it's sorta my baby. :-) As for the Rufus M. Rose pic, I did as you said and sent the permission email to Wikipedia (the subject line of my email was "Permission to use picture for Rufus M. Rose House page from Georgia Archives" if that helps). I'm not quite sure what else I need to do. I'm assuming the file will be re-uploaded and then I'll have to figure out all the lang./permission/source, etc.? Sorry to be so demanding about this, just way above my Wiki knowledge. And, again, as always, thanks for your help, Carsonmc (talk)
Fantastic. I'll eagerly await the results. Your help is most appreciated. Too, I added several pics last weekend that can be sent to Wiki Commons. I didn't now if that was a tag you had to apply or one I could. Just let me know. Cheers. Carsonmc (talk)
- No problem! Any editor can apply 'move to commons tags'. Simply add the text "{{mtc}}" to the file description page of any file that is clearly freely licensed, and the file will be put in a queue to be transferred to Commons. A quick caveat though, Commons cannot accept non-free/copyrighted content, so those files shouldn't be tagged with {{mtc}}. Best, FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:15, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
File source problem with File:Praporshchik Volentir.jpg
File talk:Praporshchik Volentir.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by SerdechnyG (talk • contribs) 05:46, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- That's not going to work. If you cannot provide a specific source within 7 days, then the file is going to be deleted. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:55, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- What do you call specific? -- SerdechnyG (talk) 06:27, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, scratch that. You don't even provide a source. Where is this file from? -FASTILYsock(TALK) 06:57, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- from at least five different web-resources, all of them are reliable and belongs to TV channels. check this [54]. it's absolutely public. -- SerdechnyG (talk) 07:45, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, scratch that. You don't even provide a source. Where is this file from? -FASTILYsock(TALK) 06:57, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- What do you call specific? -- SerdechnyG (talk) 06:27, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Another deleted image
Your bot also deleted an image for File:Tennessee Theater.jpg claiming it was available on Wikimedia commons, however that's not true. ----DanTD (talk) 15:06, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- File:Tennessee Theater.jpg was on Commons for some time. However, it was deleted because it was missing a license. If you can provide a license, feel free to upload the file again. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 18:38, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
File:Genesis_Model1_High_Definition_Graphics.jpg
Thank you for your message in regards to the license of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Genesis_Model1_High_Definition_Graphics.jpg
The author agreed to release his photo under the GFDL:
http://www.sega-16.com/forum/showpost.php?p=231340&postcount=29:
" I release my photo under GFDL.
If I need to say anything else, let me know, or if I have to, I'll upload it myself. USE THE PICTURE WIKIPEDIA! THAT'S WHY I TOOK IT! "
DCEvoCE (talk) 16:44, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- Please see WP:PERMISSION. Thanks, FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:09, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
I added explanatory details on the image description page and further details on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 March 15. Do you need more than this? DES (talk) 22:53, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- I have replied at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 March 15#File:Dr. Hedayat.JPG. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:11, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you. I will have an OTRS email sent.
Israeli settlement graph
Hi, I noticed that you tagged the graph I uploaded as a candidate to be moved to commons. I'm happy to do that if you think it would be useful. Thanks for the compliment! Factsontheground (talk) 01:44, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
- No problem. Actually, there is a bot that will automatically move files tagged for transfer to Commons. You are free to move it yourself, but that probably won't be necessary at any rate. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:16, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Image
As you can see File:Pirates of the Carabian PA190094.jpg here, there is a fair use rational detailed in the image duiscription. Deror (talk) 09:11, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- You did not fill out the "Portion used" and "Low resolution?" parameters on the fair-use rationale template. On top of that, the file fails Wikipedia's non-free content criteria #1, so it cannot be used on Wikipedia. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:42, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- It is a low resulotion image (relativley) and according to american law this criteria is only required when using another persons image and not own photograph anyway. Can you help me fill in the paratmers? what is "portion used"?
- As to criteria 1 - there can not be free image - so the criteria is met. Deror (talk) 10:35, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- With all due respect, the criterion is not met. You state that this is your own photo, yet it is copyrighted. Another editor could easily go for a ride on that particular ride and take another picture of the same thing. Even if the ride is no longer in existence, it is almost certain that your file is not unique. Now I don't mean to come off as curt or rude, but unfortunately, this image is not usable on Wikipedia. I encourage you to carefully read WP:NFCC#1 again. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:36, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- With all due respect, the criterion is is met - my photo (the derivative work) is free - the problem is the ride itself which is copyrighte. all images taken in the ride will be copyrighted by Disney (not the photographer) - that is why fair use. Deror (talk) 15:14, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- In the case of a Disney... well, ANYTHING really, I'm not sure if a free alternative is available. Disney owns the rights to derivative works, from what I understand. It's like trying to tape a movie. --King Öomie 15:26, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Commons:Commons:Freedom of panorama#United States. Read it. Your file is free. If you want to use it on Wikipedia, reupload it with a free license. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:28, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- In the case of a Disney... well, ANYTHING really, I'm not sure if a free alternative is available. Disney owns the rights to derivative works, from what I understand. It's like trying to tape a movie. --King Öomie 15:26, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- With all due respect, the criterion is is met - my photo (the derivative work) is free - the problem is the ride itself which is copyrighte. all images taken in the ride will be copyrighted by Disney (not the photographer) - that is why fair use. Deror (talk) 15:14, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- With all due respect, the criterion is not met. You state that this is your own photo, yet it is copyrighted. Another editor could easily go for a ride on that particular ride and take another picture of the same thing. Even if the ride is no longer in existence, it is almost certain that your file is not unique. Now I don't mean to come off as curt or rude, but unfortunately, this image is not usable on Wikipedia. I encourage you to carefully read WP:NFCC#1 again. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:36, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Deleting Images
You tagged images that I posted for deletion. One happens to be from Wikicommons; 1. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/thumb/a/a1/FARBEN_DWORY.png/681px-FARBEN_DWORY.png It's used at Monowitz concentration camp for some reason it wouldn't show so i uploaded it onto the English Wikipedia. It clearly shows it's source; Wikimedia
2.another one File:Bentley Manor.gif clearly gives its source and is in the public domain it was first published over 100 years ago. Around 1848, Lossing conceived of the idea of writing a narrative sketchbook on the American Revolution. The first installment was published in Harper's New Monthly Magazine in 1850, but three years passed before the completed Pictorial Field-Book of the Revolution was published http://www.nysl.nysed.gov/msscfa/sc19618.htm
3. another one File:Jans-Martense-house-plans.gif is from the Historic American Building Survey Library of Congress. http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/list/100_tim2.html it is printed right on it "Historic American Building Survey"
4. another one, is a photograph of a 137 year old map of a municipal entity which no longer exists, created by an individual who has been deceased for over 100 years,the map was created in 1873. Brooklyn became part of New York City in 1898, the map says right on it Town of Gravesend, there are neighborhoods in NYC but no separate towns, a little extrapolation: it is over 100 years old and in the public domain. http://www.bklyn-genealogy-info.com/Map/Gravesend.inner.html author:Alvin Jewitt Johnson, Johnson and Ward publishers. JAW is printed on the map.
5.this one File:Hessian jager.jpg any reasonable individual can clearly see that it is a eighteenth century illustration. It's reasonable to assume the author is dead. I don't think he is going to e-mail anything. This image or media is missing evidence of permission. It is sourced to someone other than the uploader and while a copyright tag has been applied, there is no proof that the author agreed to license the file under the given license. Unless a link to a webpage with an explicit permission is provided, or an email from the copyright owner is sent or forwarded it's used here http://myinwood.net/who-were-the-hessians/
6. another one has the source right on the image itself:File:Foster care length of stay.gif Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System it was uploaded from the White House web site. http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/rewrite/budget/fy2004/hhs.html
7.File:Ichabod B Crane.jpg gave the source: Library of Congress http://www.loc.gov/teachers/classroommaterials/connections/daguerreotype/langarts4.html It is in the public domain. You click on the link and it goes to the .....Library of Congress.
8.File:Old brewery.jpg gave a source D.T. Valentine published books in the nineteenth century.
9.File:Leptospira interrogans .jpg gives a source the CDC and an author, not that it matters because their is a larger version of the same picture with the same exact source and author information: File:Leptospira interrogans strain RGA 01.png
10.this one:File:Children of Bullinhuser Damm.jpg, falls under the fair use laws of the United States. It's a historical image of individuals who are now deceased, it can't be replaced. If it was seized by the United States or the United Kingdom, German copyright law doesn't apply in those countries. Neuengamme was in the British zone of occupation, English Wikipedia's servers are in the U.S.
- Mkay look, several things. If you are aware of the problems, know how to fix them, and have already done that, why are you telling me this? You are certainly more than entitled to fix problems when you encounter them. As of now, it seems that the problems regarding the files you have listed here are all fixed. However, I would like to take this as an opportunity to remind you again that a specific source (e.g. specific external link, magazine volume/page/edition, newspaper volume, ect.) must be provided for all images regardless of their origin. Simply saying oh, this picture comes from some brewery magazine in the 1600s simply isn't going to cut it. If you want to keep your pictures on Wikipedia, then consider complying with the image use policy and start providing specific sources. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 19:19, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Well Mkay, first no need for rudeness on your part, if you can't handle your position without rudeness and lame sarcasm maybe you should not do it. Would you be as rude to someone in person? Doubtful. "If you want to keep your pictures on Wikipedia, then consider complying with the image use policy and start providing specific sources." Why don't you consider looking up the word civility. You should read this Administrators are expected to lead by example and to behave in a respectful, civil manner in their interactions with others. Wikipedia:Administrators#Administrator conduct
7mike5000 (talk) 14:34, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hah, sarcastic, obviously. Uncivil, ummm no. I don't know where you got that from but as far as I'm concerned, swearing and personal attacks constitute incivility. I am in no way attempting to harass you, nor was that my intent, but if you want to take it that way, then whatever floats your boat. meh. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:38, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
I can respond with childish tit for tat sarcasm but that seems to be your department.7mike5000 (talk) 21:54, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Old news, perhaps
Hello Fastily, by chance I came across this edit. Is this kosher? Thanks, Dr Aaij (talk) 03:24, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
- No, it does not specifically address the concern originally noted in the deletion template. I have retagged the file as such. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:29, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
I just found a message from you about a photo of the Fountain of Time. The picture was taken by me, but I am at my folks house now, with a very wierd computer hook up - I can only see at most a 1/4 of the screen at a time, so please don't do anyhting for at least a week, at which point I'll be home. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 18:02, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
- Alright then, I'll give you a few extra days. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:47, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Rufus M. Rose Pic
Grrr... frustrating... I wasn't made aware that GA Archives had to decide what tag to put permission under (nor would that government agency take the time to look through Wikipedia media/copyright tags), I thought that was something we did? We being Wikipedians. GA archives clearly gives Wikipedia permission to use the file in its email. Can we not pick out the appropriate tag - i.e., it can be posted here on Wikipedia, but not elsewhere. If I have to go back to GA archives, I'm afraid all this will be in vein.Carsonmc (talk)
- vein=vain Carsonmc (talk)
- I know, isn't it? I can totally understand where you're coming from. Well, if the email states that the file can be used on Wikipedia only...we might have a problem. Per Wikipedia:Image use policy#Adding images, 4th bullet point, we cannot use files which limit usage to Wikipedia only. Wikipedia's goal of maintaining a free resource library does not include images whose copyrights restrict usage to Wikipedia only, commercial use, and/or derivatives. Long story short, we do not have compatible licenses for images which are restricted to Wikipedia usage only. I guess that was why the OTRS email request was denied. I'd try and help, but I'm afraid there's nothing I can do. The copyrights of the files are up to the Georgia Archives, and I doubt they'll be willing to change their licensing policies. I'm sorry Carsomc :( All the best, FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:12, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Okay...LOL... I think we've gone about all this in vain, and we could have simply posted the picture as in the public domain, which it is!! LOL... I sent another email to GA archives, and the response I got was this:
"Thank you for pointing out that the photo came from the 1903 book. Our Vanishing Georgia photos were provided to us by members of the public who authorized their use for “educational” purposes. We are making the image available for reference purposes and do not claim ownership. If you wish to use the photo, we will make it available, but it will be your responsibility to make sure there is no copyright still in effect. I suspect that it is not in effect and that you could simply tag it as being in the public domain."
Steven W. Engerrand Archives Assistant Director--Archival Services Georgia Archives
Therefore, my initial posting of the photo would have been okay... it's pre 1923 and in the public domain. The photo on their website is a copy of a photo that appeared in a 1903 book on Atlanta. Can you or someone else restore the photo. All we have to do is put the "Public Domain" tag on it. Make sense? You were right all along. LOL. Sorry for all the confusion.
- And no, Steven's email didn't say that the pic could only be used on Wikipedia, that was me thinking out loud. Simply put, the photo, as you originally stated when I asked you about posting it a few weeks ago, is pre-1923 and in the public domain. GA archives wouldn't say a word about us posting the pic on line. Please let me know if all this makes sense and you agree. Carsonmc (talk)
- >_< Hah, well that's great to know. Please feel free to reupload the file - be sure to include a link to the Georgia Archives website where you found the photo, and use the license tag "{{PD-US}}". Good to know everything worked out in the end. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:36, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- And no, Steven's email didn't say that the pic could only be used on Wikipedia, that was me thinking out loud. Simply put, the photo, as you originally stated when I asked you about posting it a few weeks ago, is pre-1923 and in the public domain. GA archives wouldn't say a word about us posting the pic on line. Please let me know if all this makes sense and you agree. Carsonmc (talk)
Fastily, I added the pic. I think I got all the info. correct. Let me know if you see something wrong. Do you think I need to add this to the photo: "Courtesy Georgia Archives, Vanishing Georgia Collection, ful0404. Permission for use and waiver of the fee for this particular article do not mean that we will automatically waive fees for other photos. If you wish to use other photos, you will need to request permission for those images as well." This is what GA Archives originally said, but then in subsequent emails, he stated that the picture was in the public domain. Would the above cause confusion? Does this all make sense? Or should I add a shortened version to the "source" area: "Georgia Archives, Vanishing Georgia Collection, ful0404." Carsonmc (talk)
- Added the shorter version. Let me know if I should add the longer one. The longer one is a bit confusing. I understand where GA Archives is coming from, but public domain is public domain. Per US copyright laws, they don't own this, and they have stated this to me in emails. I think what I have is fine, but let me know if it wouldn't hurt to just add the longer desc. I just don't want another admin. to come by and delete the photo because they misunderstand the longer GA archive bit. Carsonmc (talk)
- To make it easy for you Rufus M. Rose House. Carsonmc (talk)
Sing Along Songs images deleted
RE: deletion of image 00:31, 21 December 2009 Fastily (talk | contribs) deleted "File:WikiSASFirstSeries.JPG" (Deleted because "F5: Unused non-free media file for more than 7 days". using TW)
This image was of multple video covers (in the vein of album covers, book covers, etc) which was NOT borrowed or owned by any outside source. The photo was taken BY ME and was described as such in the item. Maybe I'm not understanding the meaning of "Fair use" or "non-free". Lo-res images of multiple covers is not violation of copyright within fair use policy, I understood. These images replaced multiple cover images "borrowed" from Amazon et al. Do I need to upload to Wikimedia commons to qualify as fair use? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Azasakayi (talk • contribs) 18:43, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
- Er....I'm not sure what you're trying to say. If you're asking why I deleted the file, it was because it was tagged as being orphaned (meaning, it is not used in/linked to any article) for more than 7 days. Per standard procedure, such orphaned, non-free images are deleted after 7 days of being orphaned (see WP:CSD#F5). At any rate, this happened in December of last year, so I'm not exactly sure why you're asking me about this now. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:25, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
vandalism warnings
I have a question- if I come across vandalism by someone who received a level 4 warning recently, I report it on AIV. But, after I report it, should I warn them again? There is nothing higher than a level four warning that I can give, and giving two "this is your final warning"s in a row doesn't make sense. Thanks, E2eamon (talk) 23:19, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
- There's no need to warn them after being reported to WP:AIV. If a vandal is still vandalizing after they've been reported to AIV, just revert their edits and wait for an admin to block them. Hope that helps to answer your question. Best, FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:38, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Vandalism
Please I request that they protect the page of Tooncast Because there are insults toward to the canal, vandalism and false information be more than enough Boomerang 2 I suggest the protection of this paginate. For favor this user Juliohfv1 My registered user's name has been imitated a vandal that puts news is false and you go back to put him and insults toward my person I suggest the blockage to imitate my user's name registered.thanks.--Hugo Felix - Messages Here 04:21, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Juliohfv. It looks like Jayron32 has already taken care of the situation, protecting Tooncast and blocking Juliohfv1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:13, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Confused
Fastily, I saw that you posted a message somewhere, today for me to read. I don't see it however?? Am I looking in the right place? 63.133.205.1 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:44, 17 March 2010 (UTC).
Sorry, it was Carsonmc that left the above, I thought I was logged in. Carsonmc (talk)
^&!%
Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_March_17#File:DSC_0504_sm.jpg: "Orphaned, Low Quality, Unencyclopedic, Use not stated". *cough*. We've been here before. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:25, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- I didn't post that. Read the timestamp and the administrator's note below the discussion. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:30, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Are this and this not what they seem to be? Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:44, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- I nominated these files shortly before our little run in. If you believe the files should be kept, you are more than welcome to withdraw my request, which was re-added by Od Mishehu, and remove the deletion tags. Good day. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:49, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Are this and this not what they seem to be? Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:44, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- In that case I owe you an apology. I'm very sorry, I had recollected that we had our little disagreement in January of this year. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:59, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Your Comment on my user Page
Hi, and thanks for your comment on how I fixed the license. However, I was unable to find anything that is free AND similar/suitable in the Commons, OR on Google. Sorry to bother you by the way.
- Jmans25 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:49, 16 March 2010 (UTC).
- It's fine. Basically, what the tag means is that a free version could be made to replace the copyrighted version. So a user made copy would suffice. At any rate, in addition to failing WP:NFCC#1, the file also fails WP:NFCC#8. I hate to tell you but the file is probably going to be deleted one way or another. This however, does not mean that your contributions are unappreciated (frankly, they are), but it's just that we cannot use this particular media file that you've uploaded. Sorry, FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:14, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
- So even if the image gets deleted, will there be another one, on the same article, to replace it? Thanks, and sorry to bother you. And I just wish every image/file was free, so stuff would not get deleted!
- Jmans25 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:20, 16 March 2010 (UTC).
- Basically. It's likely someone else will eventually create a free version for that page. When uploading copyrighted content, as a rule of thumb, always ask yourself, "Is it possible that a free version of this file could be created/obtained?" At any rate you can't go wrong with that! Happy Editing, FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:46, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
- Jmans25 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:20, 16 March 2010 (UTC).
- So even if the image gets deleted, will there be another one, on the same article, to replace it? Thanks, and sorry to bother you. And I just wish every image/file was free, so stuff would not get deleted!
- It's fine. Basically, what the tag means is that a free version could be made to replace the copyrighted version. So a user made copy would suffice. At any rate, in addition to failing WP:NFCC#1, the file also fails WP:NFCC#8. I hate to tell you but the file is probably going to be deleted one way or another. This however, does not mean that your contributions are unappreciated (frankly, they are), but it's just that we cannot use this particular media file that you've uploaded. Sorry, FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:14, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Herman, Arkansas Photo
Hello,
The photograph of the train stop at Herman was obviously not taken by me, since I was not yet alive. I did not know which listing to use. The photograph was taken by my grandfather Herman Borgman for whom the locale was named. Through inheritance the only known photograph that Herman F. Borgman took has descended to me. I wanted to share this original photograph that I have rights to with others without relinquishing the copyright to the public at large. If this is something that Wikipedia does not allow then by all means erase it. Friuli (talk) 23:39, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Friuli. Thanks for sharing. Do you know which year and where (location) your grandfather took the photo? -FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:07, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
- Well, the location is Herman, Arkansas, which is an unincorporated locale in Craighead Co. My gradfather did not annotate the year on the back of the picture. But judging from the type of photograph and the other photographs it was with, it was taken around the late 1920s or early thirties. He took the photo because he was born in a building that was a train stop and post office at that location when it was named Culberhouse. Then his grandfather Frank petitioned have the train station officially renamed Herman, which they did, but it was years later before the Post Office also changed the name to Herman, which the area is still known as today. Friuli (talk) 07:28, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Whoa Whoa Whoa
My change to "Eva Moskowitz" were in no way vandalism, they were changes to sections that were slanderous, libelous and clearly written by a political opponent. The section asserted as fact conjectures and conspiracy theories. My changes made the page more accurate and more worthy of Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.229.83.188 (talk) 06:19, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not seeing it. Would you care to elaborate? -FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:08, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Updating Admin Coaching
Hi, I see that you are listed as an active coach.
This is just a reminder to ask that you keep the entry at Wikipedia:Admin_coaching/Status up to date - if you take on a new student, or a student stops being coached, could you update your entry?
Please accept my apologies if you have been doing this - I'm sending this to everyone on the current active list, and not trying to track down what coaching is being done!
If you are no longer willing to coach, please remember to move your name to the "Former coaches" section!
Keeping the list up to date means that any potential coachees can clearly see what the current state of play is!
Thank you for your attention... and now, I'm off back to what I was doing before!
Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 08:19, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
I took a couple of existing free illustrations and combined elements of each, as I noted in the description. I have no idea what license tag to use for it. PD-self does not seem correct. Or is it? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 09:35, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
- I tagged it as PD-self, pending an answer from you on this question. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:21, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Baseball Bugs. The appropriate license tag should have been a GFDL, CC-by-sa-3.0-Migrated, and CC-by-sa-2.5,2.0,1.0 combo license as per the copyright status of File:Celtic Nations.svg. The other file, File:Flag_of_Ireland.svg is tagged as Public Domain (it's copyright ineligible anyways). At any rate I have fixed the licensing for File:Ireland green orange.PNG. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:05, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
- So I take it that when taking parts of two items, you go with the license that's more "restrictive"? Anyway, thank you for fixing. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:29, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
- No problem! Yeah, when licensing derivative works, it's best to go with the more restrictive of the original files' license(s). Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:49, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
- So I take it that when taking parts of two items, you go with the license that's more "restrictive"? Anyway, thank you for fixing. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:29, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Baseball Bugs. The appropriate license tag should have been a GFDL, CC-by-sa-3.0-Migrated, and CC-by-sa-2.5,2.0,1.0 combo license as per the copyright status of File:Celtic Nations.svg. The other file, File:Flag_of_Ireland.svg is tagged as Public Domain (it's copyright ineligible anyways). At any rate I have fixed the licensing for File:Ireland green orange.PNG. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:05, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Two of my image files
Hi Fastily. Feel free to delete the two images you have discussed with me at my own talk page. Ginbot86 17:12, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
CALLE Logo
Hi,
I am helping build a wiki article on this organization (that's why it's in my user pages for now). I have the approval of the organization to use the logo. How do I meet the approval standards for wikipedia? --Drew.ward (talk) 17:29, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Drew. Though I'm sure Fastily is more familiar with your case and will quite probably be able to offer more insight, in the mean time, you may be interested in the "already online" section of WP:DCM and WP:COPYREQ. Hope that's of some use to you. - Jarry1250 [Humorous? Discuss.] 17:45, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
- The pages Jarry listed would indeed be helpful, assuming of course, the file is copyrighted. Do you know if the file is copyrighted? -FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:11, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
It's not actually. They're a non-profit educational charity and everything they put out has the following:
"freely available for classroom use and reproduction so long as it is kept in its original format and the CALLE name and logo are not removed" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drew.ward (talk • contribs) 23:50, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, well, that could be a problem. If the file is not copyrighted content, but prohibits commercial use and derivatives, then it is not free enough for use on Wikipedia. Unfortunately, such files are outside of what defines Wikipedia's scope as "free" and cannot be used here (see WP:IUP#Adding images, bold text beneath the fourth bullet point). You may wish to verify that the logo is copyrighted, as such logos of organizations usually are. If that is the case, then the file can be used on Wikipedia and hosted on Wikimedia Foundation's servers under Fair use. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:56, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
RFA
Thank you for your help. However, I would like you to submit my request for adminship for voting, please. Thanks Yuvmil (talk) 22:23, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Your Comment about my RFA
Hello, Thanks for your concern about my RFA. I was unable to access my computer due to a power failure, which was why I could not answer the new questions. my RFA is still active and up and running! Thanks. Yuvmil (talk) 21:05, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Fastily; just to let you know, I tagged the above picture as failing the NFCC a few weeks ago, and you de-taggted it, saying, "does not fail any of the NFCC" – it has now been deleted via FFD for precisely that reason... could I ask that you, as an admin, could be a little more careful when making such vague statements? Or perhaps even enter into discussion? Thanks! ╟─TreasuryTag►sheriff─╢ 14:47, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
- It would appear that File:The Archers podcast picture.jpg was deleted purely at FFD purely because the nomination went uncontested for 7 days. The uploader isn't even active right now, so there probably would have been no way they'd be able to defend against the nomination. At any rate, I have no access to my admin account, so I am unable to view the file or the deleted revs. As far as I'm concerned I am not fault-proof so it's inevitable I will make the infrequent mistake. If you like, I can throughly investigate for you at a later date, likely within 15-20 days, and provide an explanation as necessary. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 19:00, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
- You may have noticed that I did not ask for an investigation, nor for an explanation. I merely pointed out that your (vague) comment about the NFCC was clearly not the consensus approach, since it was uncontested (people read the nomination and didn't oppose it) and endorsed (presumably) by the deleting admin. I simply asked you to exercise more care; no explanation necessary! :) ╟─TreasuryTag►Tellers' wands─╢ 10:26, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Orphan pictures
Hi Fastily. I've moved the orphan picture to commons - see File:Camille (2).jpg - and deleted it here under CSD F8. In case you don't know, Commons accepts pretty much all freely licensed images, regardless of whether they [are in / might have a] use here on Wikipedia. As a guideline, I'd recommend thinking "would someone, somewhere, possibly have a use for this image?" and if the answer is "yes" or "maybe", then move it to Commons. That's not to say every image should be kept - e.g. I'm behind the deletion of File:Tom, my kitten.jpg, as anyone that has a use for an image like that should be able to recreate it easily, and an individual kitten isn't notable itself (unlike a person with a Wikipedia article on them). I hope that rationale makes sense, and is helpful to you. Thanks, Mike Peel (talk) 00:04, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- Mike, I'm quite well aware of that rule thank you. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 01:16, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Images
All sources you requested have been added, including offline links to provide more information and proof of proper licensing. Thank you.--RM (Be my friend) 03:40, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Toy Story 3 Totoro
Hi... I was just wondering if this is acceptable: This has only been added to Wikipedia to not only to help support a statement, but also to promote the movie. This was not put up to cause any copyright issues. Bellagio2 (talk) 01:54, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- Of course it's acceptable! Any copyrighted or non-free content on WIkipedia must be accompanied by a proper license tag (which I see you have applied) and a detailed fair-use rationale, justifying it's use on Wikipedia per the US Fair use laws (otherwise, the image would be a copyright violation and deleted as such). At any rate, follow the instructions outlined at WP:FUG on how to write a detailed fair-use rationale and/or see File:Scuttle250ppx.png as an example of what a good good fair-use rationale consists of. Feel free to let me know if you have any questions or are in need of assistance. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:52, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Ok... Thanks!!! :) Bellagio2 (talk) 01:18, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- Do you think this is good Enough?
- This is a screenshot of the character Totoro hidden within the Toy Story 3 movie Trailer.
- The screenshot shows only a portion of the actual frame. This will help limit the amount the viewer can see of the actual frame.
- The screenshot does not limit the copyright owner's right to distribute the film in any way.
- The screenshot is being used for informational purposes only, and it is not considered to detract from the film in any way.
- This screenshot is not used for commercial purposes.
- This screenshot is also not to be used for commercial purposes.
- Image is only to be used for the article, My Neighbor Totoro.
- There is no "free" version and the image is not replaceable.
- The image is needed to help show the readers how Totoro is used in Toy Story 3.
- The image meets general Wikipedia content requirements and is encyclopedic.
- The image meets Wikipedia's media-specific policy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bellagio2 (talk • contribs) 03:36, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- I think it's great! I have removed the deletion tag. Happy Editing! -FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:44, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks!!! :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bellagio2 (talk • contribs) 04:23, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Oblivion image
Thanks for fixing my Oblivion image link in my comment about thanking someone else for helping me out. Haha, as I said, I'm still learning the intricacies of it all. Hopefully, my chain of thanking will end here though. *checking for typos* Torchiest (talk | contribs) 05:35, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- No problem. Just happy to have been able to help :) -FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:41, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Image permissions
Images from VectorSite are, as a rule, public domain - including this one in particular; it includes a "PD" notation in the image itself stating as such. :) - The Bushranger (talk) 02:26, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- All the images I'm uploading from VectorSite are explicitly Public Domain, and are marked as such on the images themselves (the "PD" notation). - The Bushranger (talk) 02:32, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 02:54, 23 March 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
-- RP459 Talk/Contributions 02:54, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Images
Is there any way that I can get an extension on correcting the copyright status' on the pictures I have uploaded? I will try to fix the problems as quickly as possible but there is only so much I can do in 24 hours time with 60+ pictures. RobertLunaIII (talk) 04:27, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, you have a week. If that's not enough time, let me know and I can give you an extension, provided you are actively working on resolving the missing source problems. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 04:59, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
File:Badwarecaution.png
Template {{di-no permission|date=22 March 2010}} removed from [[File:Badwarecaution.png]] in accordance with WP:CSD F11: "Acceptable evidence of licensing normally consists of either a link to the source website where the license is stated". --John Nagle (talk) 06:09, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you for correcting that. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:03, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Deletion query
Hi, Fastily. One of your deletions cropped up in a discussion on the prot-policy page, here. You deleted the page as G6 (don't know if you wrote the del summary or a del'n nominator did). The comment mentioning it (one've mine) is timestamped 16:30, 2 March 2010. When you get a chance could you drop by over at the discussion thread and comment? Cheers. –Whitehorse1 06:41, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- From a technical standpoint, it is impossible to assign administrative tools to an IP address, mainly for self-explaining site security reasons. I speedied the page because the RfA was never going to happen and because the page wasn't doing anything useful for the project anyways, hence "Cleanup, routine, non-controversial". Briefly looking over the discussion which you linked, I don't feel my input is necessary at this point, that is, unless you'd like me to undelete the page of course (I'm not sure if or why you'd want that but it's fine with me if you do). Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:09, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- Yup, knew of the technical limitation. I thought that might be a possible reason. It's an unusual page to exist because of that; then again, it's created in good faith by a user in good standing, and potentially interesting to 'pedians as being on something different to the usual types of editors that're subjects of those pages as well as about a type that isn't usually viewed in a positive light to warrant cropping up there. I came across the page by looking at an essay linking to it, although I think in the past I'd heard the RfA referred to or perm/difflinked, too. Vaguely remember browsing Wikisource a yearish ago and seeing something similar (think they may've passed, then created an account for it to be applied).
- I'm sorta leaning toward thinking undeleting the pages & redirs could be worthwhile for the above reasons. But I'm not terribly stuck on it. Your point makes sense as well. I guess it's probably better left to the original nom and move-updater of it User:John Vandenberg to decide. If you don't mind going to the trouble of poking them to see what they want to do, that'd be cool; whatever they think's okay as far as I'm concerned. Thanks for the reply. Best, Whitehorse1. 08:09, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Tag on Aeria
Fastily, I removed your tag on Aeria. Here's the thing, I state on the image that I created it myself, which I did, so what you're tagging for has already been adressed. It's not copyrighted and I created that with GIMP. I realize you're just making sure I didn't violate any copyright so no harm here. If you have any questions, feel free to ask! KoshVorlonNaluboutes,Aeria Gloris 11:33, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- Just be sure to use a license tag for any of your uploads in the future. Simply stating that you are the copyright holder, like you did here, is not satisfactory for our purposes here on Wikipedia. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:40, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily, so that's what you were saying was missing. When we upload images, we, by default already agree to a license, so one's already there for it unless we specify it's already copyrighted or held under another form of licensing as far as I know,
so that's a bit redundant, don't you think ? KoshVorlonNaluboutes,Aeria Gloris 13:32, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- When you upload files, you are agreeing to nothing nor are you automatically licensing your files under any given license, unless you specify that a license at the empty parameter marked "licensing" at the upload form. That being said, this is hardly redundant as you never specified any license in the first place. I encourage you readup on some relevant policy pages before making egregious claims regarding the way we deal with copyright here WP:IUP, WP:ICT, WP:IMAGE, WP:NFC, WP:COPYRIGHT. Also, for File:Aeria.jpg, use the {{FAL}} license, which is the equivalent of a copyleft license. Last I checked, Wikipedia does not support the version you are trying use (otherwise, the file can be tagged as missing license and deleted - I'm assuming you don't want that). -FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:49, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily, Understand I'm not trying to make a point or argue, however, when you submitt to wikipedia (articles, images,etc...) you are agreeing to release our contributions under CC-BY-SA 3.0 licensing. (per terms of use), so a license is already understood, unless the item has a copyright already. And, Copyleft is valid license, it's right there with GFDL and CC-BY-SA.
so no, it wouldn't be a missing license, one's on it at the moment. Thanks! KoshVorlonNaluboutes,Aeria Gloris 13:03, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
- I understand you're not here to argue or anything, but I cannot stress the importance of tagging your photos with appropriate tags anymore than I already have. When you upload to Wikipedia, you do not automatically release rights under a cc-by-sa-3.0 and gfdl combo license; this applies to text only. If you don't believe me, ask around; you will get the same response. I am well aware copyleft is a valid license; the {{FAL}} license (aka copyleft license) basically means just that. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:57, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Lift Kara De
Dude this should not have been deleted was a very useful article! anyway to reinstate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Imster123 (talk • contribs) 08:00, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- It would seem that a major contributing author or the creator author of the page requested that it be deleted. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 01:05, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Re: File copyright problem with File:South Park Fishsticks Gay Fish.ogg
I added copyright info to the Source section of File:South Park Fishsticks Gay Fish.ogg. I think between that and the lengthy description that the fair use is covered now, but if you think it needs more, please let me know ASAP. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 02:07, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
- That will do just fine. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:58, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi Fastily - you have written to me to advise that you are querying the use of the photo attached to my name. I'm not clear on how to reference this photo - I took it myself, a few years ago. Where and how do I put in code to show this fact, please? --Shelby1611 (talk) 10:02, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
- You need a license tag noting the copyright status of the file (i.e. how you wish to license your file for use on Wikipedia). Go to WP:ICT/All and choose a tag and apply it to the file'(s') description page(s). That should solve the problem. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance, feel free to let me know. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:03, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Copyright "problem" with my Bears photos
Don't see how there is a problem with them, or how else I can prove that my photos were created by me and no one else? Whammies Were Here 19:45, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
- This and this will do just fine. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:59, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
FOP Image
You are incorrect. The Disney Images are not FOP in the states. I wish they were but they are not. Please revert the deletion of the images. They have been uploaded to the commons once, but were deleted there for not being free, and I uploaded them here as fair use. (if u think I am wrong feel free to revert the deletion and change the license to CC-by 3.0) Deror (talk) 10:06, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
- Oh really? Please do explain why. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 18:34, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
- Btw: Melesse deleted the file. Perhaps you might want to ask her to undelete? -FASTILYsock(TALK) 19:14, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
- I asked her to answer you. Deror (talk) 16:42, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- I'm also curious why Disney images are not under freedom of panorama, I hope that's not what you were expecting me to answer. Melesse (talk) 05:02, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
- Mickey Mouse was created by Walt Disney and he died in 1966. Most of his work is protected until 2036 (Date of death of author + 70 years). However, that would be entirely situationally dependent. If we're talking about a building in the US, FOP applies. If it is a building in another country, FOP may not apply (France, for instance). But without more details, I can't provide an answer. Perhaps one of you admin types can help by providing an image description and why it isn't free. — BQZip01 — talk 14:22, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
- As you can clearly see Deror avi, we're all quite curious as to why photos taken at a disney theme park do not fall under FOP. Perhaps you would care to offer us an explanation? -FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:50, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
- Buildings are FOP but statues unfortunately are not (in Israel they are but not in the US), therefore images from inside Disney rides (which are usually necessary to illuminate the article) can only be fair use and not FOP. If I am wrong feel free to change such images taken by to to CC-by-3.0. Deror (talk) 13:21, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
- I concur that statues and other works of art explicitly do not fall under FOP, but how long have the statues been there? If prior to 1978, did they have a copyright notice on them and were they registered with the US copyright office? If not, they are no longer protected by copyright. There are certainly other issues present as well, but until I know what image we are talking about, there is little I can state except generalities. — BQZip01 — talk 18:37, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
- Keep in mind the concept of de minimus as well. If you have a picture of your family in front of a big plaza and a copyrighted statue is barely visibile in the distance, it isn't suddenly copyrighted. — BQZip01 — talk 23:45, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
- I concur that statues and other works of art explicitly do not fall under FOP, but how long have the statues been there? If prior to 1978, did they have a copyright notice on them and were they registered with the US copyright office? If not, they are no longer protected by copyright. There are certainly other issues present as well, but until I know what image we are talking about, there is little I can state except generalities. — BQZip01 — talk 18:37, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
- Buildings are FOP but statues unfortunately are not (in Israel they are but not in the US), therefore images from inside Disney rides (which are usually necessary to illuminate the article) can only be fair use and not FOP. If I am wrong feel free to change such images taken by to to CC-by-3.0. Deror (talk) 13:21, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
- As you can clearly see Deror avi, we're all quite curious as to why photos taken at a disney theme park do not fall under FOP. Perhaps you would care to offer us an explanation? -FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:50, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
- Mickey Mouse was created by Walt Disney and he died in 1966. Most of his work is protected until 2036 (Date of death of author + 70 years). However, that would be entirely situationally dependent. If we're talking about a building in the US, FOP applies. If it is a building in another country, FOP may not apply (France, for instance). But without more details, I can't provide an answer. Perhaps one of you admin types can help by providing an image description and why it isn't free. — BQZip01 — talk 14:22, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
- I'm also curious why Disney images are not under freedom of panorama, I hope that's not what you were expecting me to answer. Melesse (talk) 05:02, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
- I asked her to answer you. Deror (talk) 16:42, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- Btw: Melesse deleted the file. Perhaps you might want to ask her to undelete? -FASTILYsock(TALK) 19:14, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Would you please reconsider the deletion of this image. The editor who nominated it for deletion said the page I linked to didn't give any details, but that was a result of a site reorganization. The source is now http://www.neaq.org/animals_and_exhibits/exhibits/individual_exhibits/harbor_seals_exhibit/hoover.php -- Mgm|(talk) 20:28, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi MacGyverMagic. You are more than welcome to restore the file if you have the new source for it. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:27, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
RFA
No Thanks I'd still like to run. --Datakid1100 (talk) 23:37, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
re: Request for Adminship
I understand your concern, but I wish to have a try at it. I am an extreme hater of vandals and anything else that would bring down the encyclopedic quality of Wikipedia. I believe that it's because of the vandals that Wikipedia is having trouble clearing its name of the most unreliable internet source.
- Mast3rlinkx (talk) 23:46, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
I've already answered them, as of a few minutes ago.
- Mast3rlinkx (talk) 23:54, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
For the withdraw. Good on you! — BQZip01 — talk 06:16, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
My school pictures
I would like to know why File:Scan0003 (e2).jpg, File:Scan0001 (e2).jpg, File:Prisma 8(1).JPG and File:SMKM Anthem.jpg are listed as Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 March 27? I have prove that the cover picture is took with the permission of my school.
- I have read your message.Is there anyway to change the license of my pictures? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonhang (talk • contribs) 07:08, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
(Leonhang (talk) 07:09, 27 March 2010 (UTC))
New Users and RFA's
Not to be rude Fastily, but you really ought to be a bit more blatant with users like the two above that they won't pass an RFA instead of giving them false hope. Sometimes you need to be cruel to be kind--Jac16888Talk 00:18, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- You bring up a valid point Jac, most newbies are deplorably unaware of what they're getting themselves into. That being said, I'm going to be making some modifications to my RfA notification template. Your input would be appreciated and your edits to the page welcome. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:43, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- Is a template really necessary? It seems fine for someone who might stand a chance of passing, but when it comes to someone with 27 edits all to their userpage, just tell me them flat out its not gonna happen for a long time so get editing, or if its someone with a few thousand edits but all to the article space just tell them they're doing great but if they really want to be an admin they need to get some experience in more admin areas. --Jac16888Talk 02:28, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- If you add the parameter "1=yes" to the template, the output will be different (see [55]) - I use this version of the template to notify newbies. The template without that parameter is the one I use to notify users who have a couple thousand edits and actually stand a chance of passing. But at any rate, I'll try to work in some text informing newbies that they will flat-out not be successful. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:34, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- Is a template really necessary? It seems fine for someone who might stand a chance of passing, but when it comes to someone with 27 edits all to their userpage, just tell me them flat out its not gonna happen for a long time so get editing, or if its someone with a few thousand edits but all to the article space just tell them they're doing great but if they really want to be an admin they need to get some experience in more admin areas. --Jac16888Talk 02:28, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Datakid
This user identifies as being ten, but do you really think that they are that age? I plan on removing the age identifier thing as it identifies him as a very young minor. When I was that age, I don't even think I could've been a capable editor (although at that age, Wikipedia was just being created). I know of another minor here and and they won't even identify their age to me. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:07, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah... you bring up a good point, and I'm not particularly inclined to believe that claim but I guess better safe than sorry. At any rate you might be interested in taking a look at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Protecting children's privacy. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:49, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- Interesting. I removed the template and I will notify him of doing so with my reasoning. If he branched out more instead of editing in his userspace, which tends to be a trend that I have noticed amongst minors, I would've thought he was blatently lying about his age. Regardless, I feel old. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:49, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- On second thought, could we somehow get the age removal edits oversighted so that it won't be identifiable to anybody? I don't know who would likely be able to do that, so any help would be great. Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:55, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not really sure if that is an accurate or bogus claim by Datakid, but yes, per standard procedure, such edits are subject to oversight. I guess I'm on the fence regarding the legitimacy of the claim, but at the same time, I don't think it's right not to do anything. Consider checking out WP:RFO and emailing the oversight team. Best, FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:25, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- Oversight was just notified. Thanks for the guidance there. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 14:20, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not really sure if that is an accurate or bogus claim by Datakid, but yes, per standard procedure, such edits are subject to oversight. I guess I'm on the fence regarding the legitimacy of the claim, but at the same time, I don't think it's right not to do anything. Consider checking out WP:RFO and emailing the oversight team. Best, FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:25, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
Manishearth's ACC request
Hi there Fastily, I saw you declined this user's account creation request because they have not yet hit 6 creations (i.e. they have no need for the flag). However, as well as getting rid of the throttle, the account creation right also allows users to create accounts which have names similar to existing users, which was why Manishearth was requesting. Just making sure you're aware of this. Best, - Kingpin13 (talk) 07:47, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- Ah of course. Thanks for bringing that to my attention. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 18:29, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
Copyvio question
Hi! I just received a copy-vio for an image I uploaded. Is there any way I can edit the file info. now?--Nilotpal42 (talk) 02:50, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- Yes there is. [56] and [57] respectively. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:51, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- I am uploading pictures for the first time. I cannot figure out what other info should be provided. Please help me out!--Nilotpal42 (talk) 03:19, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- Your files are missing license tags. Here on Wikipedia, all images must have a license tag, no exceptions. Since it looks like both of the files non-free logos, it looks like the tag you need is "{{non-free logo}}". Apply that text anywhere on the image description pages for File:Chartered Institute of Arbitrators Logo.JPG and File:Fly You Fools Banner.JPG. That will resolve the copyright concern. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:27, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you very much.--Nilotpal42 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:33, 28 March 2010 (UTC).
- Your files are missing license tags. Here on Wikipedia, all images must have a license tag, no exceptions. Since it looks like both of the files non-free logos, it looks like the tag you need is "{{non-free logo}}". Apply that text anywhere on the image description pages for File:Chartered Institute of Arbitrators Logo.JPG and File:Fly You Fools Banner.JPG. That will resolve the copyright concern. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:27, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- I am uploading pictures for the first time. I cannot figure out what other info should be provided. Please help me out!--Nilotpal42 (talk) 03:19, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Michael waltrip taladega.jpg
Thanks for your concern but Michael waltrip taladega.jpg is cc-by. I've edited the summary. http://www.flickr.com/photos/pamarama73/2479360785/ --Hutcher (talk) 03:20, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- Looks good. I have removed the deletion tag. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:23, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Your edits
Regarding your edits and these two files: File:J150w-Gibson.jpg, File:File-J150W-statue-VenereDiCanova-in-situ.jpg.
Please advise which bit of "Please delete this file - typo in filename" is not clear. Thanks in advance, Pdfpdf (talk) 04:40, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, that sounds rather rude. My apologies.
- Please advise how one marks a file that one wants deleted. Thanks in advance, Pdfpdf (talk) 04:49, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- Add the text "{{db-g7}}" anywhere on the page you want deleted. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:48, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello Fastily
They keep on putting false information and insulting in the article of List of programs broadcast by Teletoon Retro
- These are false informations and invention that put anonymous users:
- May, October and December of 2010 ( as they are going to put of this month this it is something false ):
- [[58]]
- [[59]]
- [[60]]
- [[61]]
- [[62]]
- June 2010:
- [[63]]
- [[64]]
- [[65]]
- I articulate List of programs broadcast by Teletoon Retro] this protection requires a lot of false information and insults.Greetings and thanks --Hugo Felix - Messages Here 05:35, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- The page has been semi-protected for two weeks. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:49, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
all rights reserved
Hi there, the all righst reserved image should be public domain (souce). But non of the public domain options in the drop down menue fit.--SasiSasi (talk) 10:14, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- In that case, this might be of some help to you. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:53, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
你好嗎?
Hi, about File:Gareth epps consent.JPG, how do I edit the picture and say that it is my own work? I print screened it from my hotmail account.
Xie xie, Monbro (talk) 10:48, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- 你好 Monbro. Well, if the picture is screencapped from your hotmail account, then it is copyrighted, non-free content. Basically, that means you can't publish it as your own work. You can however, tag it as non-free (see WP:ICT/NFC for a list of license tags), and provide fair-use rationale. But since the photo is a screenshot of an email pertaining to file-use permission, posting it as an image really isn't the right venue. Such emails should instead be forwarded to the Wikimedia OTRS team at permissions-en@wikimedia.org - they will do the work of processing and confirming permission(s) received from third-party sources. Hope that helps to clarify things. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:01, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Images
Hello,
Re: 1. Dick Farrelly jpeg
As I could not quite understand the complex details involved in correctly adding this image to the article I was very kindly helped by 'Camaron' (Wikipedia Administrator). He uploaded the image to the article on my behalf and applied all the necessary steps or relevant information and I therefore presume everything is OK regarding the use of this image.
Re: 2. (Isle of Innisfree) jpeg and (Legacy of a Quiet Man) jpeg
In an email I received from the same administrator 'Camaron' to a querry I had regarding use of sheet music cover artwork he replied -
"Yes cover images are usually copyrighted by the publisher, but they are often uploaded to Wikipedia for use in articles on fair use grounds".
For this reason I tried to add those images to the articles but perhaps I have gone about it incorrectly or left something out. As I said I find it hard to understand a lot of the stuff involved. If the images cannot stay then so be it but I think that would be a pity as the articles benifit from having them there and add substance to the articles.
I would be very grateful if you could advise or help me with this.
Many thanks, Wingspanmusic (talk) 13:46, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- You should use a template for your fair-use rationale; copy and pastes of fair-use rationale, especially from other files, is discouraged. At any rate I have fixed the issue with File:Legacy of a Quiet Man CD cover0001.jpg. As for File:File-Dick farrelly-new-1-.JPG and File:Isle of Innisfree.jpg, the problem is with the sources you cite. The copyright status of files on Wikipedia must be verifiable by other users, no exceptions. Copyright status can verified via a specific/detailed source. Examples of good sources include bibliography format of a book/magazine/newspaper (e.g. ISBN number with page/volume number) or an external link to a website. That being said, we unfortunately cannot accept files with sources such as "it is presumed that the photograph was taken by a family member of the uploader" - as a result, such files are subject to deletion. Hope that helps to clarify things. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:14, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
File:Local woods, NC.jpg
I made that file. How do I protect it from getting deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asetwofifty (talk • contribs) 15:50, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- Add a license tag to the file, noting its copyright status. See WP:ICTIC for a list. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:15, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Advice
What do you think? As an admin I admire, what do you think my odds are of actually standing a chance?--SKATER Speak. 16:37, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Unprotect my talk page, please?
It's been a month; and if it starts up again, I can always request reprotect. I've also requested at unprotect, so whoever gets to me first. HalfShadow 16:52, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- Looks like RegentsPark beat me to it :/ -FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:16, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Is Wikipedia considered non commercial as far as uploading CC images?
- http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/deed.en Doesn't wikipedia meet all of these criteria so that CC flickr photos can be uploaded here? Daniel Christensen (talk) 18:52, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- Previous discussions have reported that, although Wikipedia is non-commercial, it allows commercial users to use its material, so those images would have be marked as "not-suitable for commercial use". I don't know of any such marking being used or proposed.
- (Sorry if I stepped on your toes; I don't know why your talk page is on my watchlist.) — Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:57, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- It's all good Arthur. I appreciate your help :) -FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:16, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Alex comic strip
Hi, I've noticed that you've marked this image up for speedy deletion. I wonder if you could possibly help me come up with a form of words that will justify it to remain on wikipedia since I don't usually have this kind of problem with the images I upload. The strip's writer, Russell Taylor, sent me an email with the strip that I uploaded, granting permission and adding that: "I've always thought it would be nice to have an example of a cartoon on our wikipedia entry but wasn't sure how to do it." If that is not enough then what is? Could you please help me out here? Thank you.--Marktreut (talk) 23:45, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- You need to fill out the remaining blank parameters at File:Alex 5462 26032010.gif#Summary, namely the "Portion used" and "Replaceabililty/replaceable?" parameters. See Template:Non-free use rationale#Usage for more information on how to fill out those parameters. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:28, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Blocking
Hi,
You recently blocked User:202.146.8.4 for vandalism. Based on remarkably similar edits, I believe his other URL is User:122.106.197.71. Have a look at the history of Jonathan O'Dea for more information.
Is there any chance you could block both? I have consistently reverted vandal-edits from both but do not have the power to block either of them. Your help would be appreciated.
Stalwart111 (talk) 00:53, 29 March 2010 (UTC).
- Needless to say, the IP is probably the same person as 202.146.8.4/Gammon. I don't feel like the edits are similar enough to warrant a block, so I have left 122.106.197.71 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) a warning instead. If the disruptive edits from the IP continue, please make a report at WP:AIV. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 01:31, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 04:15, 29 March 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
SKATER Speak. 04:15, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Image Copyright
Hi Fastily,
I have uploaded three images recently and I was asked for a copy right. The images are the following: Desta-Damtew.jpg. , Habte Giyorgis.jpg. and Ras-Darge.jpg.
The source of these three images is my music video I purchased a while ago. You can also find this music video at youtube and the address is : " http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaP16aUvC1Y&feature=PlayList&p=091677174F358351&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=19 "
I uploaded the images strictly for informational purposes.
Please don't delete it —Preceding unsigned comment added by AmbaSel (talk • contribs) 05:09, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
- Please carefully read WP:UPI. If you are still confused after reading or need further guidance/assistance, let me know and I'll see what I can do to help. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:20, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
rfa
i would like to continue —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leak rodriguez (talk • contribs) 16:42, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Please notice text
Could you be a little more careful in your tagging of images for deletion? You tagged File:Coloratura passage.png as lacking permission, even though (1) it noted in text that it was PD, so you could have so marked it with a template, and (2) it's music written by Mozart, so it's obviously PD-old. Nyttend (talk) 05:10, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Spork4beans
Hi.
I recently uploaded a pic for a page I created. I found the pic on the flickr page of a podcast host whom I emailed to ask for (and was granted) permission. I tried to give proper credit to the author of the photo but as newcomer to the wikipedia editing process, I was having trouble with properly securing permission. Any help you could give me would be greatly appreciates. Thanks --Spork4beans (talk) 06:19, 30 March 2010 (UTC)spork4beans
- Hi Spork4beans. Thank you for going through the trouble to upload the file and request permission. Your contribution is appreciated. I'm afraid we cannot use the file however; it is licensed as for non-commercial use only, per the provided flickr source. Per Wikipedia's licensing policies of Wikipedia, we cannot allow files that limit derivatives, commercial use, or restrict use to Wikipedia only (see WP:IUP#Adding images, bold text beneath the fourth bullet point). Please do not be discouraged or come to the conclusion that your contributions are unappreciated - it's just that we cannot use this particular media file you have uploaded. Let me know if you have any further questions or concerns. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 06:38, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Feedback request
Could you look at File:ETrade.svg for me. I have a particular user that vaguely asserts the logo isn't just text. Thoughts? — BQZip01 — talk 06:19, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- Two arrows and caps? I would say pd-ineligible. I always thought HS was a little more reasonable than that. Apparently I was wrong. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 06:24, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the 4th opinion... — BQZip01 — talk 17:38, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- HS refuses to discuss and doesn't agree with us. However, he decided to delete the comments saying discussion is "just not worth the constant aggravation". I'm growing tired of this kind of "discussion" with HS. He demands discussion on a topic and then refuses to discuss the merits of an argument and instead attacks the contributors while questioning their motives. I've said it before and I'll say it again, HS generally does a fantastic job patrolling for appropriate uses of NFC, but he gets it wrong too often and won't listen to reason (case in point above). As he refuses any discussion on his talk page or on any topic, I'm thinking WP:RfC is the only option available (short of ArbCom). Your thoughts? — BQZip01 — talk 20:07, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
- If a solution is clearly not going to be achievable through talk pages or ANI, I say go for it. If I recall correctly, this has not been the first time HS has refused to discuss and needless to say, it will probably not be the last if something is not done. HS's last comment here is borderline trolling. Enough is enough I think. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:29, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
- I will happily do the leg work on this one, but given my prior interactions with HS, I think it would be best if you actually filed it. My goal here is to stop such disruptive behavior. I do not desire to get HS indef blocked or permanently banned, but this kind of behavior has to stop somehow. Hopefully community feedback will help. — BQZip01 — talk 06:07, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hm. Alright. I can do that, but I shall need some evidence (if you have time, a couple diffs would be greatly appreciated) and acknowledgement from Hammersoft that further refusal to discuss will result in an RfC (I'll take care of this). Basically, I'll prep an RfC, but not turn it live unless Hammersoft continues disruptively editing. How does that sound? Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 06:53, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
- That sounds fine. I'll get to it this afternoon/evening. — BQZip01 — talk 14:51, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
- IRL issues will prevent a full list for a few days. I should have a simple update for you by sometime tomorrow morning. Thanks. — BQZip01 — talk 01:41, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
- That sounds fine. I'll get to it this afternoon/evening. — BQZip01 — talk 14:51, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hm. Alright. I can do that, but I shall need some evidence (if you have time, a couple diffs would be greatly appreciated) and acknowledgement from Hammersoft that further refusal to discuss will result in an RfC (I'll take care of this). Basically, I'll prep an RfC, but not turn it live unless Hammersoft continues disruptively editing. How does that sound? Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 06:53, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
- I will happily do the leg work on this one, but given my prior interactions with HS, I think it would be best if you actually filed it. My goal here is to stop such disruptive behavior. I do not desire to get HS indef blocked or permanently banned, but this kind of behavior has to stop somehow. Hopefully community feedback will help. — BQZip01 — talk 06:07, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
- If a solution is clearly not going to be achievable through talk pages or ANI, I say go for it. If I recall correctly, this has not been the first time HS has refused to discuss and needless to say, it will probably not be the last if something is not done. HS's last comment here is borderline trolling. Enough is enough I think. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:29, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
- HS refuses to discuss and doesn't agree with us. However, he decided to delete the comments saying discussion is "just not worth the constant aggravation". I'm growing tired of this kind of "discussion" with HS. He demands discussion on a topic and then refuses to discuss the merits of an argument and instead attacks the contributors while questioning their motives. I've said it before and I'll say it again, HS generally does a fantastic job patrolling for appropriate uses of NFC, but he gets it wrong too often and won't listen to reason (case in point above). As he refuses any discussion on his talk page or on any topic, I'm thinking WP:RfC is the only option available (short of ArbCom). Your thoughts? — BQZip01 — talk 20:07, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the 4th opinion... — BQZip01 — talk 17:38, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
List
Just a sampling of the recent edits and the reasons I find them disruptive:
Let's start with his comments below [66][67]:
Apathy/Annoyance
- "Am I wrong on the E-Trade logo? Frankly, I don't care."
- What HS fails to realize is that this is the very problem. If he doesn't care, then why is there a problem in the first place? The truth is he does care...until I get involved and then he is annoyed and tries to vilify my apropriate by-the-book responses. Another person making the exact same changes is fine, but not me. Then he shuts down and blames the entire problem on me, when in fact, his changes are the ones not in line with policy.
Vilifying those who disagree with him/Ignoring
- User_talk:Syrthiss#BQZip01_stalking_again
- Feel free to read it all. Here's a few choice comments:
- "I'm ignoring your comments as they are too transparent."
- "Scattering your comments through mine makes it very difficult to read yours. Ignored."
- "Legal threat ignored, as I am not a criminal." (I just said he should follow policy instead of interjecting language linked to crimes)
- Feel free to read it all. Here's a few choice comments:
Dramatising/logical fallacies
- "I'm at the point where I have two choices; either leave the project, or acquiesce to whatever BQZ says"
- ...or you could just stop the problematic behavior and start being more helpful.
- (below) "Whether you have the right to follow my edits is immaterial at this point. You know full well the aggravation you are causing me in doing it. "
- I'm not going to make my edits exclusively based upon the emotions of others. It would be just as reasonable to ask him to stop all contributions to Wikipedia because I feel sad about them.
Exaggerating
- User_talk:Syrthiss#BQZip01_stalking_again
- Feel free to read it all.
Refusal to discuss
- "I didn't refuse to discuss. I in fact took the discussion elsewhere in an attempt to avoid debating with you"
- That would be "refusing to discuss" something, by definition. — BQZip01 — talk 21:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
- WP:HAMMERSOFTSLAW
- "Once...an insult is made, the person making the insult has proven themselves to be wrong on all counts."
- If he deems something an insult, he feels he can discount everything the person says/said.
- "Any person resorting to personal attacks is incapable of rational discussion."
- Anyone who makes a statement that HS deems a personal attack can be ignored ad infinitum.
- "Once...an insult is made, the person making the insult has proven themselves to be wrong on all counts."
Acting on his own beliefs as if they are policy
- "zapping redirect as it results in fair use image being used in userspace in violation of WP:NFCC #9
- Redirects are used all over the place. They don't result in any new usages of NFC on the redirect page.
- User_talk:Syrthiss#BQZip01_stalking_again
- (from below) "What would have happened if BQZip01 hadn't interjected himself onto the E-Trade logo question? The logo would still be here, would still be used on the appropriate article."
- Which is the point. The "appropriate" place is basically wherever anyone wants it, not just on the E*trade article. The image should be on Commons and use should only be limited by trademark restrictions.
- WP:HAMMERSOFTSLAW
- just read...
Taunting/Profanity/Snide remarks/general incivility
- "rv badly formed English and $.02 insults by a chicken shit anonymous vandal. Is that the best you can do?)"
- "(50,000 more now. I wonder how long Wikipedia will keep up the charade of being "free") "
- User:Hammersoft & WP:HAMMERSOFTSLAW
- He revels in being a pain for people. Note the taunt "Yippie Kai Yay", in which he leaves out the taunting "motherf**ker" and that he is apparently more interested in deleting than getting things right.
This is the best I could whip together in an hour, but it is slow-speed tendentious editing in which he is more interested in the letter of the law than getting things right and fixing things that are wrong. Please note from Sythiss's page that he doesn't mind getting something deleted because if it is needed someone else will add it again and eventually the appropriate tags will be fixed. Your thoughts? — BQZip01 — talk 21:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
- That'll do just fine. Thanks for going through the trouble to bring this list together. If you have any other diffs/discussion links, please feel free to add them whenever you have time. Best, FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:00, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
How about my thoughts?
- Accusation that I am apathetic about the e-trade logo: No, I'm was not apathetic about it. I became apathetic about it when it became apparent that it was an exploding drama bomb. Whether or not it has the right tagging is worth a lot less to me than the drama bomb that has resulted. I believe in eventualism. If it's wrong, it will eventually get fixed. Given how much heat it generated, it's not worth it to me to do anything about it.
- Vilifying others: Not the case at all. When you scatter comments through mine, it does make it difficult to read. I did and have ignored it because it's too difficult for me to follow. If you formatted it properly in accordance with WP:TALK and threading, I would have read it. As to the legal threat, you accused me of being a criminal. I ignored it. I could have reported it. I was kind to you for the furtherance of discussion rather than trying to blow it up even more.
- Dramatizing; I AM at the point where those two choices remain because you are constantly looking over my shoulder despite the absolute distress you know it causes me. Yesterday when this all blew up I was *this* close to quitting. I'm sick of being harangued by you. Since I can't make it stop, my choices appear to be accept it or quit. Is there another option? Sure, months of dispute resolution, which I really don't want to deal with. I still am a total loss to understand why you feel it necessary to follow me around when there is so much very similar work to be had at places I pointed to, when you know your following of me causes problems such as this very thread on this user's talk page. You know things will blow up. You know there's plenty of other very similar work to be had. Yet, you follow me. I don't understand that.
- Refusing to discuss; yes; I refused to discuss it with you knowing full well the arguments that always ensure when you and I interact. So I should have chosen instead to interact with you knowing it would blow up? Maybe so. Hell, it blew up anyway.
- Insults; Yes, you're right, I don't have to accept insults and I do ignore people once the insults begin. I don't see any reason why I have to give quarter to people who devolve to personal insults. If I choose to ignore them, that's my problem; not yours, not theirs. The mike becomes there's at that point; I'm gone from the conversation. How does that harm them?
- Zapping a redirect; you don't understand. The redirect (I don't know what else to call it) that was pulling in a main space article to user space was, perhaps as a bug, causing a mainspace article with a fair use image to be displayed in userspace. That's against policy. I don't zap redirects for the hell of it. There's no policy against redirects. All of my actions are in regards to policy, not personal opinion.
- HAMMERSOFTSLAW: Yes, I know you hate that page. So? It shows my intolerance for insults. You apparently are more tolerant of them. Fine by me. You can be as tolerant as you want of them. But, my intolerance for personal insults is none of your business and you don't have the privilege of judging me negatively because I am intolerant of personal insults. By the way, it's been months since I cited that page in any conversation. I specifically stopped using it after you attempted (unsuccessfully I might add) have it deleted (deletion discussion).
- Yes, it is a charade that Wikipedia is free. So? You want me censured because I think it's a charade? Note that you ARE permitted to have personal opinions of Wikipedia on your userpages.
- My rv of the anonymous vandal. So? Yes, it violates personal attacks and I shouldn't have done it. That said, I have little respect for someone who uses an anonymous IP who obviously has a beef with me.
- I do NOT revel in being a pain to people. I revel in making Wikipedia compliant with its policies. That causes pain to some people. Note the current last section of my talk page where a user it very mad at me for removing a fair use image from his userpage (which an administrator also later did and warned him about, and now he's mad at that administrator). I don't care if someone gets mad at me. I don't. That doesn't mean I revel in it. Attributing emotions to me which do not exist is wrong. You have a negative opinion of my userpage. So what? I have a negative opinion of yours. Should I seek to have you censured for it? No, because it complies with WP:UP, just as mine does. Also, I specifically left out the extension of the quote because I didn't want to use it. Attributing the the use of the extension of the quote to me is improper. Further, I find it funny to cite those records as part of the overall post-it that is a joke. If you are actually taking that post-it seriously, well that's your choice. It's obviously a joke. If it's not a joke to you, you don't have to read it over and over again. Just ignore my userpage; problem solved. Are you going to attempt to censure me for asserting my username is a pseudonym for Fart Me Ohms? Or for quoting Dennis Miller (I have had my life threatened here)? Point #2 ties in nicely to the nuclear bomb animated gif. Point #1 goes right to the core of the problem Wikipedia faces, day in day out. What else? Are you going to censure me for putting File:Editor - plutonium star 2.jpg on my userpage? Look, if you don't like my userpage, you don't have to look at it. Ever. Just ignore it.
--Hammersoft (talk) 21:40, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Hammersoft response
- Ah, and now I see the genesis. Ok, first and very importantly, an apology; BQZ, I can see how my comment here could be construed as a personal attack against you. That was not my intention. Please accept my apology. It is sincere and wholehearted. Second, as I noted on my talk page, I didn't refuse to discuss. I in fact took the discussion elsewhere in an attempt to avoid debating with you, since all such debates end poorly between you and I. See Wikipedia_talk:NFC#File:ETrade.svg_free_or_non-free.3F. Am I wrong on the E-Trade logo? Frankly, I don't care. It just doesn't matter enough to me to have to deal with this. I'm not here to engage in a months and months and months long personal war with BQZip. I have desperately tried to stop it, but on it goes. I'm at the point where I have two choices; either leave the project, or acquiesce to whatever BQZ says whenever he and I interact, because I am losing sheerly by the presence of these never ending debates between he and I. I'm sick of it. I have asked at least five times for this to end, but on it goes. Fastily, you claimed on my talk page that my behavior has been brought to the attention of AN/I several times. The only time where I can find this to be the case was one brought in October 2009 by none other than BQZip01. See [[68]]. I have repeatedly begged and pleaded for BQZip01 to leave me alone. Over and over and over and over again I have done this. BQZip01 continues to claim he has done absolutely nothing wrong, and continues to not leave me alone. This latest spat between BQZip01 would never have happened had BQZip01 stopped following me. And what would have happened if BQZip01 hadn't interjected himself onto the E-Trade logo question? The logo would still be here, would still be used on the appropriate article. So, here we sit yet again with yet another drama bomb going off because of the inability for Hammersoft and BQZip01 to not interact with each other. Fastily, if you want to educate yourself on just a taste of this ongoing war, see User_talk:Syrthiss#BQZip01_stalking_again. All of this ends the moment BQZip01 agrees to stop following me. All of it. So if you want to start an RfC, then by all means go right ahead and do so. I will be very happy to present the evidence which I have been gathering for months regarding BQZip's behavior in regards to me. Failing BQZip leaving me alone, it WILL end up at RfC because these ridiculous drama bombs are going to continue to go off every time we interact. I am not alone as a person who finds it highly difficult to work with BQZip. I cite User:Melesse here.
- BQZip, you are a rational, intelligent human being. You say my edits are a gold mine of things to fix around here. Whether they are or not is not the point. The point is you can direct your efforts elsewhere, and avoid interacting with me, avoiding all this ridiculous drama. You can go to Category:Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale, Category:Images requiring maintenance, Category:Wikipedia files with unknown source and more. You don't have to follow my edits to find things to do. Surely you can see that the two of us working together is non-productive. Surely you can see how many times drama bombs have gone off between us. Surely you can agree that the best course of action is to simply avoid me. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:20, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm going to try to clarify this further, in as much as I can. BQZip, I don't care if you're right. I don't care if I'm wrong. For the sake of argument, let's just assume that everything you've ever said in regards to me with respect to policy and guideline is absolutely spot on, flawless, perfect, without a doubt an exact and correct application of policy and guideline. Fair enough? No sarcasm here. I'm just generating a thought experiment to help explain. Given that precept, there are three things that I wish to point out:
- Even given the above, the constant presence of your editing things I have edited, despite my begging and pleading that you stop doing so, is disruptive in and of itself. Whether you have the right to follow my edits is immaterial at this point. You know full well the aggravation you are causing me in doing it.
- Given how many times you have indicated I am in violation of policies and/or guidelines, there should be absolutely zero problem with you obtaining an indefinite block of my editing until such time as I agree to edit within policy and guideline.
- Even if I am wrong in every single edit that I do on Wikipedia, you are not my personal sheriff. If I am doing something wrong, then report it somewhere appropriate and leave it for others to sort out and/or take action. The last time you did so was October of 2009 at WP:AN/I. It's been almost half a year since then, and you continue to maintain I am a disruptive presence...without reporting me for being so. Every time I edit, I edit knowing you are looking over my shoulder like my personal watchdog. That's ArbCom's job and administrators empowered to enforce their sanctions, not yours. I am not under your personal probation, without any means of vacating it.
This has to end. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:52, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Why
Why haven't you been using your admin account lately? I noticed you haven't been using it since March 3. Is there a reason why? NERDYSCIENCEDUDE (✉ message • changes) 13:36, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
- As he told me it's because he hasn't been on the most secure connection lately, hope you don't mind the answer Fastily.--SKATER Speak. 22:34, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
- Skater is correct. I'll hopefully be back on my admin account with in a week or two. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:58, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Admin needed for speedy deletion
backlog needing admin attention CAT:NL--IngerAlHaosului (talk) 11:32, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Content Deleted
Hi Fastily,
I noticed you had deleted an article about Mat Zo [69] (or Matan Zohar) a leading trance producer from the UK and wondered why. In order to confirm identity and details I have included here a few links that I hope will allow the page to be restored. I did not see the original article and understand if there was misinformation then this may not be the case but please review if possible.
Here are some links about him.
Discogs bio: [70]
Interview with Mat Zo on trancesound.net [71]
Anjunabeats store (one of the worlds leading trance labels) available music: [72]
Last FM article: [73]
Myspace account: [74]
Appreciate your assistance with this matter.
Thanks, David —Preceding unsigned comment added by DayDay8421 (talk • contribs) 12:23, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
- The page was deleted per WP:PROD. In a nutshell, this basically means that the page was nominated for deletion and the deletion request went uncontested for a week. Hope that helps to clarify things. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:57, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Deleted articles
Hello,
I was going to write an article about Strimko which is a game developed by Braintonik and is a great new intelligent game similar to Sudoku. As there are a lot of news and articles about brain games advantages and educational purposes. As I saw that you had deleted an article on Strimko not long ago, I wanted to reach you before putting efforts in this article.
I did not see previous article on Strimko that was deleted. If there are any queues on what not to write, please let me know.
Thanks, Momdearest (talk) 23:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC) Momdearest Momdearest (talk) 23:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Momdearest. Just be sure that the article complies with WP:MOS, WP:COI, and WP:ADVERT. Otherwise, you may run the risk of having the article deleted. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:55, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Admin Coaching
Well, barring a miracle I think we can predict the results of my RFA and would like to ask for you to be my admin Coach--SKATER Speak. 00:06, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- Awesome, it's official :) That being said, with your permission, I'd like to create a set of coaching subpages in your userspace. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:16, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- Sure, knock yourself out.--SKATER Speak. 00:18, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- Great! Please see User:Skater/Admin coaching to get started. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:36, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- Done.--SKATER Speak. 00:50, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- Mkay, see User:Skater/Admin coaching/Lesson 2. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 01:13, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- Done.--SKATER Speak. 00:50, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- Great! Please see User:Skater/Admin coaching to get started. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:36, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- Sure, knock yourself out.--SKATER Speak. 00:18, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Ref remover
He's still out and about. Are you still unable to log in?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:22, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- No, not yet. Currently it looks like I might be delayed for another two weeks. When I get back, I'll block the IP ranges first thing. Sorry for the incredible delay, FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:33, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Deletion notification. I can't see anything notable. How about you? — BQZip01 — talk 04:18, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
FYI
The commons view of the subject of FOP of disney rides - [75]. Deror (talk) 09:56, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
2010-04-01
I successfully logged in again, thanks for letting me test my new password. Best Hekerui (talk) 11:59, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- Haha, I'm glad you found it somewhat helpful :) Happy April Fool's Day! Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:15, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Personal attack
Hey, you said that User:Hammersoft was "borderline trolling" He trolled me and made me mad at him, you should punish him, not threaten me with a block beause I got mad at users vandalizing my page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheClerksWell (talk • TheClerksWell (talk) 15:38, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- No, I didn't troll you. I removed non-free content from your userpage in accordance with WP:NFCC #9, which I pointed out in the edit summary. This prompted you to: (1) accuse me of harassing people, (2) force content back onto my talk page that I had already read and removed [76], and (3) encouraging me to get a life. Also, admin Rettetast agreed with the removals, and subsequently you called him an asshole and a jerk. Fastily, if my removing WP:NFCC violating content from people's user pages counts as being a troll, then you'd better block me now for doing something I've done at least 700 times and fully intend on continuing to do. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:50, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Could you please explain...
You applied a deletion tag to File:Andrew purvis's sidebar -- 'The Suspects- A Bosnian subplot.png, with the edit summary "This file is up for deletion per WP:CSD. (TW))"
As I am sure you are aware we don't normally allow images to be used unless the copyright owner has published it under a free liscense. Exceptions include images that are used in limited circumstances, under a claim of "fair use". Those images require "fair use rationale".
This image has a "fair use rationale". It has two because I planned to use it on two articles. This is the edit where I changed the image description from the more usual style of fair use rationale for single images to the alternate form for multiple images.
Correct me if I am wrong, contributors should feel free to nominate "fair use" images for deletion when they think the fair use fationale is not valid -- but that is not the CSD you used -- and if I am not mistaken, challenging a "fair use rationale" is not CSD at all.
If I understand your edit summary you placed the speedy based on the advice of a robot assisted editing tool. I believe the image was properly liscenced and your robot may be failing to give you valid advice.
Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 12:46, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
- I see you have added a license tag. Subsequently, I have removed the deletion tag. Bear in mind that all media files uploaded to Wikipedia must have license tags, no exceptions. Files which do not have license tags are subject to deletion per WP:IUP/WP:CSD#F4. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:05, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I did. I should have come back and told you that earlier. Sorry, I have a distracting wikistalker.
- I did use a {{non-free fair use in}} initially. But when I changed over to multiple images, the documentation for {{Non-free image data}} and {{Non-free image rationale}} seemed to indicate that they were a substitute for {{non-free fair use in}}.
Copyright Clearance Center Wiki Page
Good afternoon. I am the senior public relations manager at Copyright Clearance Center. Please explain to me why you took down our wiki page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Craigsender (talk • contribs) 14:33, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
"No foreseeable use"
| class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left; border: 1px solid silver; margin-top: 0.2em; " |- ! style="background-color: #CFC;" | Extended content
|- | style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white; font-size:112%;" |
|}
Assistance
Ironic I'm having Image problems while we're covering that lesson. I just uploaded the cover for Shadow Company: Left For Dead, and it's huge....how do I resize it?--SKATER Speak. 23:10, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
- Done [77]. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:00, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Copyright on photo
Hello,
I don't know how to go about complying with the demand. I have been unable to find specific details in the knowledge base. I obtained the photo from a friend of mine's web site. He is the owner of the amplifier in the photo. How would you suggest that I proceed?
Thank you very much for helping out.
musant 01:24, 3 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Musant (talk • contribs)
- Please see WP:PERMISSION and WP:DCP. They should help answer your questions. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 01:51, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Regarding lack of signature in previous missive...
I had a box checked that shouldn't have been in 'my preferences'. Sorry for the faux pas/party foul.
musant (talk) 01:29, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
File:FautauaFalls.jpg
Hello. You (or rather User:Fastilysock) tagged File:FautauaFalls.jpg for deletion has having no source. As it clearly does have a source listed, this edit seemed inappropriate/puzzling to me, so I removed the tag. Explanation? Thank you. Puzzled, -- Infrogmation (talk) 02:17, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, my bad. An honest mistake. Thank you for brining it to my attention. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:20, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
- OK, thanks. Seems orphaned now so I'll tag the image to be moved to Commons. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 02:24, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Image deletion
Why do you focus more on removing images rather than content creation? I bet contributing to articles could improve Wikipedia more than deleting images.
TheClerksWell (talk) 03:31, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Photo Copyright
It's TMI, man. What part(s) pertain(s) to this issue. What do I write? Thanks, Jwkelley (talk) 05:57, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi
Hey, Im still up for being a admin.--Louis Taylor (talk) 23:53, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
RFA
Hi Fastily, I think you need to be a little more persuasive to RFA candidates such as Louis Taylor, and encourage them not to run, as we both know he has no chance whatsoever of passing. It's a waste of everybody's time otherwise. If he is not able to even transclude the page on himself, what chance does he have of passing? With 300 odd edits, no chance. I think you'd be better off being much more firm to clear NOTNOW candidates and saying no when necessary. Aiken ♫ 00:14, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
- Agreed. I'm tweaking my RfA notice to reflect that. The previous version of that message succeeded in persuading most otherwise, but I guess it wasn't good enough. If you have any input, please feel free to edit that page. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:24, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
- Is this for obvious NOTNOW candidates? If it is, then a link to the essay on NOTNOW would help, and also some gentle persuasion not to run - right now it's neither here nor there. For more experienced editors, the current template is fine. Aiken ♫ 00:43, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, it's for both. Adding the parameter "1=yes" to the template (like so
{{subst:User:Fastily/Sandbox/RfA Notice|1=yes}}) outputs text which can be used to notify newbies who have created a RfA. The version of the template without the "1=yes" is the version I use to notify experienced users. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:57, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, it's for both. Adding the parameter "1=yes" to the template (like so
- Is this for obvious NOTNOW candidates? If it is, then a link to the essay on NOTNOW would help, and also some gentle persuasion not to run - right now it's neither here nor there. For more experienced editors, the current template is fine. Aiken ♫ 00:43, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
I undid your recent edit...
See my edit summary for this diff. The user who had recently reverted your edit, though very disruptive, was acting in good faith and make a legitimate revert. Thanks, Eagles 24/7 (C) 05:36, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, alright. As long as it is a valid edit, it's good with me. Thanks for letting me know. Best, FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:53, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
- No problem, it's just a shame that a quality edit would have gone to waste because a sockpuppet made it. By the way, I wish I knew who User:TheClerksWell is a sock of, because I remember a series of sockpuppets/IP's going around calling everyone fascists. Good luck on that adventure. Eagles 24/7 (C) 06:03, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
Copyrighted pictures
Okay thanks for telling me. Some of the pictures I have wrongfully licensed and I will change it. 31 March, 2010 GuineaPigWarrior (UTC).
- Adding time stamp. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:59, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
ANI thread for block review
I wanted to make sure you see this. I have no strong opinion about the block, but if he can't edit his talk page, I think the block should get community review.--Chaser (talk) 06:23, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Bangladesh Flag, Auckland HB.jpg
The author of the image had been notified about it through email, can you contact him again about this issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tanveer.bhuiyan (talk • contribs) 07:38, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Question about image copyright at WP:MCQ
Hi, Fastily. I've raised a question about the licensing situation of File:View from National Cycle Network route 47 between Nelson and Hengoed in South Wales.JPG at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#Validity of old "presumed" GFDL licenses, and I thought you might be interested in the discussion. —Bkell (talk) 02:27, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Reblocked for 1 day for no apparent reason?
After I was unblocked from my indef block I tried to edit a page, but it said I was autoblocked for one more day by you. Why is this? TheClerksWell (talk) 02:58, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
It would also be cool if you could unlock my userpage. TheClerksWell (talk) 03:02, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- And how about a unicorn over here? One that shoots lasers from its horn. HalfShadow 03:03, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Deleted photo copyright & tagging dilemma - please help me!!!Jaydavidsonrocks (talk) 23:10, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I have previously uploaded a photo for Renoly Santiago's page as I am his Personal Assistant and it's my job to do stuff like this LOL. But I have gone on tonight to update the content & discovered my picture has been deleted a bit ago and you left me a message about it somewhere on here that I didn't know about! Please can somebody tell me exactly how to get the copyright info correct and how to do the tagging etc as I'm not getting any joy with the links from the Renoly_Santiago_2009.jpg links. The person who deleted it was Melesse but I don't know how to request a reinstatement of the image from her either. Sorry to be a duffer about this but I need some help please! Thanks very much, JayDavidsonRocks.
- Generally if you have a Conflict of Interest with a person you shouldn't be writing or anything for their article. (Again Fastily hope ya don't mind me answering)--SKATER Speak. 23:17, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's all good Skater. I am actually very appreciative of high quality talk page stalking. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- Jaydavidsonrocks, your file was deleted because it was missing a license tag. This is explained clearly at WP:UPLOAD and on the upload form itself. Basically, this means that you needed to note the copyright status (is the file free? copyrighted?) with a license tag. For more information, please see WP:UPI. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:33, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's all good Skater. I am actually very appreciative of high quality talk page stalking. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
RfC: Cleared Hot
Mediation is off. I'll send you the e-mails, but, IMNSHO, the mediator didn't do much and declared it "hopeless" with little effort. RfC is the next avenue I can see. — BQZip01 — talk 03:35, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- Well that's great to know. Send me what you have and I'll get an RfC started ASAP. I'm a bit busy in RL at the moment but I'll have an RfC up and running by Friday evening at latest. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:39, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- Wilco. — BQZip01 — talk 05:33, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Round II
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Adding time stamp. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 20:38, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Re:RFA
Hey, I was answering the questions while you posted. Please excuse my ignorance, but what did you mean by "opt in" here? RaaGgio (talk) 03:16, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Re: Manu.jpg
I added the picture when there was absolutely no picture of him. So, at the time, even with its very low quality, it added to the article. However, I just noticed the article has a fantastic picture of him in his infobox and I therefore have no problem with the deletion of this picture. You may very well carry it out as I will not oppose it. RaaGgio (talk) 03:55, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- The discussion hasn't move forward. However, could you delete it via Speedy Deletion Criteria G7? RaaGgio (talk) 15:37, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Raggio RFA Question 8
G'day Fastily, I was interested in question 8 that you asked at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Raaggio, and wondered if you could spare a moment to educate me in the right direction? My thought was that it would be highly unlikely that an AP photograph would pass the non-free content criteria: because they sell photos for a business, NFCC#2 in particular would be an insurmountable obstacle. I guess there could be some circumstances where, due to the age of, or low public interest in, an image, the image has little or no commercial value. But on my uneducated view, I don't think that conclusion could ever safely be drawn. Is this right? --Mkativerata (talk) 06:43, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- AP photos are usually only permitted when they are the subject of an article. WP:NFCC#2 can apply to many such instances and users are generally discouraged from using AP photos in articles where the photos themselves are not the topic. However, such is to be considered on a careful case-by-case basis so there is no real over-reaching, all-applying summary I can give you. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:38, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- Excellent, thank you for that. --Mkativerata (talk) 07:40, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Reinhardt College
Fastily, Carsonmc here. Reinhardt College page has yet again been vandalized. You had mentioned putting a partial "lock" on the page... is that possible, preventing random IP address from posting disparaging info.??
Thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Carsonmc (talk • contribs)
- Hi, Carson what you're referring to is called Semi-protection, and it prevents any non-autoconfirmed users from editing for its duration. You could probably get this done faster by filing a request Here. Regards,--SKATER Speak. 19:37, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 20:10, 10 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Airplaneman ✈ 20:10, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
delete all my images - I could not care less anymore - I genuinely took all the live band images I added to Wikipedia but am so very tired of having to defend that I am the photographer. Makes me wonder why people bother to add info to wikipedia at all. Do whatever you like - if finding and disputing the authenticty of images from good hearted people like myself is your thing - happy trails to you...
privileges concerns
its not a good idea to advance editors with Serbian nationality (to give them privileges). this User:Evlekis can abuse his privileges, he has nationalist mentality (check his talk history) and its privileges can be used against other editors example: albanians
this editor should not be allowed to use his privilege in ballkan related articles.
i hope you will take measures , otherwise i'll report this case.-- LONTECH Talk 20:49, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
- Please consider making a report at the Administrator's Noticeboard. After briefly looking through this editor's edits, I cannot see any major instances of abuse, but then again, I am no expert on Serbian culture. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 04:50, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
I have removed the FfD tag you put on File:MUGSHOT!!.jpg, because it appears you hadn't nominated it for deletion, and didn't explain why you think it should be deleted. If you still want it to be delete, feel free to re-tag the image and make the nomination. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:55, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know. I have re-nominated the file. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 11:40, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Rfa
I'm sure I still want to go on with the Rfa. Thanks, JMB101 (talk) 22:05, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily, the above user is a suspected sockpuppet of User:Macechap. Please see the investigation, and please do not transclude this RfA. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:15, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
- Noted; the RfA has been deleted anyways. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 11:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
RFA Criteria
Hey, I was reading your RFA criteria and I was wondering: Why do you unconditionally oppose people with 3 or more RFAs? RaaGgio (talk) 22:21, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
- I hope he makes exceptions...I'd hate for him to go through the process of coaching and hopefully nominating me just to oppose me :p. --SKATER Speak. 01:56, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's not exactly unconditional, as you can see - I consider each such situation on a case-by-case analysis. I oppose the 4th and onward RfAs of users who appear to want the tools too much, exercise poor judgement in having created too many RfAs despite being unprepared, ect. The aforementioned RfA criterion is really to be taken with a grain of salt however, this is not one of the main criterion I use to judge candidates - it's only something I take into consideration during my review of a given candidate. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 19:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
- I hope he makes exceptions...I'd hate for him to go through the process of coaching and hopefully nominating me just to oppose me :p. --SKATER Speak. 01:56, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
File copyright problem with File:M3Logo.gif
I've been reading about the history of the file and got to the point that nobody as it commercializes or uses as a trademark the Modula-3 logo, this is because I learned that the company (Pine Creek Software owned by Samuel P. Harbison) which had the trademark was created in 1990 to do commercialize Modula-3 language and was contracted by DEC SRC, Palo Alto, CA (see Pine Creek Software at http://www.harbison.org/sph3/sph-cv.htm) and ended its operations in 1992, at the times there was not other who commercialized Modula-3 or anything or its logo (including DEC, now HP) as its trademark so I believe strongly that it became public domain and is no risk to put it in there so I think it complies if I understand the Wiki policies well, can you please confirm that, please see at the Permission subsection at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:M3Logo.gif
- I looked at the changes you made to File:M3Logo.gif and everything appears to be in order. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 19:33, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
How do I license it now?
that's my own photo and I swear I licensed it under a proper license... but must be not. So anyway, I don't know how to license it except when uploading and the box is right there. How do I do it now. A template? Wait, yeah I think that's it, I've done this before. Daniel Christensen (talk) 03:13, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
File copyright problem with File:Tawhid.jpg
Hello,
Thank you for the message, and sorry for the trouble. I have the copyright information, but I didn't find the way to add it to the file. Can you help me on that ? Thanks ! - TwoHorned User_talk:TwoHorned 13:15, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
- Certainly! Actually, the solution is fairly simple - adding a {{pd-ineligible}} tag to the page would resolve the issue. That being said, I've done that for you. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:04, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
thank you
Thanks for semi-protecting Alcatraz Island. --Stepheng3 (talk) 18:47, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Josh Kimmel back from the dead
On the other hand, he recreated it with the speedy tag already built in, which I suppose saves time. At what point does it merit NaCl? -- Rrburke (talk) 18:48, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
- When you've got sockpuppets creating the page. I've given User:Runninghookspictures a final warning; if they recreate the page, report them to WP:AIV and they will be blocked. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
- Scratch that, I just blocked Runninghookspictures for recreating Josh Kimmel. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:58, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
- I had previously already listed him at WP:UAA, due to the violation of WP:GROUPNAME. Josh Kimmel, moreover, is the CEO of Running Hooks Pictures. -- Rrburke (talk) 19:03, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
- Scratch that, I just blocked Runninghookspictures for recreating Josh Kimmel. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:58, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Chelmsley Wood - Thank you.
Thanks for protecting this page. Just to check, is it ok for me to edit the article to now say what it should say, or would this be seen as me continuing the edit war? Just not sure where I stand. Thanks. Abc30 (talk) 18:49, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
- Feel free to change it back. Considering that the IP edits were disruptive/vandalism, it would not be considered edit-warring if you were to revert those edits. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:56, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
Thank you for your help of the banner. (Telsimbanner.jpg) Maverick16 (talk) 18:58, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Image fix notice
In retrospect, I realize this photo has 2 problems, but only one can be fixed with a FUR. The photo is of a copyrighted sculpture. The copyrighted sculpture is not a problem as a FUR can easily justify use of the statue. However, the bigger problem is that the photographer never explicitly released the photo itself under a compatible license. As such, it is copyrighted too. I will contact the copyright holder later to get verification on its copyright status. If it isn't released, it can be replaced and the image needs to go. — BQZip01 — talk 04:21, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
File:Tawhid.jpg
Thank you ! - TwoHorned User_talk:TwoHorned 22:01, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
- Hm, looks like the message got deleted. It was regarding the indef. protection of WIlliam Clark. Could we try 6 months/1 year, as I'm not a big fan of indef? Thanks. Connormah (talk | contribs) 13:57, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
I see he's been blocked in the past, but on what grounds what he blocked indefinitely without further warning? His edit to the 2004 earthquake article, while misguided, doesn't seem to remotely come to the level of indeffable vandalism. --Golbez (talk) 06:09, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
- The unsourced edits (despite repeated warnings) to the earthquake article are only one thing. Multiple users have complained about this editor's behavior, even after being blocked earlier for the same reasons. If you can get Jigglyfidders to agree to stop disruptively editing, I will be happy to unblock. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:21, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
FFD: Jennicam01.jpg
I am concerned that you have closed this FFD two days early; and also that you have closed it having participated in it yourself.
I would have !voted "keep" for this image, for two reasons: (1) Jenni is no longer a public figure, so should not be stalked for her image. (2) The image is not just used for identification, but shows how she presented herself in the one activity for which she is notable. A random photo snatched on the street would not achieve the same encyclopedic function.
I'd be grateful if you could restore the image to allow me to make these points, and let the IfD run its normal 7-day course. Jheald (talk) 08:39, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
- Had I been aware of the discussion, I too would have recommended keeping the image. There were two comments clearly recommending a course of action - one to keep and your one recommending delete. Even ignoring that you were the one to recommend delete and to close, the weight of the arguments was about equal at best. There are no shortage of administrators available to close FFD discussions, so there was no need for you to close this at all, let alone close it early. Thryduulf (talk) 10:59, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
- An honest mistake. I deleted File:Jennicam 01.jpg per a {{subst:rfu}} tag placed on the image description page (the tag indicated that the image was to be deleted yesterday), independent of the deletion discussion. I did not realize that I had !voted in the same discussion. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:24, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Despite disagreeing with one of your deletion nomination earlier today, I am sure you won't hold that against me. With reference to Wikipedia:Non-free content review#Golden Team images that I nominated here, do you know what code to add to the other images I added under the same nomination so that each image has a deletion notice. Unfortunately, it is a pity we don't have a group nomination process like they have on the commons. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 14:32, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
- Done: Hammersoft just did it for me but I did not think he was online. Thanks anyway. ww2censor (talk) 14:41, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Dorr Felt
Fastily, why did you delete the Felt mansion hyperlink to the Felt Mansion Historic Preservation and Restoration site? I just visited there on Thursday and was given a tour by the founder of the project; I contacted her the following day about possibly helping her contribute an article on the Felt Mansion, but, for now, I think the link should remain until she creates the page--I'm going to edit the hyperlink again; if you have a serious problem with this, please contact me first on my user talk page or my email. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfeen (talk • contribs) 23:05, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
- Er...sorry? I think you may have me confused with someone else. According the page's history, I've never made a single edit to it. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:34, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Question about the protection of pan-Arabism page after Nableezy's POV edit
Can I ask you, why did you put a protection only after Nableezy (who lost his argument on that talk page, who's been blaming all those that disagree with his POV as sock puppets, he even tried to lump me with other people) asked you to, in order to lock in his vandalized version of that page? Rocalisi (talk) 23:33, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
- When I protected the article, there was an ongoing content dispute. Nableezy's edit just happened to be on top. If an agreement of some sort has been reached, please point me to that discussion and I will unprotect as necessary. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:31, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Dear FASTILY, Thanks for your response, I trust, you are fair, I am not saying you did it on purpose, but his arguments there have been refuted by a few users already. it's enough that he's put the POV on top, but the valuable information has to be reinstated, not vandalized - as he did, as such, the current (his trimmed) version is extremely unfair. regards Rocalisi (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:56, 17 April 2010 (UTC).
Please re-think about deletion of Jai gurudev - A Request
Hi,
I found it strange that the wiki page Jai gurudev was deleted. This page contained all the facts about the spiritual leader from India who has world’s maximum followers. I got a comment that this page is being created by a fan but what’s harm in that. There are pages that pertains to asocial elements with their Biography so why can’t a page that is pertains to a Spiritual awakening can be allowed to publish on Wiki. It is for benefit of society & Humanity. If we can move to direction we might succeed in combating the Global problems including Terrorism and Natural Disaster.
I am hopeful that you ll give a thought to it and will re-activate the page & advice me improvements that can help me avoid deletion. I am not a technical person hence that remains a constraint for me. Whatever Fact and figure you wish for I ll try to provide you with that. The page I created was with a intention that more and more people across the Globe can know about a Saint who is spreading message of Peace n Bother hood all across but unfortunately his followers are only in India coz the news could not be Spread across. He is 110 years of Age.
I invite you to India wherein you can yourself witness gathering to millions of people from various locations of world and talk to them about their experience. Famous Indian Political leaders got way from his preaching’s.
Thanks. Amardeep —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.162.238.35 (talk) 07:39, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Copyright???
You posted a note on my talk page titled File copyright problem with File:AnimalsRelativeNumbers.png
I hope you are a human being and not a tag robot. I am so PISSED at Wikipedia right now. I have made hundreds of minor edits over the last five years, two or three a day. I am very well aware of copyright. My household makes its living entirely on copyrighted material.
I spent five hours today creating that image from original source data. I am the sole owner of all intellectual property pertaining to that image. I tried 5!! times to upload that to Wikimedia using the http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Upload&uselang=ownwork page. It failed every time telling me I needed to indicate what the license was or that I was the author.
There is nothing on that page that gave me a clue as to what I was doing wrong (if indeed I was doing anything wrong). Nor can I figure out why you sent me this note. I did my level best to tell this idiot Wikipedia system that I OWN THAT IMAGE IT IS MINE AND MINE ALONE I HEREBY FREELY GIVE IT TO THE WORLD.
So don't delete it just tell me how to get this message across to the various Wiki sites.
Thanks, Nick Beeson (talk) 03:02, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
- See WP:UPI - that should answer your questions. Alternatively, you could have elected to carefully read the text in the green box on the upload form. It describes the whole process of noting copyright status in excruciating detail. Considering you spent "5 hours" making that graph, I'm sure you can spare 5 minutes to read the relevant policy/instructional pages so your work is not deleted. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:37, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
- I in my innocence tried to do the right thing and followed the directions I was given.
- in Wikipedia(beta) in the list of items on the left I clicked on the "Toolbox:Upload file" link
- Carefully reading everything I decided to place the image in Wikimedia, so in the highlighted pale orange box at the top I clicked on uploading it there
- I have a Wikimedia account and was automatically logged in so I clicked on "entirely my own work"
- on that page I could not get it to accept my image. The error I kept getting was that I needed to indicate what the license was. But there was no way I could find to do that. I tried several things with both the "Original source" and "Permission" items but could not find anything that worked.
- Now feeling frustrated and pissed I went back to Wikipedia and clicked on the "Toolbox:Upload file" link
- I then clicked on the "my own work"
- After uploading the file and filling in the template, I then carefully read all of the options in the license pull down box and chose "Public Domain" because I believe it is the most free and least restrictive. I got a box with a neat graphic I then clicked the "Upload file" button at the bottom left.
- For twenty-three years people have been telling me to "RTFM". Indeed that is good advice, which I have followed for that entire time. I have read everything I could before I have asked for help. In this case I carefully read every word on the Wikimedia pages I saw. None of them had the information I needed. I looked for a pull down with licensing options and could not find one. I spent a lot of time on trying to upload that file. More than a half-hour.
- I do not understand what happened. I did see that form with the license pull-down box at the bottom on Wikipedia and I did use it!
- So can you please tell me how to fix this? Do I edit the permissions on the current image? Do I delete the current image and try uploading it again? How do I verify that the system correctly accepted my choice of license?
- Thanks Nick Beeson (talk) 10:11, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
- Public Domain? You should have said so in the first place. Add the text "{{pd-self}}" anywhere on the image's description page by going here. Once you've done that, you can remove the deletion tag. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:46, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- I in my innocence tried to do the right thing and followed the directions I was given.
I think that you just tagged
File:HAL BLAINE STRIKES AGAIN.jpg. as being lacking in copyright status. That image was part of a fight/discussion that I was fighting/discussing - one that I subsequentially lost - you might notice that the article where it resides is going to be merged or deleted or whatever and as a result I'm not really interested in defending that image any more. If I change my mind I can always reload it with copyright info or just create a very similar one myself. Thanks for letting me know about it getting tagged. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 18:26, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Becky Kelly, Fairy resting on a mushroom.jpg
Becky Kelly, Fairy resting on a mushroom.jpg
mushroom sleepingwhcc5X5small.jpg
Feel free to delete the above. I couldn't figure out how to do it.
If the image copyright owner uploads it herself, does she still need to tag it?
Thanks & Regard, Ondine88 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ondine88 (talk • contribs) 21:50, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry to hear you were having trouble. At any rate, Done. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:48, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
tita tamames
let me know how can i give the rights, i took the photo and it's stated there. thanks--DEDB (talk) 22:03, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
- Please WP:UPI. Alternatively, you can also read the text in the green box of the form you used to upload the file. That should answer your questions. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:53, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
photo mikelsusperregi.jpg
Hello
YOu just sent me a message regarding the copyright of this photo. I hired a photographer (Chris Gloag) to do a photoshoot and he was paid for it, therefore Mikel Susperregi (the subject of the picture) is the owner of the copyright and this is uploaded with this consent.
Please advise what other information you require. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shafuska (talk • contribs) 22:06, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
- If that's the case, then it's likely that the photo is copyrighted. See WP:DCP and WP:UPI for more information. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:54, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Why did you delete my page?
I spent HOURS creating a page for the company Hannover House and you just decided to delete the ENTIRE THING?
03:26, 18 April 2010 Fastily (talk | contribs) deleted "Hannover House" (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)
How is what I did ANY different than pages for companies in the same industry like Lions Gate Entertainment or Summit Entertainment?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Engineerbl (talk • contribs) 03:44, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Hannover House page
I'd like to be sent the text of the Hannover House page I already spent hours on, so that I can adjust it without spending hours more gathering all the information again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Engineerbl (talk • contribs) 04:02, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
The Samsara map was created by Manus Brinkman, who has given permission to use the graphic. This is clearly indicated on the graphic description. I do not understand what your concern is. PMBCOMM
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
WVRMAD•Talk •Guestbook 13:43, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Any chance of you extending the protection? It just came off 2 one month protections with the same kind of disruptive edits. CTJF83 chat 03:59, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hmm. That's a fair point. In your opinion, how long do you believe the page should be protected? -FASTILY (TALK) 04:02, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Liberty and Ellis Island's Image Copyright
Ok, I have no idea what copyright tag to use on this image, and to be honest, I forgot to add one when I uploaded it...
It was made using two two public domain images already located on Wikipedia, Liberty Island and Ellis Island. As both files used are copyright free public domain images this picture is also.
If you could tell me which tag to use, or could add it yourself, I'd be very grateful. OptimumPx (talk) 07:10, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- Since the file is a derivative work of two Public domain images, the tag to use in this case would be {{pd-self}}. That being said, I have done for you. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:10, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Newmanyb
Newmanyb (talk · contribs) seems not to understand at all about our copyright policy relating to images. I think he is also editing as 138.89.254.17 (talk · contribs) as they are editing the same articles and neither gives edit summaries. When an image removed by Newmanyb was put back, the IP immediately removed it again, adding one of Newmanyb's images. Dougweller (talk) 09:58, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Dougweller. That's quite interesting - I must agree that the IP and the Newmanyb are the same person. I see you've already left a warning to Newmanyb. If Newmanyb and the IP continue to be unresponsive or unwilling to communicate, I think a short-term block may be in order. If comes down to that, let me know and I'll block. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 20:22, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Category deletion
I do not understand why you deleted Category:People by city in Pakistan less than 24 hours after I had restored it. At the very least, the courteous thing to do would have been to contact me to ask about it before deleting. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 10:12, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- I could have sworn there was a {{db-c1}} tag on the category when I deleted it. Sorry about that. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:18, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Belated response to a couple of FFD closures
Hi, this is going over a couple of months, but I wanted to ask about your "no consensus" closures for Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 February 15#File:Trevor Linden draft photo 1988.JPG and Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 February 15#File:Lindenmclean1994.jpg. I understand that the votes were split evenly, but I thought the delete arguments were clear cut and the keep argument didn't seem in line with WP:NFCC that I hadn't bothered to get too involved past the initial nomination. Anyway, I've started a thread here and would love to get your take. Thank you. --Mosmof (talk) 16:49, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
File:Lord Cranborne.jpg
You identified the image File:Lord Cranborne.jpg as lacking source info. I am not sure of the details required, but the information box provided with the image indicates that the image is cropped from File:Major General Wynter and Lord Cranborne.jpg, which must be fairly kosher, since it has been uploaded to Commons. Clearly all that needs to be done is to copy the necessary information across, but I am not sure what information is required. Would you mind lending a hand? Thanks, BartBassist (talk) 18:46, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- Since the file is a derivative work of a Public domain image, the tag to use in this case would be {{PD-Australia}}. That being said, I have done that for you. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:52, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
File:Philadelphia Eagles.gif
Why did you decline my F9? This is clearly a copyright violation, has no claim of fair use, and isn't even used? Eeekster (talk) 21:33, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's not a copyright violation until the uploader asserts a free license when that is clearly not the case. By your logic, we should speedy delete non-free files that lack sufficient copyright information. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:42, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- No, by my logic you should speedy delete non-free files that have no claim of fair use. Eeekster (talk) 21:47, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- Really now? If you think that, then obviously, the {{subst:nrd}} should not exist. Let's start with something simple. By definition, a copyright violation occurs when someone takes legally protected work that is obviously not their own and claims it as their own, infringing the original copyright holder's rights. Can we agree on this? -FASTILYsock(TALK) 04:09, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- No, by my logic you should speedy delete non-free files that have no claim of fair use. Eeekster (talk) 21:47, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
File:ZwillingeStampSWA1985.jpg
Re: this deletion - Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_April_9#File:ZwillingeStampSWA1985.jpg
Dear Fastily. Hi. I notice you deleted this file. Your explanation was that the "result of the discussion was: Delete".
I am not sure there was really a consensus or a discussion.
Is it the case that it wwwcensor's argument that "The stamp's existence and its purpose are already perfectly well explained in prose without the necessity of using a non-free image and does not increase the reader's understanding of the article." is compelling. Here the modfication the wwwcensor has made to policy is that he has replaced "topic" with "article". This seems to me a tightening of policy. Is this a change that could be usefully made in the policy?
User:seresin's modification to policy is that the image would be "necessary for comprehension". This also seems to me a tightening of policy.
It still seems to me that the image's presence significantly increased readers' understanding of the topic of the section 'Zwillinge (Locomotives)#The Stamp' and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. So it seems to me it passes WP:NFC#Images #3 and WP:NFCC#8.
- "increasing readers understanding" and "omission being detrimetental" to the topic seem to me key phrases in our policy at the moment.
Could you let me know your basis for deletion and your interpretation of these arguments - best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 10:31, 19 April 2010 (UTC))
- I am sure Fastily will make his own response and will forgive my interruption, but the deleting administrator weighs all the facts, not just the statements in the deletion discussion. It is not a vote. This stamp was not being used in an article about the stamp, for which it clearly fails WP:NFC#Images #3, there was no critical commentary about the stamp itself just information that the stamp was issued and what it shows, so it fails WP:NFCC#8. There is no evidence this stamp is notable in any way other than its issuance. If the point was to show another image of the locomotive, there is already a free image of that, so it would fail WP:NFCC#3a too. I do not see any merit in the argument that the fact a stamp was issued showing this loco, of which there is already a free image in the article, enhances the reader's understanding of the topic. Can you explain that? I am sure you will say this is the same argument but yours is repetitive too, so we shall have to disagree, but believe me many stamps have been deleted for the very same same reasons. This is an ongoing problem as you will see if you look at these discussions this and this and these deletion nominations January 2008 and November 2009 for a start (I can reference many more). Thanks for you time. ww2censor (talk) 13:09, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Copyright status of Geotherm.jpg
I don't understand your copyright problem with Geotherm.jpg. I clearly stated when I uploaded the article that I created the work (the graph) entirely myself. I also gave the source of the underlying graphed data, a website of the federal government. I'd be glad to clear up any misunderstanding, if only I knew where the misunderstanding lies. Regards. Plazak (talk) 13:19, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Please Place Your Input
could you please place your input into the case of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kendal Nagorcka, I am not telling you which way to sway,howver I would appreciate a expericenced editor like yourself providing a input to the case
Non-free files in your user space
Hey there Fastily, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Fastily/Sandbox/T. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.
- See a log of files removed today here.
- Shut off the bot here.
- Report errors here.
Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 00:41, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi mate,
My name is Dani and I created a page called Pogojo Ltd (pogojo.com.au) on Wikipedia last week. The page was about a company called Pogojo Ltd and it's business operation. The page as I believe, did not violate any of Wikipedia rules and it stood in the given guidelines for publishing a wiki term on Wikipedia, which is not advertising and providing a notable and reliable source (which I provided in this case and the source was the Australian Securities and Investment Commission - ASIC, to prove that the company is legitimate and operating still under the Australian laws) however it still got deleted by you!
I ask you kindly to approve it since we believe that the Wikipedia page is a source of information to serve everyone, and it meant to provide reliable information on everything. You might argue that the source is not reliable or not sufficient enough, but as a matter of fact, the page I created presents a legitimate business and it is 100% truthful, and no misleading information was included there. Wikipedia.org should be serving the internet community by presenting truthful and valuable information of any sort, not by deleting information that do not meet the rules of submitting pages but by deleting misleading and untruthful pages.
Thank you
Dani —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniman10 (talk • contribs) 02:49, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- The article was deleted via the WP:PROD process. You had a week to contest the deletion from the time it was first flagged for deletion. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:55, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi mate,
I did contest the deletion and nothing happened, I submitted my changes and explanation of why the page shouldn't be deleted...yet nothing happened! I admit I have little experience in Wikipedia contribution. please advice me what to do! should I resubmit it again? thank you.
Dani —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniman10 (talk • contribs) 23:36, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
File talk:SnowballGeography.gif
Hello, you appear to have deleted File talk:SnowballGeography.gif citing a reason that was disputed by two editors. I'd be grateful if you would explain why you have acted against consensus. Thanks. Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 01:51, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- WP:NFC#UUI, point 10. If you like, I can restore the file, and list it for deletion at WP:FFD to obtain a clearer consensus, if you will. -FASTILY (TALK) 04:32, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- That would be great, thank you. Applying point 10 to cases where the original data are unavailable (per discussion) does not seem to be a clearcut case to me, so an FFD sounds like a good idea. Thanks! Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 18:37, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- You seem to have misunderstood my earlier statement. Allow me to clarify - WP:NFC#UUI, point 10 is the reason the file was tagged for deletion in the first place, was it not? This is not a reflection of my opinion in anyway whatsoever - I am only acting in accordance policy. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:54, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
- I have listed the file for deletion. You can comment at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 April 20#File:SnowballGeography.gif. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:57, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll thrash it out there. Point 10 was likely the reason that it was listed for deletion, but this deletion was contested. There were two boilerplate "don't delete me please" templates on the file page itself, and a discussion on the talk page. If you didn't notice these, could I ask that in future you do keep an eye out for objections to deletion before deleting files? Cheers, Martin (Smith609 – Talk)
- I have listed the file for deletion. You can comment at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 April 20#File:SnowballGeography.gif. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:57, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
- You seem to have misunderstood my earlier statement. Allow me to clarify - WP:NFC#UUI, point 10 is the reason the file was tagged for deletion in the first place, was it not? This is not a reflection of my opinion in anyway whatsoever - I am only acting in accordance policy. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:54, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
- That would be great, thank you. Applying point 10 to cases where the original data are unavailable (per discussion) does not seem to be a clearcut case to me, so an FFD sounds like a good idea. Thanks! Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 18:37, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Seriously?
"No consensus"? Seriously? howcheng {chat} 16:22, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Ya seriously. All I can see in the discussion is a lot of back and forth between you and another user. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I last I checked, "Consensus" is defined as a general over-reaching agreement. At 2/2 and accompanied with plenty of hot air, in an effort to be as fair as possible, I can neither close this as delete (albeit leaning delete) nor keep. If you believe the file should be deleted, please, feel free to start another deletion discussion. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:07, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Sticks
I tried to create a Wikipedia entry for Sticks, Inc and its founder, Sarah Grant. It included only factual and historical information, but the page was deleted with the reason being it was deemed as advertorial. There are many company profiles within Wikipedia so please let me know how to structure a piece so that it adheres to your standards.
Many Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sticksinc (talk • contribs) 16:37, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Belfast City Hall Picture
Regarding the deletion issue of the picture I uploaded to the Belfast City Hall page... It was taken by myself and if you check my history you'll notice at the time I uploaded that picture, I also uploaded another picture to Victoria Square. I'm uploaded the files as free to you with no licence hence there is no copyright. You will also be able to note that both the photo on Belfast City Hall and Victoria Square (Belfast) were taken by the same camera on the same date... During a visit to Belfast. Regards, --NorthernCounties (talk) 17:41, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Per Wikipedia image use policy, a license tag is required, free or not, no exceptions. Please select a license tag of your choosing from the list and add it to the file description page if you are interested in retaining your file. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:11, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Admin
yes i wish to continue my running for and admin position. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bleach Blood Poet (talk • contribs) 02:58, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Rizon
Re Rizon, [78] there has been more than one anonymous user/IP involved over a very long period of time. AIV is ineffective, see the past logs [79] --Tothwolf (talk) 07:48, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
- I blocked the most recent IP for three months. Other than that, there isn't any recent disruption on Rizon. If you start getting a lot of vandalism from dynamic IPs on Rizon, make a request at WP:RFPP or leave me a note on my talk. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:42, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Rian Malan copyrighted photo
Thanks for your email regarding copyright of a photo of Rian Malan. I did obtain copyright from the photographer, Beowulf Sheehan, and I did inform Wikipedia of this. I wonder what went wrong? SkaraB 13:59, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
- You need a license tag denoting the copyright status of the file. See WP:UPI for more details. -FASTILY (TALK) 04:58, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Clarification
Hello, Fastily. I would like to understand your concerns about my concerns about my "limited experience, policy knowledge, judgment/maturity, and breadth of exposure". Was there any particular edit or statement that caused you to have these concerns? Best wishes. Immunize (talk) 14:38, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
PS: Please leave me a talkback template on my talk page when you respond. Immunize (talk) 14:43, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, that's a general, non-specific oppose I use; in summary, it's a longer way of saying NOTNOW. I think you're on the right route - all you need is more time and more experience on Wikipedia. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:00, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of King Arthur's Tools
I recently created a wiki for King Arthur's Tools a tool manufacture that makes specialized power tools for woodcarving and taxidermy. The article include basic information about the company and their tools (As well as references from third parties including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce), however it was deleted (G11:Unambiguous advertising or promotion was cited). I have looked over Wikipedia and feel that the article fit Wikipedia standards, however if you disagree can you point me towards a similar article that I can pattern the King Arthur's Tools wiki after or give me specific points that I can change to create a more fitting wiki.
Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by KiddGroup (talk • contribs) 18:27, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Jokebox?
Unfortunately, it often ends up as one :P Thanks for dealing with that though, it was annoying me because I was so tempted to accept them. fetchcomms☛ 03:09, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks!
|
|
- Jameson L. Tai's Guestbook Barnstar | |
| For signing my guestbook - I, - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs, hereby present Fastily with this award. Cheers! -- - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs 13:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC) |
ING Life Page - Logo Copyright
Regarding image ING Life Insurance.jpg on ING Life page... how do I place a copyright tag. I work for the organization and I am allowed to use its logos in the internet domain. Please let me know —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vikaschandak (talk • contribs) 04:19, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of Solidarity Across Borders page
Can you please explain why the Solidarity Across Borders page was deleted? The article highlighted a notable social justice organization in Montreal that has been an active voice in the debate on immigrant, migrant worker and refugee rights in Montreal and Canada. The article included references to several credible outside sources as per wikipedia guidelines. Your response is appreciated. RELI312 (talk) 20:30, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for your feedback. I have forwarded your comments to the page creator who may contact you to have the page moved into a user draft section where it could be reworked. RELI312 (talk) 17:27, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't know why you want to delete my file. I select the creative commons 3 whenever I upload my work. Anyhow, I uploaded it again and selected the same copywrite. Please don't have my circuits deleted. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PaulLowrance (talk • contribs) 14:51, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for adding a license tag. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:08, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
kindly re-instate solidscape
Fastily
as a new user to Wikipedia I have been a little slow to create and edit my contribution "Solidscape" which is a well-known 3D Printer manufacturer in the USA. Apparently, what I had drafted looks too advertising-based, but in fact, is not intended to do so. it is merely incomplete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Star500E (talk • contribs) 16:02, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Copyright of File:Temple Festival by Edmund Clint.png
I added some information about the copyright. Please verify.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Temple_Festival_by_Edmund_Clint.png#Licensing —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raghavkvp (talk • contribs) 19:26, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
- Not quite. The notice indicates that you are missing a license tag. Since you have indicated that this is non-free artwork, the appropriate tag would be the {{Non-free 2D art}} tag. To add the tag to the page, simply add the text "{{Non-free 2D art}}" anywhere on the respective image description pages. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:03, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of a userpage
Hello, I noticed you just deleted a userpage that I had under Watch. I never knew that could be done (need to back to the criteria page). I would to ask your opinion of this page. Monica Foster was deleted by AfD. I have a feeling this user, who is the porn star as well, will trot that userpage out again. --Morenooso (talk) 05:44, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
- According to the deleted edits, the first paragraph is verbatim from the deleted page. User:AlexandraMayers is not forbidden from keeping the text in their userspace, but if the page is moved to the article space, it should be tagged with {{db-g4}}, with a link to the respective AfD. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:47, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello. Please tell me how I can add a screenshot of a public site. I do not know much about licences for images and my screenshots are constantly deleted.
I have done this screenshot myself and the site is completely public.
This is not a commercial site, but a site for a public campaign. If fact, it is in the interest of the site owners that the image of the site is spread as much as possible. Ybelov (talk • contribs) 07:03, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Copyright tags
I recently uploaded 2 pictures without adding copyright tags. You have sent me a message to say the images will soon be deleted. I am the author of this work and wish to relinquish rights to it. I have not been able to find a way to do this retrospectively. Can you help? I am new to Wikipedia.--Ykraps (talk) 16:13, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
- Yes there is a way to relinquish all rights to the files. Add the text "{{pd-self}}" anywhere on the respective image pages. Once you have done that, you may remove the deletion tags. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:01, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Done! Ykraps (talk) 10:04, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of File:ZwillingeStampSWA1985.jpg
Dear Fastily, I would like to get another view of this deletion - Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_April_9#File:ZwillingeStampSWA1985.jpg. Would it be OK to take it to Wikipedia:Deletion review?
I raised this here User_talk:Fastily/Archive_3#File:ZwillingeStampSWA1985.jpg and as might be expected was not really happy with ww2censor's reply and the failure to address any of the issues I raised. Anyway, Best wishes, (Msrasnw (talk) 20:46, 21 April 2010 (UTC))
- Yes, you are certainly more than entitled to take it to Deletion Review. Be sure to notify ww2censor of the discussion. I just want you to know that the decision to delete was my non-partisan take on the whole discussion and not reflective of my opinion in anyway whatsoever. I took points from both sides and weighed them against each other. All in all, I thought a delete was in order. But of course, you are more than welcome to start a DR - I won't take any offense. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:07, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
- Dear Fastily - I just feel that legitmate doubts I have raised about what I think is an extreme interpretation of policy have not been addressed. I have asked for a review of the deletion of the Zwillinge Stamp here Wikipedia:Deletion_review#File:ZwillingeStampSWA1985.jpg. (PS Have notified ww2censor) best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 14:34, 22 April 2010 (UTC))
Image question
Hey Fastily, how are you? Anyway, I wonder if you could answer a question for me. I recently had an image listed at FfD (the nominator's rationale was spot-on and I'd missed the criterion so I had it speedied under G7), File:Sir James Black.jpg. The image came from the BBC News website, so failed WP:NFC#UUI #6, so my question is could I use a similar image that wasn't from a news source? There's an old image of him on his Nobel Prize profile and one from the University of Dundee, would either of those be acceptable? Btw, if you're still interested in nominating me, I expect I'll be up for it in a week or 2. All the best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:51, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hi HJ Mitchell. I'm doing all right, thanks for asking. WP:NFC#UUI point 6 is really just a specific case of WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#8. Since Sir Black passed away only about a month ago, it is still likely possible to obtain a free photo of him. I'm not familiar with the Nobel foundation's policy on images, but I wouldn't recommend using their photos unless you know in certainty (e.g. the website indicates the image is licensed under a free license, a representative has contacted you) they are free. Likewise, the same applies to the University of Dundee's photo. You can always request permission (see WP:PERMISSION) from the copyright holder and get an OTRS ticket number of course, but it can be a bit of a hassle. Hope that helps to answer your question. And yes, I'm still up for nominating you - just let me know when you're ready and I'll write you a nom (I may be on Wikibreak starting sometime next week all the way until mid May per business in Real Life - just wanted to give you a heads up so you can better adjust your schedule if necessary). Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 05:28, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
- Glad to hear it. Thanks for the advice. I think Sir James probably qualifies as reclusive enough to warrant a non-free image, especially now he's deceased, but I'm wary of uploading another one only to have it FfD'd again. I might email Dundee, though I expect it'll be ages before they send permission to OTRS and OTRS can deal with it. It's worth a try though! As for RfA, User:Bradjamesbrown has very kindly offered me a co-nom (he knows me from ITN) so if it works for you, why don't you go ahead and write up the nom and I expect I'll be ready in a day or so. Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:43, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
- Excellent, I'm glad to hear you're ready! I've created Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/HJ Mitchell 2. When you have time, could you please answer the questions? I'd like to know a bit more about your accomplishments and achievements so I can write a stronger nomination statement. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 06:14, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- I've answered the questions, so whenever you're ready... ;) No need to rush, though. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:47, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- I don't want to pester you but I just happened to notice you were online. Could you take a look at my answers when you get a chance? Also, I seem to have 2 supports already which is... odd, but flattering! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:05, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- I've answered the questions, so whenever you're ready... ;) No need to rush, though. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:47, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Excellent, I'm glad to hear you're ready! I've created Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/HJ Mitchell 2. When you have time, could you please answer the questions? I'd like to know a bit more about your accomplishments and achievements so I can write a stronger nomination statement. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 06:14, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Glad to hear it. Thanks for the advice. I think Sir James probably qualifies as reclusive enough to warrant a non-free image, especially now he's deceased, but I'm wary of uploading another one only to have it FfD'd again. I might email Dundee, though I expect it'll be ages before they send permission to OTRS and OTRS can deal with it. It's worth a try though! As for RfA, User:Bradjamesbrown has very kindly offered me a co-nom (he knows me from ITN) so if it works for you, why don't you go ahead and write up the nom and I expect I'll be ready in a day or so. Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:43, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Following an AIV report you blocked 67.142.161.30 for vandalism. I've unblocked the editor as those edits were most definitely not vandalism. Made with a COI, perhaps, but not vandalism. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:53, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
InkHeart again
She is back, using the anon Special:Contributions/192.197.54.28. Ωphois 16:57, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
- And again at Special:Contributions/212.100.250.207. Ωphois 21:08, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Deletion review for File:ZwillingeStampSWA1985.jpg
An editor has asked for a deletion review of File:ZwillingeStampSWA1985.jpg. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Msrasnw (talk) 18:04, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Jackthemonkey600ppx.PNG
Thanks for uploading File:Jackthemonkey600ppx.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is 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).
PLEASE NOTE:
- I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
- I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
- If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
- To opt out of these bot messages, add
{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}to your talk page. - If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:46, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Removal of Pages
why did you remove my page - if you have removed my page can you explain why you do not remove these pages?Golden Artist Colors winsor & newton and about 10000 others? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paddo777 (talk • contribs) 04:58, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
copyright licenses for images
Hi, I have tagged the image files Ban71may.PNG and Taurusiege394.PNG with proper copyright information. Thank you for bringing them to my notice. Maglorbd (talk) 10:37, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Alloyvalves?
Hi Fastily. It looks like Alloyvalves (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) is requesting an unblock (or at least an explanation of the block). Offhand, I didn't see any blatant advertising in a cursory viewing of their contributions. I figure I'm missing something so I wanted to ping you. Thanks! Syrthiss (talk) 11:46, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Anky Rookmaker
I created the page Anky Rookmaaker and surprised to see it deleted without any warning. Is this normal?
Also, I would advocate to reinstall the page and I will modify it.
The activity described on the page is notable. The person was knighted by the Queen of the Netherlands for something that she started well into her '50's during a time (mid '60's) that such activity was not common for females. In addition it was all voluntarily and ended up in an organization that is now helping educating 150.000 children on a yearly basis. I would think it is highly notable.
Referencing is not so easy as she employed a low profile method, avoiding excessive PR costs. However she managed to run a medium sized relief organization almost singlehandedly. That is well proven by the knighthood. Also the problem is that most sources are in Dutch. The US agent of the organization has a website, which can be referred to (www.helpachild.us)and there is an online description of her influence in the international l'abri fellowship.
Finally, the method of help (giving indigenous people all responsibility) is even now still not commonly practiced. She did it on a large scale in the time that there were no faxes, emails, etc.
Hope to hear from you.
Albert Hengelaar Albert hengelaar (talk) 14:29, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- It was deleted per the WP:PROD process. You were in fact notified about the deletion and given time to contest it (see here. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:49, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
A question inre this deletion: diff
I looked in at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rica Paras and saw that while the discussion had been relisted, the article itself had already been deleted 30 minutes before I looked in. Is the procedure to then close the AFD as fate acompli, or to allow the article to remain and be discussed? Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 22:59, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like the discussion has already been closed...but yes, the proper thing to do would be to close the AfD. If necessary, discussion can always be continued at WP:DR. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:57, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Grawp blocks
Just FYI, that's not just Grawp on those IP's... he's posting on 4chan trying to get them to attack NawlinWiki. It could probably be interpreted as vandalistic meatpuppetry... The Thing // Talk // Contribs 01:23, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Well that's great to know :P So instead of a army of socks, Grawp's got a legion. Unless anyone objects, I shall continue blocking the IPs then. Anyways, thanks for the tip. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:34, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- No objections from me. Yeah, he can be a real nuisance when he uses /b/. Just look at this and this. The Thing // Talk // Contribs 01:42, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
|
|
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
| Thankyou for reverting and protecting my talk page after the heavy vandalism Imperial Monarch (D•R) 02:07, 24 April 2010 (UTC) |
File:Pennsylvania Avenue.jpg kept then speedied
You closed Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 April 2#File:Pennsylvania Avenue.jpg as Keep on April 15, but speedy deleted File:Pennsylvania Avenue.jpg anyway on April 22 as "F4: Lack of licensing information". Was there a different issue as well, or some new information to indicate the licensing was indeed lacking after all? (The issue in the discussion was that the uploader seemed to be attempting to revoke GFDL.) --Closeapple (talk) 02:14, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- I tagged the file as having no license the same day I closed the discussion. Per standard procedure, images tagged as having no license are deleted 7 days after being tagged. Do we know what the correct license is? If so, let me know and I'll restore the file with the proper license. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 02:17, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- According to my initial nomination, it was {{GFDL-with-disclaimers}} and credited to "Nick Scribner" and was used in the article House numbering for some time, then changed to {{puf}} by Uncle Leo (talk · contribs), who was the original uploader, and removed from House numbering with the reason "took away an old photo I took. it shouldn't be too hard to find a better one." and no other reasoning. It appears to me that User:Uncle Leo is Nick Scribner, but I'm not completely sure, and that user didn't participate in the PUF discussion. I never did get an answer about what one does about files for which a copyright holder attempts to revoke his own irrevocable license. The deletion just appeared in my watchlist as coming 2 hours ago tonight, rather than on April 15. --Closeapple (talk) 02:34, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hm. This is an interesting situation. You are correct - when a copyright holder wants to revoke their irrevocable license, we cannot do that; the most we can do is delete the page. That being said, perhaps it might be a good idea to leave the file deleted as is (but then again, that's just my opinion). What do you think would be the best course of action to take? -FASTILY (TALK) 02:38, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- I was hoping an administrator knew or there was a Wikipedia namespace page about this. My inclination, absent any official guidance, would be to restore a file if the licensing is known to have been legitimate: if there is any evidence that any other site anywhere has copied the media, then it should certainly be restored to prevent the author from being able to claim to other innocent people retroactively that it's unlicensed; if there is no evidence of it being used elsewhere, then there is probably no retroactive harm, and restoring it would not be as important, but there is still no reason against it unless it seems like it would be difficult to prove the uploader was qualified to license it in the first place. Now, in this case, it seems like the file's provenance is a bit confusing (the author is probably the uploader, but I'm not 100% sure), and the uploader is the one "taking back" the file, and I don't see any evidence on Google that any other website has used the file — so maybe this one is not worth pushing. There is also a CC-BY-2.0 photo of the 200 SE block street sign (instead of the 1600 NW) at http://www.flickr.com/photos/takomabibelot/459967718/ that could be used. --Closeapple (talk) 03:26, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hm. This is an interesting situation. You are correct - when a copyright holder wants to revoke their irrevocable license, we cannot do that; the most we can do is delete the page. That being said, perhaps it might be a good idea to leave the file deleted as is (but then again, that's just my opinion). What do you think would be the best course of action to take? -FASTILY (TALK) 02:38, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- According to my initial nomination, it was {{GFDL-with-disclaimers}} and credited to "Nick Scribner" and was used in the article House numbering for some time, then changed to {{puf}} by Uncle Leo (talk · contribs), who was the original uploader, and removed from House numbering with the reason "took away an old photo I took. it shouldn't be too hard to find a better one." and no other reasoning. It appears to me that User:Uncle Leo is Nick Scribner, but I'm not completely sure, and that user didn't participate in the PUF discussion. I never did get an answer about what one does about files for which a copyright holder attempts to revoke his own irrevocable license. The deletion just appeared in my watchlist as coming 2 hours ago tonight, rather than on April 15. --Closeapple (talk) 02:34, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Undelete please
Given that the ArticleAlert system is currently broken, it is likely that not many people will be aware of PRODs. Can you please undelete Ray Corcoran as he did play for a top league for at least 7 years. If you don't know about PRods, we can't fix them up. Thanks, The-Pope (talk) 07:12, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 09:23, 24 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Left you a reply on my talkpage Paul2387 09:23, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Photos
Hi, I've been on leave from the Wikipedia for awhile due to real life issues, but I've noticed that a great deal of my photos that I took are being deleted. Can you tell me why? --AllyUnion (talk) 14:44, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Welcome back! I believe your files were missing sources and deleted because of that. But seeing that you've added sources, I suppose I have nothing to add. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 16:37, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
"[nationality] rugby league footballers" category deletions
Hi Fastily, you deleted the following categories earlier because they have been emptied:
- (Deletion log); 15:33 . . Fastily (Talk | contribs) deleted "Category:Polish rugby league footballers" (C1: Empty category)
- (Deletion log); 15:33 . . Fastily (Talk | contribs) deleted "Category:Georgian rugby league footballers" (C1: Empty category)
- (Deletion log); 15:33 . . Fastily (Talk | contribs) deleted "Category:Filipino rugby league footballers" (C1: Empty category)
- (Deletion log); 15:32 . . Fastily (Talk | contribs) deleted "Category:Dutch rugby league footballers" (C1: Empty category)
- (Deletion log); 15:32 . . Fastily (Talk | contribs) deleted "Category:Canadian rugby league footballers" (C1: Empty category)
- (Deletion log); 15:32 . . Fastily (Talk | contribs) deleted "Category:American rugby league footballers" (C1: Empty category)
They have been replaced today by the following newly created categories (there may be other similar cases):
- Category:Polish rugby league players
- Category:Georgian rugby league players
- Category:Filipino rugby league players
- Category:Dutch rugby league players
- Category:Canadian rugby league players
- Category:American rugby league players
This issue has had, I think, at least two Categories for discussion debates and the last one ended with no consensus to move all the categories to using players rather than footballers. Could you revert or advise please? LunarLander // talk // 15:45, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- That's fine. I deleted the pages per standard procedure (C1), but you are certainly more than welcome to recreate the categories like you did above if you are willing to populate them. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 16:39, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Admin coaching
Hello, I see that you are listed as a potential admin coach for candidates interested in focusing on images. Even though my first RfA brought up a several things to focus on, I think my biggest stumbling block was my answer to question #1. Yes, I knew that I wanted to help out, but I really didn't have a clear plan as to how. Your own oppose is a good example of what I mean, actually: it was a tentative oppose because I've had an inconsistent editing history, but you made it quite clear that you would have considered moving to support if I'd given you a reason.
I haven't considered working in images because it's a fairly complex topic and I really have very little experience with them, but I'm willing to learn. Please let me know if you would be open to coaching me.--~TPW 23:24, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Certainly! I'd be more than happy to take you on as a coachee. Unfortunately, this isn't the best time for me to take on new coachees; I'm about to be on Wikibreak starting next week until May 15 (per business in RL). The last thing I want to do is start coaching and then leave you hanging for a few weeks. If you're not interested in waiting several weeks, it's fine with me, I understand. But if you don't mind the wait, let me know and I'll start coaching as soon as I return. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 00:59, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Admin coaching
If you're not unhealthily clinging to Wikipedia, would you mind giving me some admin coaching, as we previously discussed? I'm a fairly busy individual, but I use the internet quite a bit. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:39, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Oh dear; just saw above thread; I sure do have bad timing :P Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:40, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- No worries, I can coach you too. Like above, I'm not going to be available during the next few weeks due to business in RL. If you're alright with the wait (I feel doubly bad now since I'm going to be offwiki again like last time), do let me know and I will start coaching with you upon my return. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 01:05, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Acount Creator
Wow, wasn't expecting this so fast, but I'll be ok. First Thank you for the trust, I will do my best. Question what's with all the emails I got, I think from future users, looks like a mailing list ? Mlpearc MESSAGE 01:22, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hey, no problem. Yes, I believe it is a mailing list. Since you were granted access to the ACC tool, it's likely that you're receiving emails from distributed by the mailing list. Hope that helps to answer your question. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:28, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah it's a mailing list, but it's just information, It's not things I need to respond to ? Mlpearc MESSAGE 02:16, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
RfA Thanks
More specifically, thank you for your support. "Why not?" may be a short rationale but it's one of the most concise and meaningful ones there are at RfA. Thanks! ceranthor 14:00, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
|
InkHeart
She is now using Special:Contributions/212.100.250.207. Ωphois 03:32, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Because you've contributed to FPC either recently or in the past, I'm letting you know about the above poll on the basis of which we may develop proposals to change our procedures and criteria. Regards, Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 23:05, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I have removed the FfD tag you put on File:ProjectOrionLogo.png, because it appears you hadn't nominated it for deletion, and didn't explain why you think it should be deleted. If you still want it to be delete, feel free to re-tag the image and make the nomination. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 18:17, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Deletion replacement question
You recently deleted File:Sue_Lowden.jpg as a copyvio with no fair use or public domain claim presented. Sue Lowden is currently running in the primary to become a candidate for U.S. Senator from Nevada. On her official campaign site, there is a link reading "Download a high resolution photo of Sue Lowden", from which a ,jpg file quite similar to the deleted image can be freely downloaded. Checking the site (not exactly a thorough scouring of the entire site, but more than a brief skim), I did not find any copyright notices or restrictions on usage of the content, including the downloadable photo. I'm not an expert on copyright law, or on filling out the Wikipedia usage justifications, but it seems that image might be OK to use in her article if properly documented. Can I have your opinion on this issue, and any helpful suggestions you might care to make? Thanks. Fat&Happy (talk) 03:49, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Just because the file is freely available for download does not mean that is not copyrighted. Why, for the sake of example, the majority of copyrighted movie posters can be downloaded from the internet. Briefly examining the website and the photo, I see no evidence suggesting that the file is Free content, meaning, that the file cannot be used unless permission is obtained and sent to OTRS OR unless the website specifically names the copyright status/licensing of the file. Please note that while you can upload a copyrighted photo of "Sue Lowden" (in fact, most works created by most state and local governments, unlike the federal government, are fully copyrighted) it would be in direct violation of WP:BLP, WP:IUP, and WP:NFCC#1 and would result in the deletion of the file. As a general rule of thumb, photos of living persons must be free. Hope that helps to answer your questions. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:47, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
What is the reason of deletion
You have deleted the photo of our president Dervis Eroglu. What is your reason of deletion there is no abuse of rights. Maverick16 (talk) 15:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- See WP:NFCC#1. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:48, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Re: Picture Radission Cincinnati.jpg
I took this picture so what is wrong with the copyright. Southwood Paul (talk) 00:24, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- The file was deleted because you did not include a source AND/OR because you failed to provide a license tag indicating the copyright status of the file (yes, you need to do this, even if the file is free - no exceptions). -FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:50, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, please weigh in – the farce is back and now hippo brought some friends with him. I really appreciate your input. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 01:31, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
- Adding time stamp. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 17:10, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Gary Johnson (producer) deletion
Gary Johnson is a valid entry for Wikipedia having produced, remixed or composed dozens of hits and music for TV shows over the past decade or more. He was part of Motiv 8 in the later 90s, remixing dozens of artists and reworking Addicted to Love with Robert Palmer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zh5MdjB5_Xk (he's the guy with the blonde hair in this video) As EuropaXL he remixed dozens of UK artists including Emma Bunton (Spice Girls) and Rachel Stevens (from SClub). He's composed the music for several international TV shows for the BBC, Channel 4, SKY and the Food Network. His entry on discogs is missing most of what he's responsible for, but I'd happily reference it if it helps you reinstate this page. Please reconsider!
- Adding time stamp. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 17:09, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Your threat to block
Hi Fastily, I'm not sure exactly what you want me to explain, or why you would threaten to block me indefinitely without an explanation. Have you had a chance to read the relevant talk page section yet? If you read it, I think it's clear there was some good discussion on this, mostly from other editors (none of whom were my "friends", and none of whom I "brought" from anywhere). There emerged a clear consensus that did not agree with Hearfourmewesique's view, so the content was removed. He then canvassed for some support, and edit-warred a little but the situation didn't get out of hand. If anyone has erred here, it is him. Am I missing something that I have done? If I've done something wrong, could you please explain what, with reference to policy and diffs, because I have no idea. Thanks for your help. --hippo43 (talk) 06:49, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- FYI, I've asked John, an admin who I've found to be reasonable in the past, to keep an eye on this situation. I'm a little concerned that our previous disagreement has caused you to assume I'm in the wrong here without giving the situation much thought. Thanks. --hippo43 (talk) 07:03, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- All evidence to the contrary; judging by your recent track record, I was under the impression you were violating the terms of your unblock from the indef. I'm only interested in knowing your opinion, thanks, and will be looking into the incident as necessary. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 17:09, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
RfA
I'm honored that Immunize nominated me, but I'm a little too busy right now to give the intelligent and thoughtful answers required of me. Go ahead and delete it whenever. Perhaps I can be renominated in a month or so. Thanks, P. D. Cook Talk to me! 16:31, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Alright then, thank you for being upfront about it. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 19:44, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Commons showing thru
for an explanation as to why I'm not using CSD F2 at the moment. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:40, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
I tagged this for G6 as it was commons showing thru IIRC.
The uploader seems concerned. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sfan00_IMG#File:Deutsche_Zeppelin_Reederei_flag.jpg
As you are more experienced I would appreciate you smoothing things over with them. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:16, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- The user apparently seems to have understood why the page was tagged for deletion. Looks like you did a good job explaining it to them. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:42, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Koudelka Prague
The warning (Dec 13), my response (Dec 16), your deletion (Dec 21)...
I know it was a long time ago, but do you have any idea how this happened? - TheMightyQuill (talk) 14:17, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- Apparently the file was orphaned again not long after you de-orphaned it. If there is still a need for the image, you are more than welcome to re-upload it. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:41, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- That's what I thought at first, but it was automatically removed from the page only after you deleted the image. I may get around to uploading it again, but I was just curious how this error might have happened. More curious than anything... - TheMightyQuill (talk) 00:20, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
admin request
yeah, i don't think i'd fit the requirement just yet. disregard my request, Qö₮$@37 (talk) 17:13, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- Alright, thanks for being upfront about it. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:41, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Much appreciated if you could put this on your watch-list and field some enquiries on it in relation to image issues especially.
Whilst I hope I understand some aspects of Image policy, I often like the back-up of more experienced contributors.
Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:09, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
- Certainly, I'm down with that! Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:08, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
SYS_logo.png
hello
I get a message from you that my file SYS_logo.png was deleted because of a missing copyright information.
Meanwhile I repeated the upload of the file 2 times, added that this is a foto by myself, and thet I put it under public domain.
I WILL NOT UPLOAD THE FOTO AGAIN.
Many people become wiki tired. What most urgantly would have to be removed, are self-denominated 'administrators' which lost all funcionality. Thats the same system like we had on the comunism.
As you can see from Linux distros, even for gratis things has a strong concurrence. wiki have to make efforts for survive in future, inclusive remove non-funcional people.
I let the article just without this picture. Its problem of wikis quality, not of me. If you want, you recover the picture youself
And in my own sites, I add this example to the reasons why wiki isn't trustworthy, playground for trolls and a self-denominated aristocracy
bye bye —Preceding unsigned comment added by SYS-Linux (talk • contribs) 19:29, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, um, instead of making egregious complaints, you could have elected to educate yourself by reading the text on the form you used to upload the file, where the whole process of uploading files is described in excruciating detail. Alternatively, you could have also chosen to read the warnings on your talk page which would have served the same purpose. If you don't know how to read instructions, then obviously, editing Wikipedia is not for you. Bye. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:06, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Aftermath Killing the Future photo on the Aftermath page was removed. I am not truly familiar with how this works, however, I assumed that I had provided proper trademark credit and authorization for the photo. I not only took the picture, but also managed the band and released the record on my label. Complete trademark, copyright and licensing is owned me. Can you assist me in having the photo appear on the page again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zoident (talk • contribs) 04:07, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
inclusion-exclusion-3sets.png
I apologize for neglecting to include a copyright tag in the file inclusion-exclusion-3sets.png. Does my image now comply with Wikipedia standards? Austinmohr (talk) 06:53, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
- No worries - yes, the fix you made will do just fine. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 19:27, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Regarding RfA
Yes you are right that currently i do not deserve to be an administrator. so you should proceed and delete my request, but do tell me that how much edits are required for RfA? —Preceding Amitabh.Divyaraj comment added by Amitabh1986 (talk • contribs) 13:44, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
- Alright then, thanks for being upfront about it. While there is no set number of edits required for RfA, most successful candidates have 8,000+ edits on average. However, it's really the quality of the edits that matters. Hope that helps to answer your question. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 19:29, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Is there something I'm not understanding?
| class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left; border: 1px solid silver; margin-top: 0.2em; " |- ! style="background-color: #CFC;" | Extended content
|- | style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white; font-size:112%;" |
|}
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing this template.
(This notice was added 03:37, 8 May 2010 (UTC) by Fetchcomms)
Alternate accounts
Hello. I saw you also edit under the account User:Fastilysock. What is the benefit of creating another account, and what do you use it for? Please answer on my talk page or at least leave a {{talkback}}. Thanks. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 04:45, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) (talk page stalker) As noted on User:Fastilysock, the account is for public computers (libraries, labs, etc.) which may have malicious (password-hacking) software. See the policy here. Thanks, mono 05:05, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
- For use on public networks (where one's account could possibly be compromised) and for use of automated tools (I make all the important edits off of my main account and don't use automated tools on it so people can actually find my edits without having to sort through a mass of huggle or twinkle edits.) -FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:02, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
- My answer seems rather redundant now... mono 05:05, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
- For use on public networks (where one's account could possibly be compromised) and for use of automated tools (I make all the important edits off of my main account and don't use automated tools on it so people can actually find my edits without having to sort through a mass of huggle or twinkle edits.) -FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:02, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Jim Halpert
How is Jim's FICTIONAL AIM screenname constructive while the car he drives is not?! 24.255.165.125 (talk) 19:32, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
The Offspring
Excuse me, I'm not trying to be a jerk or anything, but can you please tell me why you are reverting my changes on The Offspring article? That edit I made was not some speculation/rumor, or vandalism or a spam, it's just an update on their upcoming album made by their singer. If you want me to provide a better source, then that's fine. 206.53.147.72 (talk) 19:20, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
- My bad, thanks for bringing that to my attention. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 19:21, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
New vandal problems
It seems that an individual on 114.108.244.0/22 does not like some of the content on this page.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:30, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
May actually be 114.108.192.0/18. The /22 is doing the most damage lately.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:33, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
That is the case, as I've found more damage on Zyurangers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), Ohrangers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), Dairangers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), as well as Shinkengers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views).—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:40, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
And now on another page.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:19, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
- 114.108.244.0/22 blocked 6 months. I would have taken care of 114.108.192.0/18 too, but I'm not particularly comfortable blocking such a large range unless there's major disruption coming from it. For the time being, I think WP:RFPP will be sufficient for our purposes. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:42, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Fair-use Files with missing rationales
As you were kind enough to give me that toolserve link to help clear 'unlicensed' images..
Here's a useful link in return : Wikipedia:Database_reports/Non-free_files_missing_a_rationale
However, a lot of the images actually in the report DO have rationales, albiet ones not in a templated form.
It would be much appreciated if you could consider helping cleanup/expand some of the shorter rationales, given that most of the images I've found so far are 'in-use'.
Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:16, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks! I would be more than happy to help out here, time permitting of course :) Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:38, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
For some reason the uploader keeps de-tagging it... Am I misreading something in the page? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
- The file seems to have been deleted.... -FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:32, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Uploader claims to have added a copyright tag, I don't see it ? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:59, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
- also File:Cordoba qld aus-1.jpg Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
- The uploader blanked the page of File:Proton Satria Neo QLD AUS - 2.jpg, so I have tagged it with {{db-g7}}. As for File:Cordoba qld aus-1.jpg, I noticed the uploader added this, so I have tagged the file accordingly with {{pd-self}}. I think that should solve the problem. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:34, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Re "File copyright problem with File:Ragtime Wikipe-tan.PNG"
Uh, it's a derivative of a freely-licensed work by Kasuga...? I linked to it on the image page. The derivation was done by me under the "this isn't a very good image so I don't care about intellectual property so I'm licensing it equivalent to the original work" license. ZigSaw 06:26, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
- Alright, thanks for letting me know. I have made the appropriate adjustments. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 06:41, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
File source problem with File:Adventure Inc. cast.JPG
File:Adventure Inc. cast.JPG I have added additional source info which I thought I had covered in the other information section.--REVUpminster (talk) 07:03, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
- Could you please provide a specific source (e.g. Website link, ISBN of a book, magazine volume and page #, ect.)? Per one of Wikipedia's core policies, WP:V, the copyright status of all files must be verifiable by others, and this can only be done if you provide a specific source. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:13, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
- I seem to have lost my original source so have uploaded a new image from press kit. Failing that I could do a screenshot.--REVUpminster (talk) 09:27, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for going through the trouble to get that done. I have removed the deletion tag accordingly. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:49, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
I have removed the FfD tag you put on File:ColombiaBolívar.png, because it appears you hadn't nominated it for deletion, and didn't explain why you think it should be deleted. If you still want it to be delete, feel free to re-tag the image and make the nomination. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:03, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
- I've retagged the image. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:51, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Alex Raymond
I was following this instruction: "Please remove this template if you have successfully addressed the concern." Pepso2 (talk) 23:55, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
- I beg your pardon, but it doesn't appear you have resolved the concern. See WP:NFCC#8 - it refers to the article the file(s) are linked to, not fair-use rationale of the file itself. Adding critical commentary/scholarly discussion to the article and/or paragraph which pertains to the file would address the "fails WP:NFCC#8" concern. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:02, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Noronic photos
Please stop tagging the Noronic photos for deletion. Their fair use is clearly explained, so it doesn't matter what their copyright status is. -- Zsero (talk) 07:05, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
- Please refrain from removing image deletion notices from images you have uploaded unless you have addressed the noted concern. You need to provide a license tag for any image you upload, regardless of whether the file is free or non-free. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:10, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Mixing in: There is a template specifically for this purpose, {{Non-free unsure}}. It is said in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Non-free to be "deprecated", with a recommendation to investigate whether the work is in the public domain or not, but no one seems to have explained what is to be done if this cannot be easily determined. If I were in Zsero's place, and were confident of the fair-use rationale, I'd go ahead and use this tag — it seems clear that this is a real case that cannot be wished away, and I think the tag should be un-deprecated. --Trovatore (talk) 07:22, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
- More to the point, lack of a fancy template is not grounds for deletion. The copyright status is adequately explained in the files' descriptions. -- Zsero (talk) 10:34, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
- Will you stop adding spurious deletion tags to pictures that you know damn well are not subject to deletion. If your deliberately retagging them is not rollback-able vandalism, it's pretty damn close to it, so you can keep your rollback warning. Your claim that my removal of the deletion tag was "unexplained" is a deliberate falsehood, since you've seen the explanation. -- Zsero (talk) 03:03, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Vandalim That is Not Vandalism
Why did you revert my edits on Adrienne's picture? I got a clear message to state where the original source of the picture was found. That is not vandalism, that is where I originally found that image. Revert your edits back please, all I did was cite the source. User:Gabi Hernandez (User talk:Gabi Hernandez) --Gabriela Hernandez 20:36, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
- Funny, you seem to have reverted yourself. Rather than twist facts and make egregious claims, you could try simply resolving the issue. Just a thought. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:48, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Message
haha what the. I was like, who the hell? Anyway, I don't usually, just occasionally. If you want to visit the main site that I do, check here.
hEyyy XxMjF (talk) 03:09, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi there, Fastily! Thought you might be interested in Motto of the Day, a collaborative (and totally voluntary) effort by a group of Wikipedians to create original, inspirational mottos. Have a good motto idea? Share it here, comment on some of the mottos there or just pass this message onto your friends.
MOTD Needs Your Help!
Delivered By –pjoef (talk • contribs) 11:13, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Advice needed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sfan00_IMG#.7B.7BPD-Canada.7D.7D_images
My understanding was things needs sourcing even if uaing a PD tag? I'd like to be proved wrong though :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:35, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
- You're correct actually. Anything released under a PD license requires a source. See WP:V. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 01:07, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
- OK , They seem to have provided some limited source information on my talk, page.. That could at least downgrade the images concerned from a CSD , Care to update the images concerned, with somthing like "Source : Public domain photo currently held by <archive> original source undetermined." and then raise the issue with the projects that do image sourcing... ? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:39, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Image Rescue Corps
Maybe given this it's time to have a bunch of admins who know about various archive sources to set out to 'rescue' images that are in the public domain, but aren't currently sourced?
I'm considering reviewing the approach I take to my contribution to Wikipedia based on this, (and some the strongly worded comments made in respect of the row at Commons.) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:39, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
- Sounds like a fair idea. Although, I don't think reviewers should necessarily have to hold sysop rights. At any rate, if you can find several other interested users, it may be worthwhile to start a Wikiproject that addresses the no source issue. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 00:37, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
- Well , I was of the opinion, you'd know some people to mention the idea to :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:55, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Updating a file that had move to the commons
You may remember I needed help when creating the file http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Polls_Nov08-Jan10.png
I want to update it now, but it has been moved to something called the commons. How do I upload an update?? Thanks! --Can-eh-dian Redhead (talk) 05:39, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- The file is now located at Commons, which is a global image repository for all Wikimedia projects. Essentially, files on Commons can be used as if they were uploaded directly to Wikipedia. To upload a new version of the file, simply go here. Let me know if you have any other questions or are in need of assistance. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:25, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Stochastic resonance (book)
I tried starting an article with the above name and it won't let me because it says there already was an article with that name that was deleted by you in on Nov 21st, 2009, because it sounded like "advertising." I'm assuming the is the same book as the one I have in mind published by Cambridge. If so, could you please restore it to User:KnownLoop/Stochastic resonance (book) and I'll fix it up and write it properly. Then after your approval you can move it out of my User space. Also please advise me which bits particularly need attention that brought upon its deletion. I'll then ensure it gets done properly.KnownLoop (talk) 07:41, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
- Done. I have restored the deleted content to User:KnownLoop/Stochastic resonance (book). If you ask me, I think you may find WP:ADS, WP:YFA, and WP:MOS useful when revising your article. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:46, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
- Something's wrong. When I click on your above link I get a blank page. No restored content :-( Pls can u check? KnownLoop (talk) 08:34, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
- Go to the page and click "edit this page". -FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:47, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
- Great. That works. However, when I edit the result doesn't show up on that user page. Am I misunderstanding something? Forgive my novice questions. KnownLoop (talk) 16:48, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- The code bits, "
<!--" and "-->", which I placed at the beginning and end of the page are hiding the text from view. I did this intentionally so that the page would not be accidentally deleted again for whatever reason. If you feel you are ready to move the page into the article space, remove those bits of code and move the page. Hope that helps to clarify things. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:29, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
- The code bits, "
Muh-hund-original-rondellliten.JPG
Re: your revert of mu removing the db tag from Muh-hund-original-rondellliten.JPG. I agree with you: it should be removed if there's no valid copyright. I understand both of the policies that you are referring to. I was only saying that the speedy delete policy (WP:SD) doesn't apply because the image survived deletion once. The file should be deleted; I just thought the FfD was the correct forum for it. I don't have any particular interest in this file, so I won't debate process anymore. I was just trying to follow process as I understood it. JRP (talk) 22:49, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
- I beg your pardon, but the file was never up for speedy deletion. The tag that was placed on File:Muh-hund-original-rondellliten.JPG indicated that the file was missing information on it's copyright status. At any rate, the issue seems to have been resolved so I guess there isn't really much more to say. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:31, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Ancient template needs updating
I found this in checking my old contributions: {{Expimgsrc }} - Could you pass it on to someone able to bring it up to current specs?
It's survived a TfD so it's felt there is still some use for it. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:38, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- Certainly. If I get the opportunity, I will do that. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:33, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Image Copyright
Fastily,
Added the copyright to the image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cynthia_elbaum_1989.jpg
I am the owner and added the GNU copyright notice to it. Hopefully this has been done correctly.
Thank you for your message. Let me know if I need to do anything else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Templeofreason (talk • contribs) 20:34, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi. You closed Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 April 26#File:Kovpak.jpg as Keep, saying a solution was offered. But note that Rockfang merely stated the source of the image; he did not clear up the other issue, i.e. that the license tag is likely wrong. There seems little chance that the picture is from before 1943, and Rockfang's source does not appear to clear that up (if you can read Russian and think I am wrong, let me know). I further see you tagged it as a Commons candidate but it's unlikely the image would survive a deletion request there. Wknight94 talk 00:22, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
- My mistake. No, I could not read Russian even if my life depended on it; I assumed that the provided link was the source. That being said, I have deleted the file accordingly. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:57, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
... is actually for categories too :/ I know, the name is really misleading. —fetch·comms 03:22, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
- Well that was smart. Yeah, I just saw this. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:23, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
i was not vandalising rangers f.c. in europe the matches i was deleting are not official UEFA matches. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rangers1985 (talk • contribs) 05:42, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
As an uninvolved admin, would you keep a watch on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rich Zubaty and remove comments such as this and this? I have warned Lew Loot (talk · contribs) for his/her personal attacks on FisherQueen. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:32, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
block of User:Ellebelle1 on hold
I was thinking of giving some WP:ROPE here, checking back with you first. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:38, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
- That's fine by me. I trust your judgement. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:50, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
- Done Beeblebrox (talk) 22:17, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Voss photograph on Ian Bremmer's page that was deleted
The photographer, Stephen Voss, has given us permission to use his photograph of Ian Bremmer. What do I need to do to repost it? Or what does he need to do? Thanks, JaneEG
- You will need to verify the permission/copyright status of the file by sending an email to OTRS. Please see WP:PERMISSION and WP:DCP for more information. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 22:09, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Hey!
HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? has bought you a pint! Sharing a pint is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a pint, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Cheers!
- Nice to see you back on my watchlist :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:21, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the warm (or cold, if you will) welcome :) It's good being back. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 22:39, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Rollback
Hi, thanks for the information regarding acquiring rollback. I have taken this onboard and I am currently in the process of reverting as much vandalism as I can. --Ciaran M (talk) 22:26, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Can you tell me if the image is covered under Template:PD-US? CTJF83 chat 02:41, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
- I would think so. However, there is no way to verify this because no source was ever provided. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:44, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
- Hows this? That isn't the clearest/best image though. CTJF83 chat 02:46, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
- That'll do. File:SEAL IOWA.png restored. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 02:49, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
- Hows this? That isn't the clearest/best image though. CTJF83 chat 02:46, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Re: Einstein UK.jpg deletion
The discussion for this photo indicated that it was most likely PD and w/o copyright. It was also tagged, I believe, with a holdon notice, so it would avoid automatic deletion. Can you please check on this? Thanks. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 03:07, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, but that's not the feeling I got reading over Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 May 1#File:Einstein UK.jpg. User:Future Perfect at Sunrise nominated the file for deletion because he believed the file to be non-free. At any rate, I found Future Perfect at Sunrise's case to be more convincing. If you disagree with my interpretation, I encourage you to discuss further with User:Future Perfect at Sunrise here or start a deletion review. -FASTILY (TALK) 04:07, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
- Is it OK to re-upload under a non-free license, assuming it meets all criteria? If so, can I leave the original file name the same? --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 04:50, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, that's fine. Judging by the source of the file, I think it's safe to say that the file is non-free . Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 04:59, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
- Is it OK to re-upload under a non-free license, assuming it meets all criteria? If so, can I leave the original file name the same? --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 04:50, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Your assistance please
The record shows you deleted File:Ali-Abdul-Aziz-Ali.jpg, and File:Rawa photo of dead Taliban in Sultan Razia school.PNG. Can I ask who uploaded these images? Can I ask whether you know if the nominator advised anyone they had nominated them for deletion? Can I ask you to copy the source and {{information}} templates to User:Geo Swan/review/File -- Ali-Abdul-Aziz-Ali.jpg and User:Geo Swan/review/File -- Rawa photo of dead Taliban in Sultan Razia school.PNG.
The reason I ask is that they were on my watchlist, but I don't remember them -- and the second one at least would have been in the public domain, because Afghanistan is not a signatory to any international copyright agreements, and has no domestic copyright protection.
If the information portion of the files had been vandalized could you please copy the unvandalized copies?
Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 04:16, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Template for evaluation
Created so there was a slightly more polite way to deal with relativly new unlicensed images in some cases.
I term it a level0 response...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sfan00_IMG/Sandbox#un-imgproblem0
Obviosuly discretion to use existing level1 etc images notes would still exist:)
Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:00, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- It's a good idea and a decent draft. Do you need me to help you with it? -FASTILY (TALK) 23:34, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yes please , It needs an equivilant for the image description page , so that I can get those out of the list of
apparently 'unlicensed' images shown on toolserver.. Thanks for the offer of some help :)
BTW The level0 template could be considered part of the Image Rescue Corps idea, BTW? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:34, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
- Alright then, I'll add where I see fit. I agree that the current notification template we employ could use some updating. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:53, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Don't understand why CrowdMap was deleted
Hi Fastily,
I'm trying to understand why the CrowdMap page was deleted. I'm happy putting it in whichever format it needs to be to be conformant with Wikipedia guidelines. I also tried to put it in a similar voice to other similar products.
Can you please help me understand what was wrong with it? I'd like to recreate it, but I'd rather it not just be deleted again.
Stellsmi (talk) 17:55, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Stellsmi#Re:Don't understand why CrowdMap was deleted -FASTILY (TALK) 01:45, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi Fastily, please help me understand why you deleted Talk:Großer Waldstein for this recently created article? I was intended to recreate it to show its provenance from de.wiki and add the usual project boxes. Have I had missed something? Cheers. --Bermicourt (talk) 19:17, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
PS I suspect the issue here is that the bot that notifies links needing disambiguating then blanked the page after I had disambiguated the links. --Bermicourt (talk) 19:23, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
- Looking through the history of the deleted page, I see a grand total of two edits: a bot created the page and then requested it's deletion. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:46, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
thanks for deleting List of collateralized debt obligations
appreciate it... maybe someday someone can do it better than i did. Decora (talk) 00:45, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- No problem. You're always welcome to give it another shot if you wish. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:47, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
File:Stamp1953.jpg
Hey there Fastily, you recently removed {{di-disputed fair use rationale}} I had added to File:Stamp1953.jpg and replaced it with {{di-no fair use rationale}}. However, I had previously tagged it with {{di-no fair use rationale}}, only to have After Midnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) remove the tag, stating, "as some rationale, suggest F7". Basically, the tagging of this file has gone around in a circle. Which tag should really be applied? — ξxplicit 01:27, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- {{Di-no fair use rationale}}. Just from reading the tag, you should know this is the applicable tag; the file is missing sufficient fair use rationale, i.e., it's missing an explanation as to why it is covered by fair use. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:50, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
File for Deletion
Re this, I'm wondering if I could get a bit more of an explanation. I don't see how it meets WP:NFCI #5 or WP:NFC #8 as it is not used to depict the film it was from and it is not used for critical commentary. I don't see any difference between the use here and the example in the guideline of using a baseball card for barry bonds to show what barry bonds looks like without commentary to show why it is significant. The is no use in the article outside of a few words in the caption. Certainly not extensive critical commentary. In other words, using an image from a movie to show what a helicopter looks like without commentary to explain why it is significant. It's more than just the replaceablility I object to, it's also the usage. Having mentioned replaceablity, there are four aircraft of this exact model that are still in use today and the article is about the aircraft, not the paint on it. Thanks,--Terrillja talk 02:26, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- If anything, the file fails WP:NFCC#1. However, I saw no real consensus at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 May 8#File:JA9503 You Only Live Twice.jpg to keep or delete the file, so I closed the discussion as No Consensus. I'm afraid that there's not much I can do at this point, given the discussion that occurred. You may renominate the file for deletion if you wish, but I suggest discussing with the users who !voted keep. You may refer those users to me if they are giving you a hard time. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 02:32, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- One user !voted with zero explanation, one with a long explanation and one !voted delete with reasoning and one without a decent reason (a drawing?) so I see 1 valid, explained keep and one valid, explained delete, which is well within the closing admin's judgment to handle. If I thought I could reason with the person who uploaded it, I would but they have decided that I have no clue about the subject matter and are committed to "fighting it". WP:BATTLEGROUND much?--Terrillja talk 02:45, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Ping
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
--~TPW 02:27, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Strikeforce: Heavy Artillery
I'm sorry, but I don't understand what was wrong with my edit. 69.255.149.54 (talk) 04:03, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Reverting
May I ask why my edit was reverted on WRMA, I added a callsign meaning and a slogan. What's wrong with that? 71.252.203.166 (talk) 04:05, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- My bad, I have restored your edit. Thanks for letting me know. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 04:09, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for doing me the favour of reverting the edit. :) 71.252.203.166 (talk) 04:42, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Philippine Cable Channel Line-Up removed articles
Hello!!
May I ask that the user Active Banana are trying to removed Philippines Cable Channel especially channel line-up like SkyCable, Global Destiny Cable, Cablelink, Cable Star Iloilo among other and also include 3 Philippine DTH provider like Dream Satellite TV, G Sat, and Cignal Digital TV to know the current channels of the said cable in Philippines for unknown reason. How about the Asian Cable or Satellite Channel are now display their current channel line-up in their respective article but why the Philippines attacking the Philippines Cable and DTH articles???!!! He or she almost destroy anything without permission or any reason itself to put unknown warning or what so ever. Can you please block this user to immediately to teach him a lesson. I though he or she is not a Filipino, a vandalizer or even another Gerald Gonzales itself in disguised. It was reveal that he is an Indian Tamil national user he is reverted article about the Philippines especially in Philippines Cable and DTH articles. can you include him or her to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism or you can ask for a page to be protected at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection as I mention of these Philippine Cable and DTH articles, Can you block him as soon as possible, Im begging you! -- Puppyph (Puppyph•contribs) 01:30, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- This is hard to say. The user in question has several thousand edits, going all the way back to February of this year. It's possible that the user is a sock of Gonzales, but it's not his style (he tends to use a multitude of sleepers socks or goes IP hopping). If I were you, I'd recommend making a report at WP:ANI on this so that the community can provide some oversight. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 08:50, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Lock on Catholic Sex Abuse Cases
Thanks for the protection, but you forgot the Lock icon in the top right ;). -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 08:32, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Orphaned images
Hi Fastily, I've noticed you nominate a number of orphan images everyday, is there a holding pen for such images? I'd like to volunteer to check through the images and see which ones would be suitable for transfer to Commons, before they get nominated for deletion here. Is it within etiquette to transfer an image to Commons before the deletion review is finished here, as I would really like to save File:Tofu stacked 01.jpg. Anyway thanks for your work with this backlog.KTo288 (talk) 06:36, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, there is no real log or queue that I use. I compile a list of files I come across each day through a variety of methods and nominate them accordingly. If you disagree with any one of my nominations, on the grounds that you believe a given image should be moved to Commons, you have my permission to go ahead and move the image to Commons and then tag the file for deletion. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 08:55, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, I didn't want to step on anybodies toes by going and transfering files before the reviews had finished, and wow "there is no real log or queue", I've tried searching images on wikipedia and if that experience was anything to go by your list must be a real pain to compile. Maybe someone should talk to the developers about importing some of the the Commons image categorising bots here. Anyway thanks again.KTo288 (talk) 09:38, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- There was a tool to find orphaned images at http://toolserver.org/~jason/orphaned_images.php but right now it is broken however the owner JaGa assures me he will fix it within a few weeks. ww2censor (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Block Talk page editing too?
Under what circumstances is it appropriate to prevent a blocked user from continuing to edit his / her own Talk page, and to whom would one direct such a request? Blocked editor Razorbladesoup has not taken his block graciously and, while petulance doesn't bother me, I'd prefer not to have to keep an eye out for further personal attacks. See the history of his Talk page following your block: [80]. Thanks for any advice. JohnInDC (talk) 01:12, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Please Investigate Problems on BP (british Petroleum) Wikipedia Page: Intentionally Burying Section on Gulf of Mexico Oil Disaster, Changing Name of Oil Disaster to Hide it
Any attempts to correct this (following reasonable Wikipedia guidelines) are met with aggressive reverts and edits. Intentional spinning and manipulation of article in favor of BP? Can this task force investigate this?
Currently there is no easily recognizable section on the current Gulf of Mexico Oil Disaster, surprisingly since the US Government has held BP responsible. Instead the "Oil Disaster" Section in the article keeps being given obscure (hard to recognize) names (as if someone is trying to hide the section from the public).
That section also keeps getting pushed to the bottom of the article (attempts to bury it)?
It's as if the BP Public Relations department has staff people who are aggressively spinning the article. Could this Task Force investigate this?
75.166.179.110 (talk) 08:13, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Blocked user comments
Razorbladesoup (talk · contribs) appears to be misusing their talk page after being blocked. Brambleclawx 01:12, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
- Talk page access for User:Razorbladesoup disabled. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:44, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Citrix XenDesktop
Hi,
I'm continuously puzzled by why your organization continued to delete Citrix XenDesktop from Wikipedia.
We have experienced multiple issues here: 1. Our competitor's reference for some reason is never deleted. They are VMware View. 2. You have on numerous occasion redirected XenDesktop to Xen, which is completely wrong. 3. You have deleted content that were true but perhaps you got influenced by certain entity which leads to your action.
Please kindly explain your actions.
-Victor —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thuvictor (talk • contribs) 02:41, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Thuvictor#Re:Citrix XenDesktop -FASTILY (TALK) 00:45, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
Just a friendly reminder to please be a little critical when reviewing files moved to Commons, in this case the image was uploaded with the "AutoReplaceable fair use people" tag, which the unloader then changed to CC-BY-SA for no apparent reason a little later (no OTRS tickets or other claims of permission and it's sourced to an official website with no mention of CC license) while also adding a fair use rationale stating that no free licensed version could be found. Somehow I have my doubts about the validity of that CC license, and you are only supposed to "F8" a file if you are reasonably sure the license is correct and it otherwise meets all the listed criteria. Also while it's not a policy it's very helpful if you list the more dubious files you find for deletion over there as well, Commons is quite low on admins, so unless we raise a flag on Commons while reviewing Commons moves on this side it may take years before it comes to the attention of someone with a delete button on Commons otherwise.
I just happened to notice because I looked at the file yesterday but it was very late so I put off doing anything about it untill today when I noticed you had deleted it here already, just figured I'd drop you a note. Cheers. --Sherool (talk) 08:14, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
- I've been reviewing a large number of files in the category Category:Wikipedia files with the same name on Wikimedia Commons as of late, and well, after the 110th image or so, one starts to slowly go senile. At any rate, thanks for letting me know. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:48, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Article marked for deletion
Fastily - I submitted an article for a company I feel has had a significant impact on teaching in the science classroom and it was marked for deletion. (Vernier Software & Technology) I would like to rewrite the article but as others have mentioned, don't want it to just be deleted again... So, I'm wondering if I should try to more directly show why Vernier is a notable company and talk less about what they offer (aka products). I can cite numerous articles / sources for the impact their products have had in the science (and math) classroom as well as show the impact they have had in teh local/regional/national community through philanthropic activities and good business stewardship. Would that help ensure the article doesn't get marked for deletion?
Science ed (talk) 12:56, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Science ed#Re:Article marked for deletion -FASTILY (TALK) 00:49, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
User:Maczilla97
Hi Fastily. I noticed that you deleted some of the images Maczilla97 (talk · contribs) uploaded. This user has, despite the warnings on his talk page, continued to upload copyrighted images (he uploads album covers that he created himself from images he took from the Internet). I'd appreciate if could you delete these as well, and perhaps write him a message? Thanks, Theleftorium (talk) 14:43, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Nuked. The user is blocked indef anyways so I guess there isn't much point in leaving a message... -FASTILY (TALK) 00:52, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks! He was blocked after I posted the above message, so yeah, there's probably no point in leaving a message. Theleftorium (talk) 13:40, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Category:People self-identifying as having used recreational drugs
Hello, I'm curious as to why this was deleted. I had indicated on the talk page that I wanted it reviewed by my peers. I have no messages that this was done. Another editor took all of the pages I had put into the category out, and he then nominated it for deletion. I question his motives in doing so as he likes to put notches in his belt for the number of categories he gets deleted. Please point me toward the discussion, if there was indeed one. LovelyLillith (talk) 17:29, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
- I deleted the page per WP:CSD#C1, in which empty categories are routinely deleted for housekeeping/cleanup. I recommend contacting the editor who removed all the pages from the category and inquiring as to why they did what they did. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:54, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Admin Coaching
Hey Fastily, in case you haven't noticed I have responded on the coaching page about continuing and have reviewed everything. No rush my friend, just letting you know in case you missed.--SKATER Speak. 20:18, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, of course. Will get on that ASAP. Sorry for making you wait. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:54, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Hey Fastily
I was patrolling the recent changes and I got another speedy deletion candidate: Holocaust conspiracy. Tommy2010 00:07, 18 May 2010 (UTC) :)
Wikirotimi.jpg
Thanks for deleting this file. Having gone to the trouble of hassling the photographer for the correct copyright permission and emailed it to the correct email address on the 6th May 2010; the day after I was requested to so, where no-one bothered to either contact me or put a response code on the image, I am beginning to wonder why I bother contributing to Wikipedia at all. Jkslouth (talk) 00:38, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- Will check with OTRS to verify your claim. Sorry for inconvenience. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:39, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- Copyright status verified by OTRS; File:Wikirotimi.jpg has been restored along with proper documentation. -FASTILY (TALK) 06:18, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Abra, Kadabra, and Alakazam
WTH. Why did you delete it? I was trying to get somebody to tell me HOW to say where the source was, so I could add it. But nobody was replying. The image was created by putting together three images made by Sugimori, which is released in several promotional packages. I somewhat implemented that into the image's page. Did you even look at it, or did you just delete it because it still had the template? Blake (Talk·Edits) 00:59, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- Do you have an exact external link, book ISBN, newspaper/magazine edition & pg number, ect. where the file can be found? If you can provide me with that, I'll restore the page pronto. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:00, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- I am not sure you understand. The images are released by a number of sources. One online source is here. I merged the 3 images of Abra, Kadabra, and Alakazam together using GIMP. If you want an exact source from where the images came from, I got the art from Bulbapedia, because they have the most cleaned up ones. All of the Pokemon species images such as File:Sugimoris025.png say "Promotional press kit material for the Pokemon series. Artwork is by Ken Sugimori for the video games and players guides." Can you restore the image, or is merging them not allowed? Blake (Talk·Edits) 01:13, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- Merging is allowed. For us copyright enforcers, it's known as a derivative work. If you can provide me with an exact external link for each of the images you used to create the merged image, I'll restore the file with the links and add a note on the file description page that the file is a derivative work. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:27, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- I am not sure you understand. The images are released by a number of sources. One online source is here. I merged the 3 images of Abra, Kadabra, and Alakazam together using GIMP. If you want an exact source from where the images came from, I got the art from Bulbapedia, because they have the most cleaned up ones. All of the Pokemon species images such as File:Sugimoris025.png say "Promotional press kit material for the Pokemon series. Artwork is by Ken Sugimori for the video games and players guides." Can you restore the image, or is merging them not allowed? Blake (Talk·Edits) 01:13, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- Abra, Kadabra, and Alakazam. But like I said, all of the other Pokemon images just say the source is the promotion material released for the games. Should we source them with a Bulbapedia link also? Blake (Talk·Edits) 02:42, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Dogfighter (2010 computer game)
Hello, Fastily. It looks like you have speedily deleted Dogfighter (2010 computer game). As I posted on the article's talk page, I was really thinking that it didn't meet the criteria for speedy deletion. It seemed reasonably encyclopedic and not exclusively promotional, and I thought the subject was probably notable as well. Can you please restore the article? I have at least one editor who has already volunteered to submit it to the regular Articles For Deletion process, which I think would be much more appropriate. (If you reply here I will see what you say.) — Mudwater (Talk) 01:24, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
File:MercuryFoodChain-01.png
Greetings, this note is in regards to the "File:MercuryFoodChain-01.png" which appears to have been mistakenly deleted. The initial issue was that the file had been released by the original authors under a CC license that didn't allow commercial use. The original authors have since released this image under a cc-by-3.0 license which is acceptable to Wikipedia. This was all present in the discussion, so I'm wondering why the file was deleted anyway? Moby69 (talk) 19:52, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
I was led to believe that I didn't need to contact OTRS since the issue was resolved by the original author and therefore the image would not be deleted. The file has clearly been released under an appropriate cc-by-3.0 license and this can be verified on the original site. What do I need to do to get the image back? Moby69 (talk) 05:00, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- I see it now. File restored. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:39, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Left you a message bro
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
You're got some kind of problem, dude
| class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left; border: 1px solid silver; margin-top: 0.2em; " |- ! style="background-color: #CFC;" | Resolved; nothing left to see here. Thanks to everyone who provided input.
|- | style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white; font-size:112%;" |
|}
Files for Deletion
Following on from the above section, and per the instructions as WP:FFD, Skookum1 has a point. I'm not exusing the PAs above but the instructions at FFD clearly state to notify the uploader that a file has been nominated for deletion. Skookum1 was denied the chance to defend at least 3 files that were nominated for deletion. Would you be willing to revert the deletion and then open a new FFD discussion on each and notify Skookum1 of the discussion so that he has the chance to comment on the proposal? It may be that the files are deleted, or it may be that they are kept, but I feel that due process has not been followed in these cases. Mjroots (talk) 09:12, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- Er...sorry? The files were never listed at FFD. If I'm not mistaken, they were tagged with di-file deletion tag. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:42, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering if you can reconsider my request for protection of this article. That nutcase has hit again with a new named sock and an IP sock and is obviously intending to keep this insanity up. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 13:18, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- Done Page protected for a week. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:43, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks :-) -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 22:03, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
User:Fbot
Hi, I've asked to an italian burocrat about the usurpation. Usually we do it only for user with no edits, and it:fbot has made 3 edits in 2008. I don't know if he'll satisfy the request. I'll let you know as soon as possible. Bye Jalo 15:42, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Why have you deleted my page?
I built the page Nelson Rand- I am in no way connected to him. He is a journalist and published author. He has a book deal with Maverick House, so how the hell is this "unambigous promotion"? If I can't biult a page for a published author then what's the point of Wikipedia? Why have you done this? Please explain and if possible put my page back up now. This is very very annoying. Again as per above comments, I was given no notice that this deletion was going to take place —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fiedorczuk (talk • contribs) 17:14, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- I've looked at this and think there are enough independent sources to suggest notability, did not think it so unambiguous advertising to warrant a speedy, and have restored and userfied the article for improvement. Rodhullandemu 17:44, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Your deletionism
Your will to delete images without even BOTHERING to try to get them OTRS ticketed or approved is potentially extremely damaging to the encyclopedia. I am one of our most experienced editors and went out of my way to upload the entirety of images for 22 Jermyn Street and spoke to Henry Togna the guy who owns the place before it was demolished who provided these images freely to use. These images were highly valuable and will never be replaceable. Please reatore these photographs and restore them in the article asap and I will recontact him and try to get OTRS tickets on them. Dr. Blofeld White cat 21:14, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- If you want me to help you, and I'm more than willing to, you could start off with a more pleasant tone. Otherwise, I'm done here. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:46, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Toe Juice
I am extremely upset about your deletion of a page while I was in the process of making it compliant with Wikipedia guidelines. You will need to explain the deletion of this page in light of existing articles including iPod, Wonder Bread and Sharpie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Douglaswitt (talk • contribs) 21:43, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Douglaswitt#Re:Toe Juice -FASTILY (TALK) 21:48, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
LDN Research Trust
I have just created a page for the UK based registered charity The LDN Research Trust, of which I work directly with the Trustees and I have the position of Fundraising Director.
The information I had submitted for the LDN Research Trust was our OWN property and as we took part in the BIGON LDN Glasgow Conference there was text used, with our permission, for their promotional website.
I am in no way trying to market or promote anything. We are a UK based registered charity and are totally non profit. run solely by volunteers Please could I ask that you therefore reinstate the page that I have just spent 2 hours on. I would appreciate this very much
My contact email is (E-Mail removed for security purposes) the website address is http://www.ldnresearchtrust.org/
Where you will find our information and me named as the fundraising director.
Please let me know when this has been done.
thank you
sally darin-brame —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ldnresearch (talk • contribs) 23:14, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
You should be voted off the island
Fastily, you are worthless and biased as an editor. You demonstrate that you are more about defending your personal biases than about being a meaningful contributor to Wikipedia. I would like to know how we rate the administrators at Wikipedia so we can get you voted out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Douglaswitt (talk • contribs) 23:48, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- Deja vu, Don't attack other editors.--SKATER Speak. 23:49, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Did you remove the deletion notice on the Royce Garner article? Prsaucer1958 (talk) 00:10, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- according to this, Douglaswitt did--SKATER Speak. 00:15, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Home Run King
Being new to Wikipedia, I wonder what makes Home Run King notable. It appears to be nothing more than a press release for a common video game. Prsaucer1958 (talk) 09:39, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- Apparently so. But it does meet the general notability guideline. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
External Links
Genetran (talk) 14:42, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Genetran#Re:Mirus Bio LLC -FASTILY (TALK) 22:24, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted File
How come my file was deleted and I was not notified? Sophie (Talk) 18:25, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- Er... I beg your pardon, but if I'm not mistaken, I have never deleted any of your files... -FASTILY (TALK) 23:17, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- sorry, my old username was...sdg...something or other. It was the spoken version. the file was The Game (mind game) Sophie (Talk) 13:01, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Removal of Aquarama images- Critical for restoration
These images were taken from an advertising phamplet promoting Aquarama (only one may exist). The document has "NO COPYRIGHT" information printed on it. The company that owned Aquarama is defunct. The building has been demolished and achived photos are "extremely" rare and none compare to these. This phamplet was part of the press material to attract visitors and there is not indication that they intended to copyright it. So I presented it as public domain. Most importantly only these images can capture both the structure and context to enchance the article, otherwise readers will not get the full value of the article.
Please restore these crtical images:
File:AquaramaArtistRendition.JPG.
File:AquaramaTheateroftheSeaEntrance1963BrochureInside.jpg. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pretzelfactory (talk • contribs) 21:37, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- I deleted your files because they were missing source information for more than 7 days. If you have a source and still feel it is imperative that the file(s) remain on Wikipedia, you are more than welcome to reupload the files, with added source information of course. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:19, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
File:TARDIS2.jpg
Hello... you deleted the image File:TARDIS2.jpg per a "corrupt file" speedy - but it appears to display correctly to me. I have thus restored it as it is used in a number of articles. --Ckatzchatspy 22:11, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- The file is on the Wikimedia Commons. What I deleted was an unaffiliated image description page by the same name. Please undo your restore or I'm afraid I'll have to take this to WP:ANI. I have no interest in wheel warring. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 22:13, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, but per your own edit summary, you deleted the image per speedy category F2("Corrupt or empty image: Images that MediaWiki is unable to read or generate resized thumbnails of, or that contain superfluous and blatant non-metadata information"). That is very different from deleting a page, and the image appears to clearly be present. Furthermore, from looking at the one on Commons, it only lists one link to EnWiki (whereas this one lists over one hundred). I feel compelled to ask if you may have mistakenly either entered an incorrect rationale or perhaps inadvertently deleted the file by mistake. (As well, why on earth are you making threats about ANI posts? This hardly warrants such action.) --Ckatzchatspy 22:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- Negative - I meant to do exactly what I meant to do. Media files are quite different from any other page you will encounter on Wikipedia. When a file is uploaded, a separate file description page is created for the file. So essentially, when uploading a file, an editor actually creates two separate pages, which can both be found together under the file name. What seems to have happened was that when the file was transferred to Commons, the administrator who processed (WP:CSD#F8) the file failed to delete both pages, leaving the image description page, which should have been deleted along with the file. Relevant text may be found at mw:Files, if you're interested. Thus, as you can clearly see, my deletion of the file was purely for the purposes of maintenance and cleanup, which is why I'm unfortunately going to have to make an ANI post if you disagree :/ -FASTILY (TALK) 22:32, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, but per your own edit summary, you deleted the image per speedy category F2("Corrupt or empty image: Images that MediaWiki is unable to read or generate resized thumbnails of, or that contain superfluous and blatant non-metadata information"). That is very different from deleting a page, and the image appears to clearly be present. Furthermore, from looking at the one on Commons, it only lists one link to EnWiki (whereas this one lists over one hundred). I feel compelled to ask if you may have mistakenly either entered an incorrect rationale or perhaps inadvertently deleted the file by mistake. (As well, why on earth are you making threats about ANI posts? This hardly warrants such action.) --Ckatzchatspy 22:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)Further to this, why did you rewrite Template:Db-f2 and MediaWiki:Deletereason-dropdown to add terms that are not listed on the CSD:F2 policy page? Come on, let's finish hashing this out instead of reverting each other. Please. --Ckatzchatspy 22:34, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- With respect to CSD:F2, it appears to apply specifically to images, not to description pages:
As the templates must reflect the policy, we cannot rewrite those templates without first getting consensus for similar changes to that policy. Second, with respect to the image, from what I can tell we are dealing with two separate image files (even though they may be identical). The one on EnWiki has the URL http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c3/TARDIS2.jpg, while the one on Commons has the URL http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c3/TARDIS2.jpg (note the "commons" subdirectory instead of the "en" subdirectory). --Ckatzchatspy 22:49, 19 May 2010 (UTC)"F2. Corrupt or empty image. Images that MediaWiki is unable to read or generate resized thumbnails of, or that contain superfluous and blatant non-metadata information."
- (edit conflict) I've started a thread at WP:AN#WP:CSD#F2. Alas, you make a fair case; I see no explicit justifying text. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:52, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- With respect to CSD:F2, it appears to apply specifically to images, not to description pages:
(outdent)So, which file is EnWiki referencing? My impression is that we are still using the local version, given a) the different URL and b) the fact that the example image you listed at AN/I clearly display a "Commons" notice, whereas the TARDIS image does not. --Ckatzchatspy 22:59, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- The TARDIS image description page did reference the Commons page when it was first tagged. When you restored, you restored both the file and it's image description page. At the moment, en.wiki is referencing the local copy, because both necessary pages are present. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:08, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for the RFA cleanup - I remembered to check that the tally was accurate, but forgot the rest after dealing with the MFD. 7 05:15, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Help!
I was trying to restore a previous version of List of PlayStation 3 games by ClueBot, but it's timing out, so it doesn't work. It probably needs a drastic rollback. mechamind90 06:19, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
RfA thanks
|
|
Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 99 support, 9 oppose, and 2 neutral. Your support was much appreciated. |
Regards -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 16:57, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Your opinion please...
I noticed that several images of Omar Khadr have been deleted recently.
If File:Alleged Khadr 3.png, File:Alleged Khadr Waving.png and File:Khadr's Colleague.png are the images I think they are, then they should all have been tagged with {{PD-Afghanistan}} and moved to the commons.
The deletion log says you deleted the first two images. I can't figure out who deleted the third image.
I know some contributors have doubts about the {{PD-Afghanistan}} liscense. Their opinions on images from Afghanistan vary.
- Some objectors acknowledge that images taken in Afghanistan are without any copyright protection -- but only if they were first published in Afghanistan.
- Some objectors acknowledge that images taken in Afghanistan are without any copyright protection -- but only until they are published outside of Afghanistan. They maintain that once the images are published outside of Afghanistan they belong to who-ever first published them in a country that is a signatory to International intellectual property rights agreements, without regard to whether that individual or organization had any connection to the original photographer.
I acknowledge that there may be some merit to the position of the objectors. The law can be highly counter-intuitive. I wouldn't want our consensus as to how to interpret the copyright status of these images to be influenced by WP:ILIKEIT. And, for some time I have expressed the wish that the Wikimedia Foundation get the professional opinion of a lawyer, or lawyers, who specializes in intellectual property issues on the copyright status of images from nations like Afghanistan with no copyright protection.
However, until the WMF gets that professional opinion, I think we should go with the consensus on images like this, so far -- which has been that they should be kept.
If you agree with me, in your opinion, what is the next step? Do you think you have the authority to re-instate images from Afghanistan that should have born a {{PD-Afghanistan}} liscense? If you don't agree, in your opinion, what is the next step?
One last question -- who uploaded these images? Was it User:Sherurcij?
Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 21:08, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
- I just checked User talk:Sherurcij, and saw this request from you. My questions about these images were not prompted by a request for my input from Sherurcij. I simply noticed that these had been deleted.
- On his talk page I recognized one other image you wrote to him about: File:HagiFiz2.jpg that I believe qualified for {{PD-Afghanistan}} liscencing and porting to the commons.
- Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 21:26, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
- Er...I'm not quite sure I follow you here, but I'll do my best to answer...I deleted File:Alleged Khadr 3.png and File:Alleged Khadr Waving.png because they were missing fair use rationale and were tagged for more than 7 days with {{subst:nrd}}. A file with the name File:Khadr's Colleague.png has never existed, ever. File:HagiFiz2.jpg was missing a source and was tagged with {{subst:nsd}} for more than 7 days. If you're suggesting that I restore these files despite their missing essential information on their copyright statuses, you know I can't agree to that. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:50, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
File:Phantom ray rollout.jpg
Sorry about that. I meant F-8. While I'm here do you know why File:Future Combat Sytems.jpg still hasn't been deleted. It's been sitting there for months. Marcus Aurelius (talk) 22:54, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
- It's probably because there's a fat backlog - Category:Wikipedia files with the same name on Wikimedia Commons & Category:Wikipedia files on Wikimedia Commons. At any rate, file deleted. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 22:57, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Are editors allowed to keep advertising in their User space? Everard Proudfoot (talk) 22:59, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
- The page is marked as a draft with an intent to improve the text, so technically, yes. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:01, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
- They stuck it in their User space almost a month ago and did not come back to work on it. I've listed it at mfd. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 23:03, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm trying to upload an image on behalf of my organization, the Vinyl Roofing Division of the Chemical Fabrics and Film Assoc. It is a photo of one of our roofs - but it keeps getting deleted. How can I ensure that it is not? Which license should I use? Koskim (talk) 23:10, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
- Apparently you indicated that only non-commercial or educational use of the file is allowed. Unfortunately, we cannot accept files with such licensing restrictions so these files are deleted on sight. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:12, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
regarding entry for US bankcard services
Hi Fastily,
I'd like to add a page for my company: US BANKCARD SERVICES. The page was marked as advertisement and deleted. I'd like to know a good format to submit my content without it being marked as ad. We are not internally putting ad here on wiki, we just want to be visible.
Thanks for any help you may provide.
William
- User talk:Usbsi#Re:regarding entry for US bankcard services -FASTILY (TALK) 02:01, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Removed PROD on Center for Khmer Studies
I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Center for Khmer Studies, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! - A Center funded by the Rockefeller Foundation and the Henry Luce Foundation is most probably notable. A quick search revealed several Goggle Scholar hits in independent works. Additionally, this was a creation by a relatively new editor that we should encourage and mentor. Even though it might read like an advert today, it can be improved and we should all work toward that goal.--Mike Cline (talk) 13:17, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Automatic pistol
Hi Fastily. Please see Automatic pistol, where numerous IP users are persistently vandalizing the page with edits such as this one. Per another user's post on the talk page, they are discussing the vandalism [http://boards.4chan.org/k/res/6100817 here] at 4chan. ROG5728 (talk) 21:23, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
A protection of the talk page there (Talk:Automatic pistol) may also be necessary. IP users such as 186.13.241.158, 71.226.250.181, and 88.104.121.146 are blanking and changing other editors' comments there. Specifically, these IPs have been changing one editor's comment to say that the editor vandalized the page, and/or removing another editor's comment that pointed out the 4chan discussion about the vandalism. Thanks. ROG5728 (talk) 22:01, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- I've warned all of the IPs. If the disruptive editing from any of the IPs continues, report that IP to WP:AIV. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 06:16, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
You're not Jampilot
I believe Jampilot (talk · contribs) borrowed your user namespace design and some of the links still sweeps one off to your page. I admit I was momentarily confused. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 09:39, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- Well, as long as there is no malicious intent involved, I guess there's not much we can do about it :/ -FASTILY (TALK) 18:26, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- I would gladly ask him to (at the very least) change the links, but he's one of those users who doesn't seem to realize there's anyone else around here lol – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 18:27, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Tons of images without FURs
Hi Fastily. I hope you don't mind me asking for your assistance. Brianmcfa (talk · contribs) has uploaded tons of images [81] without including a source or FUR on any of the image description pages. What should be done here? The user has been notified of the problem, but doesn't seem to care (check his talk page history)... Theleftorium (talk) 17:54, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- Warn and mass tag. I'll take care of it. Thanks for letting me know. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 18:26, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot! :) Theleftorium (talk) 19:57, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Slang CfD
I'm pretty sure the outcome of the slang CfD was, at the very least, "no consensus". A number of issues were raised during the discussion that were not fully satisfied, and the evidence for "keep" was rather weak. —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 18:16, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- Well, the result would have been the same whether I used "keep" or "no consensus" - file categories would have been retained anyways. If you like, I can change the bold text, but I don't see how that makes a difference. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:28, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Mark Kobayashi-Hillary
i would ask you to reconsider your speedy deletion of Mark Kobayashi-Hillary: notable per 2 independent reviews of his written work; in no way shape or form an advertisement. Pohick2 (talk) 18:17, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- Looking through the deleted diffs, I noticed you were working on cleaning the article up. Sorry for the inconvenience. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:31, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Anusaaraka page deleted ?
This comes to your speedy deletion of anusaaraka article . Anusaaraka is a free opensource software available under GNU GPL license. It is a major academic research activity jointly carried out by IIIT-H , UOHYD, CIF. Please visit the project homepage for details. You can ask any clarification about the article. Thanks Anudev (talk) 18:20, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Anudev#Re:Anusaaraka page deleted ? -FASTILY (TALK) 18:33, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
RFA
Hey Fastily, I got your message about the RfA. I'd like to attempt to at least try to become an admin, even though the chances are very small. Yours, --水の男の子 (talk) 18:23, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- Please don't go through with it. You can keep building on it until your truly ready but not now. Marcus Aurelius (talk) 18:28, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
I had this same discussion with him just two days ago, when he was in the middle of the uploading, and I warned him that he needed to provide fair use rationales for ever one of those images. He got hostile and told me that he's been here long enough to know what he was doing, and when I warned him that the images might get deleted, he said he would just re-upload them. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 21:12, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Like I told Mr. Proudfoot before, I will get to it, just be patient. I wanted to have the pages they're used on in place. I should have no problem getting at least all of the basics done by the "deletion" date. It's pretty obvious to anyone that looks at his talk page he tends to basically try to irritate people with a happy trigger finger.
Selected Publications
- first demonstration that plasmid DNA could be delivered effectively to the rodent liver in mice using rapid intravascular injections (Budker et al., Gene Therapy 3:593, 1996)
- first demonstration that plasmid DNA could be delivered effectively to skeletal muscle cells in rodents using rapid intravascular injections (Budker et al., Gene Therapy 5:272, 1998)
- first demonstration that ‘caged’ DNA-containing nanoparticles are resistant to aggregation under physiologic salt conditions (Trubetskoy et al., Bioconjugate Chemistry 10:624, 1999)
- first demonstration of siRNA-mediated knockdown of an endogenously expressed gene in mice (Lewis et al., Nature Genetics 32:107, 2002)
- development of low-toxicity, DNA-containing nanoparticles for gene delivery to lungs (Trubetskoy et al., Gene Therapy 10:261, 2003)
- development of the clinically viable, high efficiency Pathway IV™ method for delivering plasmid DNA into mammalian skeletal muscle (Hagstrom et al., Molecular Therapy 10:386, 2004)
- development of a genetic immunization method in research animals by rapid intravenous delivery (Bates et al., Biotechniques 40:199, 2006)
- development of the Dynamic PolyConjugate™ technology for targeted delivery of siRNA to liver cells in mice (Rozema et al., PNAS 104:12982, 2007)
- development of a plasmid vector providing sustained liver-specific transgene expression in excess of one year following a single injection (Wooddell et al., Journal of Gene Medicine 10:551, 2008)
- Adding time stamp. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 17:15, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Copyright of my photo
Hello! It is my private photo. What kind of copyrights do you need?
- Could you please indicate the name of the file in question please? Thanks, FASTILY (TALK) 22:53, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Never mind. It was on my user page User:Skoglund. Actually, I don't know who owns the copyrights for this photo. I know you must follow rules but I think some rules are stupid. You are the first site that asked for the copyrights but I understand that you had some problems with governments so I respect your desicion.
- Quite a few sites respect copyright law, which protects images from being used in ways that their creators didn't intend. If you're bothered by the existence of these laws and live in a country with some form of democracy, there are probably avenues for expressing your concerns.--~TPW 21:55, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- I respect your policy but it is the first time I was asked about my photo so I was surprised. I have it on MySpace and Facebook and many other sites. User:Skoglund.
The photo you marked for deletion
I have sorted File:Abedecian.jpg, but it was obviously my own photo so why such harshness, I feel sorry for new users! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abedecian (talk • contribs) 15:27, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- If you don't provide information on copyright status, I am obligated to tag the file. It's just that simple. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 17:08, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deletion requests.
Hi! There are many images you are nominating for deletion that are perfectly fine and usable. You should mark them with the {{MoveToCommons}} template instead. --Beao 16:31, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- If you disagree with any of my nominations, you have my permission to move them directly to Commons as soon as you see them. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 17:06, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Konxari Cards
Hi Fastily,
I created a page for Konxari Cards, a fairly well known form of Cartomancy that doesn't already exist on Wikipedia. When I first submitted the entry, I didn't have time on that particular day to add any links from other online sources. Rightly so, it was immediately tagged for deletion.
However, several days later I found over 20 links and many other wiki crossover areas. I made many additions and corrections, but the page was still deleted seven days later.
I'm asking that I can re-submit a completed article for Konxari. Please let me know. Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Divinationnation (talk • contribs) 21:37, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Divinationnation#Re:Konxari -FASTILY (TALK) 05:23, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Spice Market Buffet
I'm going to request that you reconsider the speedy deletion of Spice Market Buffet. If you look at the history, your will find a long well referenced article. Then the anon that nominated it for deletion demolished the article before nominating it for deletion. Personally this should probably be restored to the 2009 version wiping out the anons revisions. If you decide to restore it, please also restore the talk page. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:50, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- If I restore the page, would you be willing to actively work on cleaning it up and sourcing it? -FASTILY (TALK) 05:23, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Admin
I do attend to still aplly for adminship.--Mager123 (talk) 01:23, 23 May 2010 (UTC)mager123
Followup to Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Hassocks5489
Regarding your note at User talk:Hassocks5489. The RFA was created by User:Minimac, not Hassocks5489. Hassocks5489 declined the offer anyway ([82]). East of Borschov (talk) 04:52, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, of course. Page deleted accordingly. Thanks for letting me know. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:24, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
User:Darkhelmet322
Hey Fastily. Sorry for bothering you again, but I don't know who else to turn to. Can you take a look at User:Darkhelmet322's image uploads? He has uploaded 30 files without giving any license, and many files also lack source and author information. I think many of them might be copyrighted as well. Could you do a mass tagg, like you did with User:Brianmcfa, and/or talk to him on his talk page? I would appreciated it if you could. Thanks, Theleftorium (talk) 10:55, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
"Unmove" needed
I see that you've deleted Europäische Kultur und Wirtschaft (ECUE) and its associated talk page. When the user moved his user page to that title, he also moved his talk page to Talk:Europäische Kultur und Wirtschaft (ECUE). Could you restore that content as User talk:Alias 79 (except, I guess, for the requested move, which really was intended for the article's talk page and not for his own)? Deor (talk) 18:17, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
tb
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
CTJF83 chat 02:33, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
File:Swa 1andahalfd1937stamp.jpg
Dear Fastily,
Hi. I see you tagged File:Swa 1andahalfd1937stamp.jpg for needing a source and threatening deletion. I have added a source but am not sure if it is in the right place. i.e. I think it is in the wrong place. Is it OK now? Should I have been notified of this potential deletion? Also I was wondering about uploading a cropped version of the picture here [83] to include just the post mark (and bits of the stamp in the cropping) in the hope that postmarks might not be copyrighted. But won't if you think they are. Best wishes, (Msrasnw (talk) 19:16, 23 May 2010 (UTC))
- Our friend Ww2censor has magically addressed the first of the points above - but the other issues remain. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 21:25, 23 May 2010 (UTC))
- I am no expert on South African copyright law and I know no more than you in regards to whether the postmark is copyrighted or not. To be safe, I recommend you use the current file, unless you are certain of the copyright status of the other file you wish to upload. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:53, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- Perhaps I will ask about postmarks elsewhere but with regards to one of the above questions "Should I have been notified of this potential deletion?" I think it might be nice to let people know on their talk page when you are proposing to delete things they have contributed as it is easy to miss things if you don't watch lots of pages. (Msrasnw (talk) 10:21, 24 May 2010 (UTC))
- (talk page stalker) Actually it was not magic! Regarding the 1985 postmark, I would say this is definitely copyright even if you removed all of the stamp images from the background as it would still not be just common text and graphics. It has to do with whether there is any artistic elements to the image and when it was used. What is the purpose? ww2censor (talk) 22:37, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- Dear Ww2censor, Hi - my hope had been, which in light of your response has no chance and will not be pursued, to provide an image to allow readers to identify the postmark (Marcophily is a new word for me!) which is mentioned in my little article on the lovely little Zwillinge locos. I think it best to leave it for now and add the image in 30 or so years time in the unlikely event that I am still around. Best wishes (22:54, 24 May 2010 (UTC))(Msrasnw (talk) 23:10, 24 May 2010 (UTC))
Expansion desired regarding unblock request
At User talk:BoogaLouie, you reviewed an unblock request with a rather opaque reason: "Block evasion through sockpuppetry? No." Can you expand on your reasoning for refusing the request? Do you have proof that the editor has been sockpuppeting? I do not have access to admin tools so color me curious... Binksternet (talk) 03:30, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- See [84]. BoogaLouie would appear to have used socks to evade his block for disruptive editing. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:57, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, but did you check Khoikhoi's assumption? I do not see the evidence that demonstrates User:RevolutionExpert is a sockpuppet of BoogaLouie. I have examined RevolutionExpert's few edits for similarity of style, and I do not see WP:DUCK in action. Did somebody perform a checkuser test? Binksternet (talk) 12:14, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- Not being the blocking administrator, I do not have that answer. I suggest you query the blocking administrator, User:Khoikhoi. If Khoikhoi is unable to provide an adequate explanation, I will happily unblock BoogaLouie. -FASTILY (TALK) 06:04, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, but did you check Khoikhoi's assumption? I do not see the evidence that demonstrates User:RevolutionExpert is a sockpuppet of BoogaLouie. I have examined RevolutionExpert's few edits for similarity of style, and I do not see WP:DUCK in action. Did somebody perform a checkuser test? Binksternet (talk) 12:14, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
User:Fbot
I've made the request on behalf of you. I suppose we'll have a response in a week. Bye Jalo 11:06, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
Hi Fastily; thanks for dealing with the deletion and sorting-out of the RfA which was (unexpectedly) created for me. It's not the first time I have been approached for adminship, but I feel I don't have the necessary skills or understanding for the extra responsibilities; also I have more and more content work I "need"/want to do! Cheers, Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 12:19, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
File:Sodium_burn.JPG
What copyright information should I add to Sodium_burn.JPG? It was a picture taken out of a book. Thanks. --Chemicalinterest (talk) 12:19, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- That's a bit complicated. Do you know the copyright status of the book, i.e. what is it licensed under (e.g. is it Free, is it non-free, do you know the specific license?), and the year it was published? -FASTILY (TALK) 23:59, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Which comments
Which comments are you talking about? In what context did they happened? How you threatening me solve that problem of that another user stalking me on articles he never edited before?--Nutriveg (talk) 18:05, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- See comments posted at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive615#User:ThaddeusB by ThaddeusB. In the diffs provided by ThaddeusB, you were making personal attacks; regardless of the situation at hand, this is unacceptable. If there is a discrepancy, I suggest you discuss with ThaddeusB. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:12, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
The best way to post a page about a company as the topic
I am wondering what were the specific reasons why the page I created was taken down as an advertisement. Please advise as to the best way to get the page registered.
Thanks,
18:51, 24 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sendaula (talk • contribs)
- User talk:Sendaula#Re:The best way to post a page about a company as the topic -FASTILY (TALK) 00:13, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Ireland League
Care to explain why Craig Walsh was deleted without any discussion? So what if the League of Ireland is not fully professional. Does this mean you intend to delete almost 1400 LOI players? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.251.229.122 (talk) 19:31, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
History
Mirus Corporation was founded in Madison WI in 1995 by three University of Wisconsin - Madison scientists: Jon A. Wolff, James E. Hagstrom and Vladimir G. Budker. Mirus focused on developing and commercializing innovative non-viral gene delivery technologies for gene therapy applications. These innovations also served as the basis for the company’s transfection reagents and other products. In 2008 the Therapeutics Division was acquired by Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. The former Research Tools Division of Mirus remains an independent entity now known as Mirus Bio LLC.
- Adding time stamp -FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:13, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
deleted page
I'd like to recreate a page that you had deleted. It is for Zupan's Markets, a grocery business in Portland, OR. I believe this business should have a Wikipedia page as do its competitors (such as New Seasons Markets). Kindly let me know if the page will be allowed so long as the new entry is more fact-based than was the previous. Thank you. Sterlingk (talk) 18:12, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Kindly let me know if it would be helpful if I created it as a "special:mypage" so you and/or others could take a look. Thank you. Sterlingk (talk) 19:36, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
ummm....please let me know if I should be asking someone else about this... Sterlingk (talk) 03:30, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry for the late reply - I can't believe I missed your message! Yes, you are more than welcome to resubmit the page. Just be sure that it complies with the policies/guidelines outlined at WP:ADS, WP:YFA, WP:MOS, and WP:GNG. Otherwise, you run the risk of having the page deleted. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 06:06, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
no worries re; delay - thanks! Sterlingk (talk) 21:46, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Atlantic Southeast Airlines Logo
I got the logo from the airline's page. I didn't see a copy right symbol just a trade mark symbol. What do I need to do to make sure everything is okie-dokie? (This is my first attempt to upload anything on here, so I am pretty much clueless, on what to do.)
- Also, how do I properly tag the image? I read through some rules and couldn't find anything that could give me a clue on how to find a copyright license tag.
- Please go to the form which you originally used to upload your file and carefully read the instructions in the green box. That should answer all your questions. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:51, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- Go ahead and delete the pictures, I am not sure how to. Thanks for your help, this will help me in the future.
Hi, Fastily! You just have deleted the two separate pictures which I made cutting this one into two halves, in order to use each portrait separately when need: 200px|left Couldn't we use the permission for the whole picture as permission for both of its parts? Greyhood (talk) 14:01, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, we can. It's called a derivative work. Can you provide me withe file names of the two derivatives you made? If you can do that, I'll restore the files and add proper licensing and attribution information. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:02, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- The names of these files were File:Pronchishchev Vasili.jpg and File:Pronchischeva Maria.jpg. It would be nice if you deal with the problem, thanks.Greyhood (talk) 00:15, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Fastily! Recently you have helped to resolve the license problems with the two derivatives of File:Vasili and Tatiana Pronchishchev.jpg. There is exactly the same problem with the file File:Tula gingerbread.jpg, which is a cropped version of the file File:Тульский пряник.jpg. Could you fix this too? My regards, Greyhood (talk) 21:16, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- Done -FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:18, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of "White Spaces Consulting" page
i am trying to create awareness about White spaces consulting among people. But not able to understand the reason it is being deleted. It is similar to any other company page on wikipedia. Can you please explain the reason it is being deleted & solution for it. this will be very helpful. This is similar to any other consulting company. Abhishek Rathi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyberrathi (talk • contribs) 06:53, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Cyberrathi#Re:White Spaces Consulting -FASTILY (TALK) 08:42, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
I was wondering why my page (Fantasy Kingdoms) was deleted, and if I could get it back... I followed the same format as other games, and this is part of facebook's game app topics... Somebody help? I want to follow the guidelines and I spent a lot of time creating it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcolyr (talk • contribs) 22:20, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Dcolyr#Re:Fantasy Kingdoms -FASTILY (TALK) 22:27, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Vandalism? I think you are mistaken...
What edits are you referring to? I am not aware of any edits that can be construed as vandalism. There is revert war with an IP editor, however I have not crossed 3RR though he has under another IP. I have taken the discussions to the talk pages as well. 68.25.103.189 (talk) 22:37, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
RE: AIV (User:Lowellmassachusetts)
If it wasn't clear then, it is now. User:Lowellmassachusetts recreated Douglas eivind hall, after your warning. Can you please deal with him? Rami R 23:04, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- It seems Lowellmassachusetts (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been blocked indef by Materialscientist as a sock. Guess I was too late :/ Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:50, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Thank you!
Hi Fastily,
The articles you pointed out help me to understand where I was off. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction!
Sincerely,
DivinationNation —Preceding unsigned comment added by Divinationnation (talk • contribs) 01:04, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Bogus warning
I have reverted your warning, because it was obviously mistaken. I have not engaged in any vandalism. 81.111.114.131 (talk) 09:48, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Your opinion please...
Your answer to my question was archived before I had a chance to respond.
You wrote: "If you're suggesting that I restore these files despite their missing essential information on their copyright statuses, you know I can't agree to that."
Your reply surprises me, because I think it is obvious we do have all the essential information for File:Alleged Khadr 3.png and File:Alleged Khadr Waving.png. The original URL where these screenshots were taken from is http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/16/60minutes/main3516048.shtml
I request you restore those two images. I can put in the source field, or you can put in the source field, as you wish. Geo Swan (talk) 19:18, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- You know, I fail to see how my response is surprising - frankly, it's ironic that I should be surprised your response. I kindly ask you not to try to get smart with me, it's just not going to fly. You should have provided the source data in your first post so I don't know why you're telling me this now. You have a week to clear up the copyright statuses of the two files above. -FASTILY (TALK) 06:21, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- I added what I believe are properly fleshed out fair use templates. I also asked on the Commons village pump for opinions as to whether the images should be moved to the commons as {{PD-Afghanistan}} and {{PD-USGov-Military}}.
- WRT whether I was "getting smart" with you... If I were an administrator I would do my best to approach each question over actions I had taken or statements I made, with an open-mind. We are all fallible, and on a project where we are supposed to aim for collegiality and civility it is important to to bear in mind the possibility we may have erred. When one of my correspondents makes a good point, or when they say something that helps me realize I made a mistake I do my best to openly acknowledge that. I think this quality is an order of magnitude more important for our administrators.
- Since you brought up the term "getting smart", it seems to me you responded to my civil questions with a "smart" answer, and one that, frankly, seemed disingeneous to me. Disingeneous because you replied as if I had asked you to re-instate images that I knew lacked essential information, when I think it was clear I was asking no such thing.
- Why didn't I initially offer the URL to the 60 minutes' video? May I remind you that your entries in the deletion log said the images lacked valid fair use rationales -- not that they lacked the URL to a source? In fact now that I can see the revision history I can see that Sherurcij had offered rationales. Geo Swan (talk) 17:27, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- I look at everything with an open mind. However, I don't feel like you're being upfront with me, withholding certain details and releasing them at your convenience. I try to be as friendly and helpful as I can, but there are limits. For purposes of collegiality, can we at least try to work together in a cooperative manner? -FASTILY (TALK) 00:38, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- Why didn't I initially offer the URL to the 60 minutes' video? May I remind you that your entries in the deletion log said the images lacked valid fair use rationales -- not that they lacked the URL to a source? In fact now that I can see the revision history I can see that Sherurcij had offered rationales. Geo Swan (talk) 17:27, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
No license?
In this edit, you mark a file for deletion due to having no license. Right above your edit, the file is stated to be in the public domain. What's up? --GRuban (talk) 17:58, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- And in this edit you mark another file as no license, right in the section titled Licensing which clearly says it's fair use. And in this edit you do it again, right under a template marking it as GFDL-self. These are all on the same day. Slow Down! I know your user name is Fastily, but please, slow down. --GRuban (talk) 18:06, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- My gosh, there are more of them! Here you add the no license tag right under a license box; not using a standard template, but clearly stating a free to use license. Here you add the tag right under a statement: "Licensed under the GFDL by the author". Here it's right under a fair use rationale. --GRuban (talk) 18:28, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- Right under a fair use rationale
- Right under a fair use rationale
- Right under a fair use rationale
- Right under a fair use statement (not a template)
- Right under a statement permission=public domain
- Permission=Public Domain
- Permission=Public Domain
- Right under a statement, in capital letters, yet: PLEASE STOP PUTTING THE NO COPYRIGHT TAG ON THIS PHOTO! PERMISSION WAS E-MAILED MAY 17, 2010 BY THE COPYRIGHT OWNER. READ THE SUMMARY BOX BEFORE ADDING TAGS.
And all this done at bot-like speeds. Are you the reincarnation of BetaCommand or something? Please, please, please be more careful. --GRuban (talk) 18:41, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- Then there's this one where the user says "free domain" right above your tag. Now that's probably not good enough for us, we want the technical term "public domain", but surely we can ask him if that was what he meant, and if so if he could write that, rather than just tag blindly? --GRuban (talk) 19:01, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
OK, that's too many; I'm pretty sure you are being careless now. I'm going to revert all of these, and I'm going to ask you not to tag any more images this blindly. This kind of blind tagging doesn't help anyone. --GRuban (talk) 19:06, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:GRuban#May 2010 -FASTILY (TALK) 00:28, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- Please refrain from removing image deletion notices from images you have uploaded unless you have addressed the noted concern. You need to provide a license tag for any image you upload, regardless of whether the file is free or non-free. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:27, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- Wow. You actually reverted to restore the deletion notice, after I pointed out in each case why it's not correct. You're willing to delete images that are actually free, and say they're free, just because they say so in text rather than in a template? Are you sure you want to improve the encyclopedia, and not play Nomic? We don't follow rules here just because they're rules, we follow them because they help improve the encyclopedia. BTW, I don't know where you got the idea they're images I uploaded. They're just images you marked for deletion due to not having a license, that clearly do have a license. I strongly suspect you have also marked others this way; I haven't looked through all your edits, and urge you to. Take responsibility for your work, please. --GRuban (talk) 12:04, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
licence of File:Bangla.jpg
Dear Fastily,
1. Thanks for your tag in the file File:Bangla.jpg. I myself created this file and uploaded. I also used this file in article Avro Keyboard. But I am sorry, I missed to put the copyright information for this file. I am a new user in Wikipedia. I could not find how to fix this problem. Could you please help me by showing some guideline how to give copyright status? Thanks.
2. 2 other pictures (File:Amibanglaygangai.gif & Bangla.gif ) that I uploaded did not serve my purpose & not used anywhere. Actually, I was unaware of the feature "Upload a new version of this file", so I uploaded 1 by 1 images. I am sorry for this mistake. As I am new, I could not delete those 2 files. Could you please help me to delete those 2? Thank you. ----Cool BD (talk) 23:13, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- For point 1, you want to add one of the tags from Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags/All (and remove the no license tag). They have links describing them there. The most free tags are the Public Domain ones, such as {{PD-self}}, and the most restrictive commonly used one is {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}. Note that even that one isn't very restrictive; Wikipedia only allows licenses that allows other people to edit or reuse the image, including commercially. For point 2, only an administrator can delete any file, but you can help by adding {{db-author}}, which is a request tag that the author requests it be deleted.--GRuban (talk) 23:54, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- No worries, File:Amibanglaygangai.gif and File:Bangla.gif Bangla.gif deleted. As for File:Bangla.jpg, like GRuban mentioned above, you will need to find an appropriate license tag. Since you're new, I'll walk you through it. Could you please start by specifying whether the image is of free or non-free/copyrighted software? -FASTILY (TALK) 00:34, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Project tagging
Please don't delete the talk pages for photos that are tagged as part of WP:USRD/WP:MSHP. All photos of roadways and bridges in use in highway articles for the state of Michigan have been tagged as part of the project, even if they're now hosted on Commons. There's no need to delete these pages, since it allows the project to track the images in use. Imzadi 1979 → 02:18, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- Has consensus at the wikiproject been established that these talk pages are not to be deleted? This is the first time I've heard of a project with an intent to maintain talk pages for deleted pages. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:22, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- The project banner template was recently updated to provide for image tagging. The primary purpose is to tag images that have been the Selected Photo at Portal:U.S. Roads, but also for other images as well. Imzadi 1979 → 02:32, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry. I don't it was clear what I was trying to ask. Could you please direct me to a discussion within the Wikiproject where consensus has been established among the members of the project that talk pages of deleted pages are to be retained? Per Wikipedia policy WP:CSD#G8, pages without an associated content page are to be deleted on sight. If you can provide me with evidence suggesting that the members of the project you cite above have agreed that orphaned talk pages are to be retained, I shall happily restore the deleted talk pages. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:36, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- From that same policy: "This excludes any page that is useful to the project, and in particular: deletion discussions that are not logged elsewhere, user talk pages, talk page archives, plausible redirects that can be changed to valid targets, and image pages or talk pages for images that exist on Wikimedia Commons." (emphasis added). Imzadi 1979 → 02:56, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry. I don't it was clear what I was trying to ask. Could you please direct me to a discussion within the Wikiproject where consensus has been established among the members of the project that talk pages of deleted pages are to be retained? Per Wikipedia policy WP:CSD#G8, pages without an associated content page are to be deleted on sight. If you can provide me with evidence suggesting that the members of the project you cite above have agreed that orphaned talk pages are to be retained, I shall happily restore the deleted talk pages. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:36, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- The project banner template was recently updated to provide for image tagging. The primary purpose is to tag images that have been the Selected Photo at Portal:U.S. Roads, but also for other images as well. Imzadi 1979 → 02:32, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Freebie Ashford
Hello
I know your doing your job but please consider this...
04:50, 27 May 2010 Fastily (talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Freebie Ashford" (G8: Talk page of a deleted page)
This article should not of been deleted. It "isn't" spam and is not trying to get popularity. It is already well known in Ashford, Kent. It would of been nice to have its own article as it is "already" at a stage when people want to know more about the non profit organization.
I believe you made a mistake. Please consider, Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Appleus (talk • contribs) 05:05, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Appleus#Re:Freebie Ashford -FASTILY (TALK) 06:49, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi there, I had this page on my watchlist so I noticed that it had been speedily deleted (I heard at ANI that you deleted it) a week or two ago. I thought that reasonable because the article reads like advertising spam. I recently saw that the article had been undeleted, so I asked at the undeleters page, User:John Vandenberg, about the reasons for that. I am not yet sure of his reasons, but he did say that the admin who made the undeletion (which I guess is you) must have been mistaken, asleep at the wheel, or on a deletionist spree. So my question is, are you in any of those categories, and do you remember what caused you to speedily delete the article? Cheers. Weakopedia (talk) 05:12, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- No, I do not remember why. I delete a large number of pages each day, and I do not recall going through this particular one, especially since it was roughly a week and a half ago. I'm glad to see the situation was worked out. -FASTILY (TALK) 06:51, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I can't say I am all that impressed with how it was worked out - I believe you deleted the article in good faith. There doesn't seem to have been any review of your deletion, someone just reverted it without discussion, and when asked they said you must have been 'mistaken, sleeping, or on a deletionist spree'. I don't think, from looking at your contributions, that you are on a deletion spree for no good reason, and I think that if someone thought your deletion was wrong or evidence of misbehaviour that they should have mentioned it to you. But that is just my opinion, and I have asked JV for his. Cheers. Weakopedia (talk) 07:14, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Deletion review for P90X
An editor has asked for a deletion review of P90X. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Stifle (talk) 08:48, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
File:Chemistry Lab.JPG
I saw you posted it for deletion since it did not contain copyright information. If you looked at the file, you would have seen that I typed {PD-self}} instead of {{PD-self}}. Thank you. --Chemicalinterest (talk) 11:59, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
No source?
Regarding File:Federalisttitlepage.jpg, the source is the book the title page is from. Please see discussion here: File talk:Federalisttitlepage.jpg. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 19:04, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- Per WP:V, you must specify a specific source (since the file is that of a book, please specify publisher, date published, ISBN - if applicable, volume/edition, author, ect.). The copyright status of any given file must be verifiable by others. By providing a specific source, you are making this possible. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:31, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- All of that information is on the title page, which the image is a picture of! --ChrisRuvolo (t) 18:16, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Shouldn't AOL Dejando Huellas (Flex EP) be renamed to AOL Dejando Huellas since that is the name of the EP and there is no other article with a similar title to necessitate the disambiguator? --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 22:21, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
I see that you have deleted the above article. I believe that whoever created this article has created two other articles, Kc bhattacharya and Sangitalaya containing the exact same text. I am not sure what should be done exactly. So, I am nominating them for speedy del and letting you know.-Nilotpal42 09:49, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- An SPI has been made here. Please add the name of the account that created the K. C. Bhattacharya article. Thank You.--Nilotpal42 16:52, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Read it!
Hello Fastily,
I read over those policies per your request. I wasn't sure if you'd had a chance to note that. Cheers!--~TPW 12:35, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Kinksi photo
Could you take a minute and review changes to the rationale for "File:Large one from the heart.jpg"? There is also new commentary added to the article Natasha Kinski, which describes this image within the film. If it's OK, I'd like to add the image to the article. Thanks. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 20:15, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- Well, as a rule of thumb, most film characters images are not used on the pages of the respective portraying actors/actresses. See WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#8. I'm sorry, but this file really should not be re-added per WP:NFCC. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:59, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for checking. Just wanted to make sure you realized that this was actually a publicity screen shot used to promote the film, not just a photo. This particular image was used in advertising of various sorts, and the image is referred to in the article text itself. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 03:18, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Why was NTI Corporation deleted ?
I only had one sentence and it was deleted ?
"The company was founded in 1993. NTI released the world’s first CD Copy software in December 1995. " —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karlosgaona (talk • contribs) 00:47, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Karlosgaona#Re:Why was NTI Corporation deleted ? -FASTILY (TALK) 03:01, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Please restore deletion of image
With reference to this action of yours (which ignored my 'hangon' tag):
• (Deletion log); 23:58 . . Fastily (talk | contribs) deleted "File:MetRoofGardenKoons.jpg" (F9: Unambiguous copyright violation: concern was "images of works of art by Jeff Koons are not public domain")
I believe your are mistaken about the image rules. This was not a photograph of a two-dimensional work, but rather a photograph of an outdoor scene in a public space that happened to include some sculpture. There are literally thousands of such images in WP; see Category:Outdoor sculptures in Chicago, Illinois for just the ones in Chicago, including Cloud Gate which has survived FA scrutiny. These would all have the same level of copyright that the Koons works do.
Please restore the image, and take it to a discussion at IfD if you really feel strongly about it. Given the prior use of such images all across WP, a speedy deletion was most inappropriate here. Wasted Time R (talk) 04:02, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- The US has not FOP for 3D works of art. By the same token, most 3D works of art are in fact copyrighted/non-free (take a look at the photos in the category you cite above). Unless it's known for sure whether that particular 3D work of art is free or non-free, I cannot restore the file. -FASTILY (TALK) 04:48, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- Okay, my bad for not understanding FOP in the U.S. adequately, and I apologize for the somewhat cantankerous tone of my previous remark. However, I presume I can restore the image under a non-free fair use provision? This is what images like File:Cloud Gate (The Bean) from east'.jpg and File:Atomium 20-08-07.jpg do. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:30, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- No worries. Before I restore, do you know if the sculpture is free or copyrighted? We wouldn't want to tag a photo of a statue which is free art as copyrighted and vice versa. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:50, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, I realize that it will fail on fair use grounds, because I was using it in the Metropolitan Museum of Art article, to illustrate how their roof garden attracts crowds viewing Manhattan and seeing outdoor sculpture. Fair use only qualifies if the article is specifically about the particular work itself (e.g., can only use a magazine cover in an article about the magazine, can only use an album cover in an article about the album). So I can only put up a photo that shows the roof garden and Manhattan but no sculpture, which loses most of the meaning. I'm screwed. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:35, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- No worries. Before I restore, do you know if the sculpture is free or copyrighted? We wouldn't want to tag a photo of a statue which is free art as copyrighted and vice versa. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:50, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- Okay, my bad for not understanding FOP in the U.S. adequately, and I apologize for the somewhat cantankerous tone of my previous remark. However, I presume I can restore the image under a non-free fair use provision? This is what images like File:Cloud Gate (The Bean) from east'.jpg and File:Atomium 20-08-07.jpg do. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:30, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of user talkpage User talk:132.234.251.211
I saw you deleted User talk:132.234.251.211, which I now restored. The page was converted to something without any meaningful content by the user itself, and then blanked by another editor. However, the editor is a) blocked, and b) there are in the history very, very many warnings. Deleting such pages, IMHO, removes that type of history, and I thought that pages of blocked editors and/or long term vandals should not be deleted anyway. Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:01, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- A procedural blank? Perhaps you might like to discuss this with User:BD2412 instead. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:10, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- I'll consider that as well. No real harm done, I think the long-term vandal talkpages will be watched and undeleted quickly enough. Just thought that I'd let you know, seeing that I undid your administrative action. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:53, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- Grr, it is always the same, and I knew it would come back. I have always argued, together with many others, that pages of 'systematic vandals' should NEVER be deleted. I see that now the sequence is to blank them, and then later they get deleted because they have no content. Sigh. I am sorry (and it is not your fault), but these deletions damage the work of, especially non-admin or cross-wiki, spam fighters and others; it is exactly why many of these warnings categorise the page in 'do not delete'; the problem is, if the warnings are blanked, no-one takes care if the warnings were there later). I'll contact BD2412. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:07, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
I have started a discussion, again, here: Wikipedia_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#IPUser_talkpage_deletion_.._again. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:42, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Just a heads up; after some discussion on WT:CSD, I have adapted WP:CSD to further exclude deletion of user talk pages of IPs. --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:44, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of "Haytoug"
Hello, why was the page to Haytoug deleted? If it had anything to do with the images, I am the creator of the images. Thank you for your help, I would like to get the page back up as soon as feasible. Vthomassian (talk) 13:37, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Vthomassian#Re:Deletion of "Haytoug" -FASTILY (TALK) 06:48, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
My deletion
Hi Fastily
My pages have just been deleted
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Asian_Playboy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Feng http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABCs_of_Attraction
Please could you offer some advice on what kind of changes I would need to make to these pages to get them re-submitted?
Many thanks in advance.
(Lucywriter (talk) 15:25, 28 May 2010 (UTC))
- Please see WP:ADS, WP:YFA, WP:MOS, and WP:GNG. Be sure that your resubmitted versions comply with the aforementioned policies/guidelines; otherwise, you run the risk of having the pages deleted again. -FASTILY (TALK) 06:51, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Fbot & SUL
Hi Fastily, it's ary29 from it.wiki. Jalo informed us that you would like to usurp it.wiki username Fbot for your SUL account. I have just posted the proper request on your behalf, but I would like to inform you that, so far, there is no SUL account for Fbot. Check here! My advice is that you create immediately the SUL account for Fbot - even if the Italian username is not available yet - because at present any user on any Wikimedia project except for en.wikipedia and it.wikipedia could sign up and get the SUL account. Maybe it won't happen, but I heartily suggest you to get hold of the SUL account as soon as possible. If it.wiki Fbot doesn't oppose in 5 days (2 already gone), then you'll be able to add it to your SUL account. Ciao, Ary29 (talk) 22:35, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
File:Rudolf-to-the-sky.jpg
Hey could you restore File:Rudolf-to-the-sky.jpg. It was deleted due to the fact it was orphaned. Well it was used in a userfied article and now that article exist for real at To the Sky. STAT -Verse 00:18, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- Done Please be sure to add fair-use rationale. Once you have done that, you may remove the deletion tags. -FASTILY (TALK) 06:57, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
What about the keep votes were compelling? Thanks. ÷seresin 18:29, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- Nothing. If you ask me, I think it fails WP:NFCC#1 cold. Consensus however, was to keep the file, and I respect that. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:56, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- Well consensus, particularly at FfD, is not determined by numbers. If the delete votes are policy-backed, then they win, even if they're outnumbered. So the keeps had to be compelling in some respect to warrant a "no consensus". ÷seresin 03:30, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- Okay then, it will be at DRV shortly. ÷seresin 18:35, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- Well consensus, particularly at FfD, is not determined by numbers. If the delete votes are policy-backed, then they win, even if they're outnumbered. So the keeps had to be compelling in some respect to warrant a "no consensus". ÷seresin 03:30, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
User 68.25.103.189
Can you check on his contribs? There is odd stuff afoot about sockpuppet accusations and such. He just came off a block so it appears suspicious. Alatari (talk) 08:48, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of File:77th Infantry Division.patch.jpg
I am confused as to how when other U.S. Army patches are allowed under
- "Permission
- This image is in the public domain because it contains materials that originally came from a United States Armed Forces badge or logo. As a work of the U.S. federal government, the image is in the public domain."
Would that not then apply to the shoulder patch of the 77th? If not, can you explain the difference? And can you tell me then where I need to get permission for us to use that photo here? Thank you.Degenret01 (talk) 12:00, 29 May 2010 (UTC) [86] My primary wiki.
- What is the source of the file? (i.e. where did you find it?) All material uploaded/posted to Wikipedia must be verifiable. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:48, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
- I do not know where it was originally obtained. I was not the uploader. As for verifiable, are you looking for proof that it is indeed the shoulder patch of the 77th? What would you accept as proof? Any online store selling Army insignia sells it, any search of the internet will show you many examples that this has indeed been the patch of the 77th. [87], [88], [89], [90], [91], [92]. These all show that it is the patch of the 77th. As such, it fits under the same allowance of use as all U.S. military insignia patches as being in the public domain.Degenret01 (talk) 04:04, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
- That will do just fine. File restored. -FASTILY (TALK) 06:01, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you.216.136.67.212 (talk) 08:26, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
Thank you for your help in keeping The Shack and wikipedia free from disruptive edits. peterl (talk) 06:39, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Brace for War
Hi there, new to this, not trying to advertise just state what event the fights are on, can you fix it to be complient? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pukman (talk • contribs) 23:37, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Pukman#Brace For War -FASTILY (TALK) 06:55, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
My article about HoloTouch Technology was apparently deleted as being unduly promotional even though it simply describes specific technology, with patent references, and lacks specific product information of the sort found in any number of other articles, such as GestureTek. As I'm new to this, although I've read the policies, is there a cogent source of information which might illustrate why specific product information is permitted for some articles but even basic techical descriptions in articles without product or promotional information such as HoloTouch Technology are not? Rufus Regier (talk) 17:49, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Was there a reason you deleted the Wikipedia page for this file? It is a featured picture, and the page is used to indicate so, as described in the notice at the top of the page when editing: [93]. Jujutacular T · C 07:25, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
- Is it now? My mistake. Page restored. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:00, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you! Jujutacular T · C 17:20, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_May_22#File:Portal2-testchamber.jpg + Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_May_22#File:Portal2_coop_characters.jpg
Hi, could you please explain what was said in this IFD discussion that allows us to completely disregard criteria 2 of the fair use policy for this particular image?--Vaypertrail (talk) 13:12, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
- The image met "criteria [sic] 2" – as almost everybody pointed out. Nobody would decide not to bother buying the game just because they'd seen that tiny image, so the manufacturer lost no income. ╟─TreasuryTag►person of reasonable firmness─╢ 13:17, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Sorry. But I don't quite understand.
Hello fastily. You have recently sent me a message reguarding if I am still aiming to become an administrator. I do, however I do not understand what you are asking. Please do not delete my RfA as there are merely two comments on me - both negative - and I would like others to rate it. Thanks --MICHAELIPF5SUMANTalk 00:20, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
- Your RfA has not been transcluded yet, meaning, it has not officially been submitted for review. Those two votes you have were made prematurely. If you like, I can submit your RfA for you, but please bear in mind that you risk the possibility of failure. Do you still wish to continue? -FASTILY (TALK) 01:10, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I would like to continue. I thought that all I had to do was submit the message where I had already sent it. Could you please move - or transclude - it to the correct location for assessment (if you don't wish to do so, please tell me how to do this myself) Send me a link so I can answer any questions needed if you DO move it. Thanks --MICHAELIPF5SUMANTalk 09:05, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
- Alright then, I've transcluded the page. You can see it at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship#Ipfreely555 2. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:19, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I would like to continue. I thought that all I had to do was submit the message where I had already sent it. Could you please move - or transclude - it to the correct location for assessment (if you don't wish to do so, please tell me how to do this myself) Send me a link so I can answer any questions needed if you DO move it. Thanks --MICHAELIPF5SUMANTalk 09:05, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Fastily. I see you closed this as "no consensus"—however, I do think that there is an issue there that needs sorting out, and would observe that WP:FFD states, "Files that have been listed here for more than 7 days are eligible for deletion if there is no clear consensus in favour of keeping them."
However, if you are not planning to delete it on that basis, I must take the issue further, because it needs resolution rather than indecision. I'd be interested to hear your advice as to whether I relist the file, or take your closure to DRV? (Nothing personal, but there must be a conclusion to the matter!) Best, ╟─TreasuryTag►inspectorate─╢ 08:40, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily, please could you respond to this ASAP, because it needs to be acted upon. Thanks. ╟─TreasuryTag►most serene─╢ 17:26, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
- Hi TreasuryTag. I agree with you that the file, despite being a photo of Mr. Norton, is likely a copvio or file with questionable copyright status. When closing the discussion, I felt that there was no consensus whatsoever (especially since most !votes were choppy and w/o argument) to keep or delete the file. Feel free to relist. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:13, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
< OK, done! I'd welcome your views. ╟─TreasuryTag►Lord Speaker─╢ 18:18, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I'd like to have the Eulogy Recordings and Ferret Music pages restored. I don't know what the articles looked like, but the subjects are long-running rock music labels. I can remove promotional material from the articles if need be, but at the very least a list of artists signed to the labesl is critical. Chubbles (talk) 17:26, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
- Certainly. Would it be alright with you if I were to restore them to your userspace? -FASTILY (TALK) 18:15, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's fine, I'll dump out any promotional puff and move them back over. Chubbles (talk) 18:19, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
- Done at User:Chubbles/Eulogy Recordings and User:Chubbles/Ferret Music. Sorry for any inconvenience. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:26, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's fine, I'll dump out any promotional puff and move them back over. Chubbles (talk) 18:19, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Articles for deletion nomination of Ferret Music
I have nominated Ferret Music, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ferret Music. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Codf1977 (talk) 19:43, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Articles for deletion nomination of Eulogy Recordings
I have nominated Eulogy Recordings, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eulogy Recordings. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Codf1977 (talk) 19:44, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Apple logos
Could you restore File:Apple Computer Logo.svg so I could verify something? I want to make certain I got something right when I transfered it to commons. Could you also restore File:Apple logo Motter Tektura.png so I can properly tag it as {{PD-US-no notice}} and {{Trademark}} so I can then transfer it to commons to preserve the attribution path for File:Apple logo Motter Tektura.svg (which is now properly tagged)? --Tothwolf (talk) 22:13, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
- Done. Please let me know when you're finished with them. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:43, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
- Done with both of those, thanks. You can also delete File:Apple first logo.png as I'm done with that one as well. --Tothwolf (talk) 22:47, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Deletion: FRIENDSHIP-Framework
Dear Fastily,
yesterday we posted an article about the software FRIENDSHIP-Framework that you deleted. Of course we are aware that beeing from the developing company ourselves the accusation of advertisement seems natural. On the other hand we tried to stick to the facts and refrain from unambiguos content. The fact that we didn't use any reference yet was simply owed to the missing time. Wen ment to post references, but the deletion was just to fast to be able to do that.
We would like to post this article again in a revised form. Since this was our very first article in Wikipedia, we kindly ask for your suggestions how to improve it, respectively make it compliant to Wikipedia's rules.
Best regards, FriendshipSystems --FriendshipSystems (talk) 15:51, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:FriendshipSystems#Re:Deletion: FRIENDSHIP-Framework -FASTILY (TALK) 18:56, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
speedy deletion
Hi Fastily. A page I was working on in my user account was speedily deleted and I have not been able to make any changes to a page that was written about my company. I would like to know more specifically what and how I can make changes to the DiMarzio entry and I would like to have a page that explains my background and history as well. I don't have any intentions to break the rules of wiki, I am just not familiar with them and must say that the guidelines and information on how to participate are not as clear and user friendly as I would like. Your suggestions are appreciated.
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LarryDiMarzio (talk • contribs) 18:55, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:LarryDiMarzio#Re:speedy deletion -FASTILY (TALK) 18:59, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Regarding your decline of speedy deletion for this image, I don't understand your reasoning of "no assertion of free license". The whole rason I tagged it is that there's no assertion of license or permission. Could you enlighten me? VernoWhitney (talk) 19:32, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
- Nevermind, I was reading the text of {{db-imgcopyvio}} and not the actual text of CSD#F9. Sorry to bother you. VernoWhitney (talk) 19:36, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Essentially, a copyright violation does not exist until someone claims someone elses' work as their own. In the case of File:LazerBrody.png, neither attribution nor permission was claimed. For our purposes, a copyright violation exists only when an editor claims copyrighted/non-free work as their own, posting it to Wikipedia under a free license. It's a common misconception to assume that any file found online and posted to Wikipedia is immediately a copyvio. Hope that helps to clarify things. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:37, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
- Ehh, all good. No worries. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:38, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
- I appreciate your extra explanation. I'm used to working with text copyright violations where posting automatically claims free license/fair use, and so I guess I got carried away with tagging the image to go along with a copyvio article. I'll try not to make the same mistake again. VernoWhitney (talk) 19:42, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
- Ehh, all good. No worries. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:38, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Advice, Reinhardt College
Fastily,
It's been awhile. I hope you are well. Question: Reinhardt College, today, changed its name to Reinhardt University. I made the changes in the Reinhardt page, but don't know how to rename the article nor put in a redirect tab, eg. those searching for Reinhardt College to be sent to Reinhardt University.
Any advice?
Carsonmc (talk) 19:50, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Keyed-Up Motorsports Image
Hello. I recently uploaded the logo for Keyed-Up Motorsports which you deleted. I have hardly any experience with uploading images and I was wondering if you would be willing to help me licence it correctly. I'd really appreciate your assistance because the team specifically gave me the image for the sole purpose of putting it on Wikipedia. Thank you for your help.--Johncoracing48 (talk) 21:01, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
- When you uploaded the file, it seems you restricted use to Wikipedia only. Per Wikipedia's image use policy, files that limit commercial use/derivatives or restrict use to educational/non-profit use only are subject to on-sight deletion per speedy deletion criterion F3. Hope that helps to clarify things. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:49, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Ok. I think I understand now. Thanks for the help. I'll try it again and hopefully I'll do everything right this time. Thanks again, --Johncoracing48 (talk) 23:23, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
rfa
On mature reflection, I shall pass. I've already got too much to do. But it was great to be asked! Fergananim (talk) 23:13, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
- Alright then. Thank you for being upfront about it. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:34, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
My file
You tagged one of my images as non-free but since you tagged it, nothing's been done about it. Is it going to be addressed? --Kevin W. 01:54, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- Judging by your posts at Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2010_May_20#File:Pac10-Uniform-AZ-ProPac.PNG, the file is indeed non-free (despite the fact you created it yourself - what you have created is a derivative work) because of the copyrighted logos and therefore a copyright violation. Essentially, your options at this point are to tag it as non-free and insert it in an article or have it speedy deleted per speedy deletion criterion F9. Hope that helps to clarify things. Let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:38, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, how would I go about having it properly displayed on my user page then? It's a hypothetical uniform, so it'd have no business being on the Arizona page. I'd like to display it as an example of my work. --Kevin W. 05:34, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- Er...hate to tell you this...but you're technically not allowed to do that. See WP:NOTWEBHOST, bullet #2. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:45, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- No problem. There are other places where I can exhibit my work. Thanks for the clarification. --Kevin W. 05:50, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- Er...hate to tell you this...but you're technically not allowed to do that. See WP:NOTWEBHOST, bullet #2. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:45, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, how would I go about having it properly displayed on my user page then? It's a hypothetical uniform, so it'd have no business being on the Arizona page. I'd like to display it as an example of my work. --Kevin W. 05:34, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
No source for census
You are adding a tag for no source to the images from the US Census, where each image already says it is from the "US Census", so why the tag? The license tag also says it is from the US census. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 03:58, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- And how do I know this is from the US census and not some, if you will, bullcrap you just made up on the spot? I will be more than happy to remove all the tags if you can provide me with a verifiable source. You know what a verifiable source is - a specific external link, book ISBN number and page number, a newspaper edition/volume/page number, ect. My goal is not to make your life harder, but simply enforce image policy, which was exactly what I promised to do in my RfA. -FASTILY (TALK) 04:00, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- I might be able to help here. I think the issue here is that something that might be obvious to R.A. Norton is not obvious to Fastily. The decennial U.S. censuses from 1790 to 1930 are published by the U.S. National Archives on microfilms that are available at many National Archives regional locations and other libraries and repositories. Many of them are indexed and they are widely used for purposes such as genealogical research. I am familiar with what the microfilmed pages of the census look like and I have spot-checked a couple of these census images and can confirm that they appear to be printouts of the microfilmed census pages; there is no reason for doubting that this is what they are.
- A full citation of a census microfilm should include data such as the NARA publication number (this can be obtained from the NARA website), the census year (which is obvious enough), the volume and page, or perhaps information on the census tract and division. It would be optimal to include this information in case someone wanted to look up the page, and it would be good practice if R.A. Norton would go back and do so, but I would not say it should be essential in deciding whether to keep or delete such an image. Additionally, because the census is a US Government publication, there should be no copyright or licensing issues with using them on-wiki (I don't know whether there is any dispute about that).
- I hope this helps in resolving this aspect of the matter. Please feel free to let me know if there are any questions. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 08:51, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thanks for deleting the duplicate image that I tagged for "speedy deletion"! Sincerely, --Skb8721 (talk) 04:26, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Deleted page - DERTOUR UK
Hi,
I am trying to write a page for my company and obviously what I wrote before was advertising! Could you please let me know the best way to write the page so that it does not breach any guidelines?
Thanks! DERTOUR UK (talk) 13:42, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Uno bus route SHTL
I would like to know why the page has been deleted. It is a notable bus route as the main link between the two university campuses, and on average Uno's most frequent route at 5-6 mins during daytime termtime. How notable must a bus route be before it is considered 'notable' enough? --BigToe7000 (talk) 18:11, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
- The file was deleted per the WP:PROD process. You were given a week to contest the deletion from the time of the flagging to the time of the deletion. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:57, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, I was not around during the week to check and did not notice until it was too late. Is there any way I can try and get this back seeing as I believe it is notable enough? (I know you personally did not flag it but I have read policy says I should speak to you) BigToe7000 (talk) 23:01, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
No source information?
In what sense does this file, [94] not have source information? Isn't it clearly marked as from the New York Times? --GRuban (talk) 12:06, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- By the way, yesterday I added copyright templates to the dozen or so files you had marked and I mentioned last week. Feel free to check if they're correct, and if any aren't, please do say. --GRuban (talk) 12:07, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, I looked around more. Looks like you're in a major dispute with User Richard Arthur Norton, aren't you? Yeesh. And Newyorkbrad is involved; the big guns. I wouldn't want to be in that fight. Anyway, for this specific file, is the issue that the date of the NYTimes article isn't given? If so, it would be nice if you said so in the notice you applied. Anyway, I found the date of the article, here.[95] Is that what you wanted? --GRuban (talk) 12:18, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- To be clear, I'm not involved here in any "big gun" capacity; I'm just trying to help resolve a situation that appeared to be spiralling rapidly downhill. Newyorkbrad (talk) 15:04, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, I looked around more. Looks like you're in a major dispute with User Richard Arthur Norton, aren't you? Yeesh. And Newyorkbrad is involved; the big guns. I wouldn't want to be in that fight. Anyway, for this specific file, is the issue that the date of the NYTimes article isn't given? If so, it would be nice if you said so in the notice you applied. Anyway, I found the date of the article, here.[95] Is that what you wanted? --GRuban (talk) 12:18, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Similar question for [96] - what source information isn't given there? Title of the book is given, as is publication year. Page number is clearly visible in the scan. What else is specifically required, please? --GRuban (talk) 12:38, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- Note: I have removed the deletion tag from File:DelValle-Reginald 001a.jpg as the source was clearly indicated and I have provided a link to yet another copy of it. VernoWhitney (talk) 17:23, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Your user page has been cloned
Take a look here, and see if you recognize anything about this editor. I suspect it's just Chace Watson back (he tends to copy other people's user pages), but it's probably worth having you see if this editor is someone you recognize.—Kww(talk) 15:13, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
discuss things on image talk page please
- If you disagree with an editor on a template, please discuss it on the talk page. I started one discussion here [97] Dream Focus 17:14, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Orphaned images
You might be interested to know that JaGa just let me know that his the orphaned images tool is up and running again. You might find it useful. ww2censor (talk) 23:11, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Deletion review for File:NorwaySpiral.jpg
An editor has asked for a deletion review of File:NorwaySpiral.jpg. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Stifle (talk) 13:29, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Your little mistake in File:QuickTime on Windows Vista.png
Hi, Fastily
You'll have to admit that you made quite a blunder in File:QuickTime on Windows Vista.png. On 29 May, Mono (talk · contribs) tagged the image for deletion on fully unfounded basis: His assertion ("Media being played in screenshot is not attributed (lacking permission info)") is completely nonsense because you can still visit the description page and see for yourself that the file being played if fully attributed by the following statement:
| “ | QuickTime 7.5 on Windows Vista playing Big Buck Bunny. | ” |
I can't believe this: You deleted the image without even verifying the assertion?
Now this new file you've uploaded does not match the description given and hence may be deleted for violating NFCC6 !
Would you please kindly undelete the deleted file? Fleet Command (talk) 15:23, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
File:Queen Rania Family.jpg
Hello, Fastily! I'm sorry to bother you, but I'd appreciate your help. Could you please take a look at File:Queen Rania Family.jpg? Is everything okay with it? If it is, can I crop out some persons? The articles about them could really use some an image. Surtsicna (talk) 21:58, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, probably not. We need some sort of verifiable source, a way to show that an image really is properly licensed. As is, the image only says it is, but gives no details. Since it is pretty clearly a posed portrait, I doubt anyone off the street could have taken it; I would imagine it's an official photograph, so we need a rather convincing statement that it is really released under cc-by-sa 3.0. --GRuban (talk) 02:02, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Vassy photo.
Hello Fastily, i'm a little bit concerned and confused how Wikipedia works? i recently tried Uploading and posting a Picture of Vassy(Vocalist) to her Wikipedia, but for some reason it got deleted? i believe from you?
i Don't really understand the Wikipedia lingo on files and such. or what kinda of Source you need to the Copyright? I'm the Artists Publicist, and Have consent from Both Vassy & Jeff Wayne(Photographer).
What are the Steps to Successfully Posting things on here too? because i have another Artist by the name Xonia, who's whole Wiki Page got Deleted? i'm confused. lol.
Thank You very Much for Your time.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Xreye007 (talk • contribs) 08:11, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
- For the photo case, you want Wikipedia:Contact us/Photo submission. For deletion, I can't find the specific deletion discussion, but one possibility is that there might not have been enough reliable sources proving Wikipedia:Notability. Read that link, but the basic idea is that we only make articles about topics that others have already written about; you'll want to show that there are at least several reasonable sized articles, for example from newspapers or magazines, focusing on the artist. --GRuban (talk) 12:21, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
A request to check (back)
Hi there,
I've created a referenced historical map. When asking for an oppinion, I was advised by an other admin to refer to you :). Can you have a look at it [98]? Thanks Aregakn (talk) 20:57, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- Hope you don't mind, my friend, I sent Aregakn here :). See user talk:HJ Mitchell#Could you please check?. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:01, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- ehh HJ... now, when you wrote it, Fastily will surely understand, that it is required to "mind" :) Aregakn (talk) 21:10, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- Just reverting the bot archiving of my pending request. Aregakn (talk) 23:07, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry about that. Bot archived it before I had a chance to review the file. I'm afraid that this image cannot be used on Wikipedia. The external link you provide as the source specifically notes that the map image cannot be used for commercial purposes:
- Just reverting the bot archiving of my pending request. Aregakn (talk) 23:07, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
| “ | © J. Vanderspoel, Department of Greek, Latin and Ancient History, University of Calgary This and the subsidiary documents and images have been prepared primarily for the use of students in the courses which I teach, but may be used for any legitimate educational purpose by private individuals and students. Commercial reproduction is specifically prohibited. | ” |
- Per WP:IUP, files whose copyright places restrictions on commercial use/derivatives, or restricts use to educational use only are subject to on-sight deletion per speedy deletion criterion F3. Alas, I am sorry to inform you that I have deleted your file in compliance with Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to let me know. Kind regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:48, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
The map itself does not belong to the University and is not under their copyright. It is published in 1907 and on the page it is said to be in Public Domain [99]. Aregakn (talk) 05:54, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Fastily, per the assertion on the referenced page that the original map was under public domain, I've restored Aregakn's recreation of the map. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:35, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Exams
Hey Fastily, just letting you know that I will be very minimally active thise week due to exams. I will answer the Admin Coaching Questions ASAP.--SKATER Hmm? 14:38, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
NTI Corporation
Hello I have new content that is revised from NTI Corporation, where should I place it ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karlosgaona (talk • contribs) 00:16, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you
Fastily - Thank for your participation and support in my RfA.
I can honestly say that your comments and your trust in me are greatly appreciated.
Please let me know if you ever have any suggestions for me as an editor, or comments based on my admin actions.
Thank you! 7 22:48, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
CSD F8
Hi. You've deleted a few old PD images I uploaded since they were uploaded to commons, but I'm concerned that the F8 criteria that "All information on the image description page is present on the Commons image description page" wasn't strictly met. Some images were taken from external websites, and although they are old enough to fall into PD, I think the source info needs to be noted. The specific image I'm concerned with is File:Nangklao portrait.jpg. --Paul_012 (talk) 07:26, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Fbot
Hi Fastily, it.wikipedia username Fbot is now available. As I suggested you before, you should create the SUL account as soon as possible. Ary29 (talk) 09:34, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Possible banned editor evading, disrupting and edit-warring
Hi there, I see that on April 15, 2010, you have blocked Jigglyfidders (talk · contribs) indefinitely and the next day on April 16, 2010, Iwanttoeditthissh (talk · contribs) was created and began editing the same articles as Jigglyfidders with the same style and same POV. For example, Jigglyfidders changed the correct number of Sunni Muslims at Islam page from 85% to 75% [100] and now Iwanttoeditthissh is reverting to Jigglyfidders' version by removing sourced figures that is backed by Encyclopædia Britannica. [101] You can see that both names are made in a very similar style. BTW, Alek2407 (talk · contribs) may also be him because that one is supporting Iwanttoeditthissh's view and reverting to Iwanttoeditthissh's version.--WKTU (talk) 10:06, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
User Page help
Hi,
I wrote to you last week about having a page deleted and wondered if you have had a chance to see that message yet? I am new to Wikipedia and so do not know how to wite a page correctly - please let me know what was wrong with the original page so I can correctly put up a new one!
Thanks for you help, DERTOUR UK (talk) 09:40, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Revision to Sid Meier's Alien Crossfire and Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri articles
I noticed that you have revised either Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri or Sid Meier's Alien Crossfire.
I intend to revise those articles following the Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines. There are more details on the discussion pages of those articles. I'd be interested in any comments you have. It would be best if your comments were on the discussion pages of the two articles.
Thank you.
Vyeh (talk) 12:26, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
CfD
Glad to see help at CfD for closes. Just a comment on Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_May_13#Mimzy1990.27s_slang. When you close as keep you need to remove the discussion tag on the affected page. And if you really do it completely, you can tag the discussion page with {{Cfdend}}. Some of these are still tagged. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:34, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Speedy Deletion of telecommunication software article
Please respond with reason why this article (telecommunication software) was marked for speedy deletion as promotional? I quote from the definition: Note that simply having a company or product as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion.
The whole article was only stating facts, and also so in a neutral, non-promotional way. The article will be recreated. Please provide feedback about specific problems (references, structure, text quality, phrasing) for constructive feedback on proper recreation, on my talk page, or provide feedback on the article talk page later on.
Pnetz (talk • contribs) 20:34, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Pnetz#Re:Speedy Deletion of telecommunication software article -FASTILY (TALK) 04:19, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Greetings, Fastily! Instead of easing back into lessons I decided to go ahead and upload a non-free image with a poor rationale. This seems like a "coachable moment" to me, so would you kindly take a look at the expanded rationale I provided and tell me what you think? I appreciate your time.--~TPW 04:02, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
- Hi True Pagan Warrior. The fair use rationale for File:Witchvox.com screen shot.png looks perfectly fine to me. I have removed the deletion tag accordingly. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:22, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
A suggestion for recreating the page Carve Your Destiny which was earlier deleted because I personally feel that the respected administrators were a bit too quick to delete it.
Respected Administrator, A very Good day to you, herein I'm writing you a long piece but believe you me it's worth reading:) I being a contributor to this store house of knowledge called "Wikipedia" was tracking the discussions on this page "Carve Your Destiny" as well as "Anubhav Srivastava" till the time they were deleted. But here is something which I want to bring to light that IS A SERIOUS FACT the creator of both these pages was NOT USING this platform for promoting his project NOR WAS HE SELF PROMOTING HIMSELF, in fact I am sorry to say but I personally feel the administrators were a bit TOO HARSH ON THESE PAGES and I sense a bit of BIAS attitude was shown towards both the already deleted pages which are PERHAPS actually worthy of being given some more time before doubting their CREDIBILITY on Wikipedia because of the following third party references which you can check for yourself and if you feel both the articles DESERVE ANOTHER CHANCE DO ALLOW AND PERMIT THEIR RECREATION...
A LIST OF ALL THE REFERENCES FOR CARVE YOUR DESTINY(Radio appearances and mainstream coverage)
1.BBC Radio Appearance:
Anubhav was interviewed by BBC Radio on March 4, 2010 regarding Carve Your Destiny. Check out the appearance here! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCbx_HEjgq8
2.Carve your Destiny was featured on October 10, 2009 in the Times of India which is the largest English newspaper in the world in terms of circulation Here is the link- http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/life-style/people/Filmi-destiny/articleshow/5105746.cms
3. One of the most popular web portals in India, Rediff.com featured Carve Your Destiny on September 28, 2009.http://getahead.rediff.com/slide-show/2009/sep/28/slide-show-1-meet-amateur-film-maker-anubhav-srivastava.htm
4. Hindustan Times is the newspaper with the highest circulation in New Delhi, the capital of India. Carve Your Destiny was featured in the Hindustan Times’ HT city on September 4, 2009.http://carveyourdestiny.com/media-coverage/hindustan-times-article-on-carve-your-destiny/
5. Carve Your Destiny was featured prominently on the second page of the Mid-Day newspaper’s Delhi edition for August 13, 2009 http://www.mid-day.com/news/2009/aug/130809-Anubhav-Srivastava-young-amateur-filmmaker-motivational-films-Delhi-news-Twitter.htm
6. The Indian Express featured Carve Your Destiny on September 3, 2009. Read the online edition here.http://www.indianexpress.com/news/secrets-of-the-big-shots/511636/
7. Carve Your Destiny was featured on the website of the University of Leicester. http://www2.le.ac.uk/ebulletin/features/2010-2019/2010/02/nparticle.2010-02-22.2069246695
8. Most recently Anubhav appeared on 93.5 Red FM with RJ Nitin on the 31st of May at 9:30 am, the online edition will come soon but you can check the pictures in the meantime http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=3969000&id=76975844104&ref=mf
P.S. IT IS THEREFORE A REQUEST IF THE ABOVE MENTIONED PAGES DESERVE A PLACE ON WIKIPEDIA DO RECONSIDER THEIR RECREATION AND PLEASE NOTE THAT I AM AN INDEPENDENT RESEARCH SCHOLAR FROM INDIA AND BEAR NO AFFILIATION TO NEITHER CARVE YOUR DESTINY NOR ANUBHAV SRIVASTAVA WHATSOEVER SO KINDLY KEEP THIS IN MIND WHILE ARRIVING AT ANY DECISION.
- Please feel free to recreate the pages. Both were deleted per the original authors' requests. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:05, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
LA Galaxy logo
I'm extremely disappointed that you deleted this image with no clear consensus obtained between the pro and con arguments. With the exception of the original proposer, there was only one con argument to counteract my pro argument, which hs hardly enough to establish a proper consensus. I strongly feel that this absolutely the wrong decision, and there are clear precedents with many, many other sports teams having a gallery of historical logos similar to the one I was trying to build with Galaxy. --JonBroxton (talk) 04:00, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello. Per WP:DRV, I'm supposed to contact you first and ask you to take a second look at Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_May_31#File:The_Prestige_fashion.jpg. This image was used to increase the readers' understanding of why the film received Academy Award nominations for Best Cinematography and Best Art Direction and how the cinematography and costume design was achieved. WP:FILMNFI says: "Non-free images can illustrate technical and/or thematic aspects of the film. Examples include, but are not limited to: production design, makeup, costume design, camera technique, visual effects, lighting, and iconic shots." That is precisely what this image has done, and its significance is self-evident as a result of the Academy Award nomination received. I explained this in the keep, so I'm curious how it could be deleted. Is an Academy Award nomination insignificant? And, how is it possible to illustrate the costume design and cinematography without this image? Joan Bergin and Wally Pfister's work is highly notable. Could you explain how the arguments for deletion made by seresin and VernoWhitney outweigh this keep? Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 10:21, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- I am sorry - you did not mention what you just told me above at the deletion discussion. Your keep !vote did not directly address the concern posed by the nominator. Had you done that, I would probably have closed the discussion as no consensus. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 18:14, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Forgive me, but I see no difference between the points made in the verbose explanation above, and the concise rationale I provided in the discussion. I believe I addressed all of the points raised, and I don't understand how the oppose vote could possibly mean anything at all. Viriditas (talk) 00:39, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Same as above. Neither decorative fair use as claimed by seresin, nor does it fail WP:NFCC#8 as claimed by VernoWhitney. As I explained in the rationale for keep, and as I allude to above in my link to WP:FILMNFI, this image is "significant in increasing the readers' understanding of the topic" as it "illustrates technical and/or thematic aspects of the film" including production design. I've previously explained this in explicit detail. This is precisely how we use non-free images in film articles, so I don't understand why it was deleted. Viriditas (talk) 10:29, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- This does fail WP:NFCC#8. The file does not significantly add to a reader's understanding of the article - essentially, the text of the article fails to give significance to the file. You are welcome to consider DRV, although, be sure to notify users who originally participated in the FFD discussion. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 18:18, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- How did you come to that conclusion? Are you saying that the paragraph in the caption describing the recreation of Tesla's experiment, a significant historical recreation of a science experiment that has no free equivalent, does not add to the reader's understanding? Critical commentary on the production and location of this scene is also important to the reader's understanding of the article. What change would be required for it to meet your criteria? Viriditas (talk) 00:49, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Requests for adminship: Kenshinflyer
Hello, Fastily. I have read your message, and I fully understand that the Adminship requires high standards, and applying for it is like running for President. However, it's worth a try applying for such a position, so I carry on with my application. Thank you.
Kenshinflyer (talk) 00:12, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Rollback misuse
A thread concerning you has been opened by me about you, here. Giacomo 18:26, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily, when you next log on, please review and comment on the ANI thread as a matter of urgency. AGK 16:52, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
- [thread restored from /Archive 4] Hi Fastily. Could you please respond to the assertions made against you in relation to your rollback misuse, perhaps in an ANI post? AGK 09:33, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- The ANI thread was archived even though unresolved. You can find it at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive617#Rollback misuse. DuncanHill (talk) 10:25, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Certainly. This revert, which appeared to be the primary concern, was in fact a mistake. I made that clear before Giano started the thread at User_talk:Dr.K.#Thanks_3. Dr. K also mentioned that on the ANI thread here, although his post seemed to have been largely ignored. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 18:10, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- There are seven other counts of misuse of rollback alleged against you. Can you please clarify if you are saying all eight were mistakes? Stifle (talk) 08:06, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Those were not mistakes. Richard removed no source image deletion tags without first remedying the problem. At this point, specific sources have been added and/or the consensus has determined that the sources are sufficient. I respect consensus and will not push the issue further. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 17:05, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Are you suggesting that the use of rollback was appropriate in this case? –xenotalk 17:11, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- This is a rhetorical question. I have no comment. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 17:12, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- No, it was a direct question. Do you feel that you were justified in using administrative rollback to revert Richard's edits? I note that some of Richard's edits actually added information [102] [103] that you subsequently removed by using rollback. –xenotalk 17:15, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- If you're demanding I make a public apology to Richard, you've got one. I hereby publicly apologize to Richard Arthur Norton for whatever actions/administrative actions that him/his associates may have found offensive. Anyone is free to undo my actions - I will not contest this. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 17:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not sure why you think I'm demanding an apology; what I am looking for is some indication that you realize that your behaviour has been less-than-acceptable and that you are taking steps to modify your behaviour accordingly in light of the criticism offered by the community. –xenotalk 17:24, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- It's implied in my last post. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 17:32, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not sure why you think I'm demanding an apology; what I am looking for is some indication that you realize that your behaviour has been less-than-acceptable and that you are taking steps to modify your behaviour accordingly in light of the criticism offered by the community. –xenotalk 17:24, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- If you're demanding I make a public apology to Richard, you've got one. I hereby publicly apologize to Richard Arthur Norton for whatever actions/administrative actions that him/his associates may have found offensive. Anyone is free to undo my actions - I will not contest this. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 17:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- No, it was a direct question. Do you feel that you were justified in using administrative rollback to revert Richard's edits? I note that some of Richard's edits actually added information [102] [103] that you subsequently removed by using rollback. –xenotalk 17:15, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- This is a rhetorical question. I have no comment. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 17:12, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Are you suggesting that the use of rollback was appropriate in this case? –xenotalk 17:11, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Those were not mistakes. Richard removed no source image deletion tags without first remedying the problem. At this point, specific sources have been added and/or the consensus has determined that the sources are sufficient. I respect consensus and will not push the issue further. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 17:05, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- There are seven other counts of misuse of rollback alleged against you. Can you please clarify if you are saying all eight were mistakes? Stifle (talk) 08:06, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Certainly. This revert, which appeared to be the primary concern, was in fact a mistake. I made that clear before Giano started the thread at User_talk:Dr.K.#Thanks_3. Dr. K also mentioned that on the ANI thread here, although his post seemed to have been largely ignored. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 18:10, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Please explain why you deleted so many of my images?
Rodolph (talk) 16:35, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily, "Administrators are expected to respond promptly and civilly to queries about their Wikipedia-related conduct and administrator actions and to justify them when needed." This query has been here almost 24 hours now, and you seem to have been on Wikipedia long enough in that time frame to nominate and deleted a good number of pages; yet as far as I can tell, you haven't responded to this good-faith query. Is there some reasonable explanation for your lack of reply? –xenotalk 14:21, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- [104] -FASTILYsock(TALK) 17:02, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I understand that you have a proclivity to use the rollback button as a "response" but this is hardly something that could be considered civil or a justification. –xenotalk 17:05, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry? I don't believe I pushed the rollback button here. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 17:06, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Just because this user placed a less-than-civil query - perhaps accidentally - on your userpage doesn't mean they can be ignored now that they've left you a civil good-faith query on your talk page. You've deleted their images. Are you going to explain to them the reason why? –xenotalk 17:07, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- As you wish. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 17:13, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Just because this user placed a less-than-civil query - perhaps accidentally - on your userpage doesn't mean they can be ignored now that they've left you a civil good-faith query on your talk page. You've deleted their images. Are you going to explain to them the reason why? –xenotalk 17:07, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry? I don't believe I pushed the rollback button here. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 17:06, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I understand that you have a proclivity to use the rollback button as a "response" but this is hardly something that could be considered civil or a justification. –xenotalk 17:05, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
InkHeart
Hey, InkHeart is back again at Special:Contributions/99.243.108.148. Ωphois 04:06, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
I proded and you deleted the Robert Watke article. Another admin undeleted and posted to AfD. I thought you might be interested. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Watke. ALXVA (talk) 13:53, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
deletion of FingaskMural Lofty Buchannan
hi. on 29 may I think you deleted the above image re discussion at [105]
Actually, there seems to have been no discussion.
user Rodolph has asked for help re deletion of a number of images he has uploaded. I dont think he has quite got the hang of copyright tagging, but in this case I dont see why the image was deleted. User memphisto appears to be engaged in a vendetta with rodolpho over images and was in this case the only person requesting deletion. I gather this may apply to a whole swath of other images. It seems to me the proper course for a good faith editor would be to assist Rodolpho in properly tagging his images, rather then trying to get them deleted. It is my understanding that being orphaned is only grounds for deletion of an image if it is 'fair use'. Perhaps you can cast some light on this, and indeed undelete the image if there was nothing wrong with it? Sandpiper (talk) 21:24, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Similarly, you seem to have mistakenly deleted Fingas Follies.[106] Sandpiper (talk) 21:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
And also [107]
I expect there are others as you seem to work on deletions. perhaps you can look at these and if you agree they should not have been deleted, we can then move on to any others? Or, of course, I would be pleased to know whether there was a valid reason for their deletion, as I cant see the deleted pages. Sandpiper (talk) 21:30, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- The proper thing for Rodolph to do would be to contest the deletion at the discussion(s). Because he made no such comment(s), I did what was presumably a non-controversial close, and deleted the file(s). While the files were not non-free (and yes, you are correct that orphaned non-free files that are routinely deleted), orphaned free files can be listed at WP:FFD and deleted if no one contests the deletion. In the nominations cited above, memphisto does not seem to have done anything out of process. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:32, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- But the rules state files may only be deleted on the grounds they are orphans if they are free use. I take it these were not, so an administrator would not be following the rules if he deleted them. ? It really isnt good enough for an administrator to hide behind 'due process' and state that a knowledgeable editor could have objected, or could now go through the rigmarole of undeletion request to overturn an incorrect action. I dont know exactly what is goin on here, but memphisto seems to have dedicated himself for months to deleting rodolphos images. If you do not feel you can now reverse your own edits, perhaps you will be so good as to list the files for undeletion yourself? Sandpiper (talk) 21:42, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Please see the first line of Wikipedia:Files for deletion - the blue box on the right. It is acceptable to nominate orphaned images for deletion. Rodolph had a week to contest each deletion - considering that he is fairly active, I'm positive he was aware of all the deletion discussions. Unfortunately, due process runs this place and as an administrator, I am bound by it. You may wish to directly query Memphisto and inquire as to why s/he is nominating all these files for deletion - that may provide some insight. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:48, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- I have. Wikipedia is only run by 'due process' when people can't be bothered to investigate the non-trivial cases. I have personally never considered 7 days sufficient notice for deletion of anything since I can perfectly well not look at wiki for a week or longer. You know perfectly well this is just a formal excuse to allow getting on with things, but it does not make decisions right. Sandpiper (talk) 22:09, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- But the rules state files may only be deleted on the grounds they are orphans if they are free use. I take it these were not, so an administrator would not be following the rules if he deleted them. ? It really isnt good enough for an administrator to hide behind 'due process' and state that a knowledgeable editor could have objected, or could now go through the rigmarole of undeletion request to overturn an incorrect action. I dont know exactly what is goin on here, but memphisto seems to have dedicated himself for months to deleting rodolphos images. If you do not feel you can now reverse your own edits, perhaps you will be so good as to list the files for undeletion yourself? Sandpiper (talk) 21:42, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
I read the intro to files for deletion. It seems to me less than clear since it specifically refers to deletion of non free use files. These do not seem to be non free use files, so the examples given would not apply. In any case I understand there is a policy of transferring valid files to commons, not deleting them. Can you refer to a longer and more precise listing of the deletion rules? Sandpiper (talk) 22:29, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I see that the deletion page says this explicitly further down,VII. If a file is appropriately licensed and could be usable elsewhere, consider copying it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of listing it for deletion. Once copied to the Commons, it is eligible for speedy deletion per criteria 8 for files.Sandpiper (talk)
- Have found a relevant page at Wikipedia:Deletion_guidelines_for_administrators, which says, Administrators must use their best judgment, attempting to be as impartial as is possible for a fallible human, to determine when rough consensus has been reached. For example, administrators can disregard opinions and comments if they feel that there is strong evidence that they were not made in good faith. Such "bad faith" opinions include those being made by sock puppets, or being made using a new user id whose only edits are to the article in question and the voting on that article. If a rough consensus holds that the nomination was made in bad faith, the page may be speedily kept. Granted there was no opposition in some of these cases to deletion, but since memphisto to my knowledge has been doing this for some time and there was no one else supporting his nominations, there is clear question in my mind as to whether these are good faith nominations. The guidance also says When in doubt, don't delete. The rules also say that in the first instance to discuss deletions with the closing admin, which brings this matter back to you. Sandpiper (talk) 23:14, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Sandpiper, I really want to help you - believe me, I do. However, I fail to see anything inappropriate or out of process with Memphisto's nominations. You claim the nominations were made in bad faith, but I see nothing in the discussions linked above suggesting bad faith. If you can provide some diffs supporting this accusation, I will be more than happy to take action. Until then, I have nothing more to say. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:25, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- Come now, that is rather disingenuous. I got into this by accident because rodolpho posted some images I was interested in. That was some months ago but his disagreement with memphisto seems to be rumbling along and his images keep getting deleted. As an admin who is keen to do administrative work, I would have thought that if you were really wanting to help other editors, then you would. I have not claimed memphisto's posts were 'out of process', merely that they were not motivated for reasons of improving the encyclopedia, rather some little war which is going on. He is entitled to post applications for deletions. You are entitled to refuse them. As an admin doing deletions, it is your responsibility to take all factors into account when taking actions. Ok, you didnt know about this before. Now you do. Sandpiper (talk) 21:42, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
I am sure that User:Rodolph has made many fine contributions to Wikipedia, however he has a long history of uploading copyright and orphan images.
Like many of us his contributions are generally confined to non-controversial areas of Wikipedia and so he does not come into contact with other users very often; however when this does happen all hell seems to break loose with accusations of vandalism and bullying. See Vandal alert - [108] and his comment here Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 January 11#File:FingasFollies2007KateF.jpg.
Maybe Rodolph will never come to understand the reason why respecting image copyright is crucial to Wikipedia; but I also don't think it helps when User:Sandpiper encourages him to falsify OTRS tickets - "...I have found the need to artificially create emails to satisfy the regulations..." User talk:Rodolph#deleted images. Memphisto (talk) 10:48, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
ANI
Another editor started an ANI thread complaining about one of your admin actions and failed to notify you, so I thought I'd better :) ╟─TreasuryTag►belonger─╢ 10:12, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- Alright, thanks for letting me know. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 18:26, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi!
If at all possible, please don't go around tagging files for deletion related to Wikimedia Chapters activity on Meta-wiki regardless of the presence of any license tag. If in doubt, just consider them {{Copyright by Wikimedia}}. Thank you, --Dami (talk) 10:41, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- I figured something wasn't right. I'll get to that ASAP. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 18:27, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Closure line could be fixed
In a recent case you closed at WP:AN3, you put 'Reporter blocked' in the header, but actually didn't you block the IP? The reporter was Ophois, who was not blocked. For clarity, I suggest changing the header to read 'IP blocked 3 months.' The body of the report needs a matching fix. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 12:48, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- Well that was good. Thanks for letting me know - I've made the fix. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 18:29, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank spam!
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
TFOWR 21:34, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Is the history of a deleted file available?
You recently deleted File:Smpabouturluv.jpg which was involved in a strange series of edits I think, but without the history I cannot verify. To my recollection, there was a previous image with a screenshot logo from an old TV show "abouturluv". Can you verify that User:PrimeViper recently uploaded under that file name a new image (which you deleted) which was a screenshot logo for a non-related upcoming show Momay? An IP editor replaced within the article a validly licenced Momay screenshot with a link to this newly uploaded high res version. (several times actually) [109] Which makes me think User:PrimeViper is hiding behind IP editing to attempt to skirt our copyright / free use rules. Active Banana (talk) 21:37, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- Here is the IP removing the image from the original article [110] Active Banana (talk) 21:38, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- I'll restore it temporarily for you. Just let me know when you're finished with it. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:39, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- [111] Confirms the unusual upload by PrimeViper of an image for the show Momay under the completely unrelated name which was then subsequently linked into the Momay article by the IP. Please take whatever actions you feel are appropriate. Active Banana (talk) 21:42, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- Alright - quick summary of what I just did: IP blocked, original version of File:Smpabouturluv.jpg restored and re-added to its relevant article, I've reverted the IP's edits at Momay, and deleted the old versions of File:Salaminsim.JPG. I think that should solve the problem. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 21:56, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- thanks!Active Banana (talk) 22:03, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- Can you revert File:Smpabouturluv.jpg back to the "about ur luv" screenshot as originally uploaded by MFGV.3? Active Banana (talk) 22:23, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- thanks!Active Banana (talk) 22:03, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- Alright - quick summary of what I just did: IP blocked, original version of File:Smpabouturluv.jpg restored and re-added to its relevant article, I've reverted the IP's edits at Momay, and deleted the old versions of File:Salaminsim.JPG. I think that should solve the problem. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 21:56, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- [111] Confirms the unusual upload by PrimeViper of an image for the show Momay under the completely unrelated name which was then subsequently linked into the Momay article by the IP. Please take whatever actions you feel are appropriate. Active Banana (talk) 21:42, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- I'll restore it temporarily for you. Just let me know when you're finished with it. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:39, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Big Ten Conference
Thanks for dealing with the Big Ten Conference page. Of course, now, less than an hour later, the Big Ten announced that they accepted Nebraska. The semi-protection you applied is allowing for cleaner revisions regarding the new circumstances by preventing anonymous trolls from larding it up with incorrect stuff, so I respectfully suggest the protection be left on the article over the weekend to let the new status shake out. It's also pretty much a given that there will be more rumors of schools moving around. But I wanted to drop you a message to alert you to the news in case you feel the article should be unprotected in view of the changed circumstances.
Thanks again, and I apologize if this has been an inconvenience for you. 1995hoo (talk) 22:11, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- The semi-protection has been set to expire on the 25th of June. If you would like an extension or a shorter duration, please feel free to let me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 22:30, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- I indeed noted the duration. Tell you what, I'll keep an eye on the news and and on the article early next week and if it seems the protection is no longer needed, I'll follow up with you. (I tend not to be online too much on Saturday and Sunday, especially when the USA plays in the World Cup.) Thanks again. 1995hoo (talk) 22:40, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Montereybayaquarium180ppx.png
Thanks for uploading File:Montereybayaquarium180ppx.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is 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).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Connormah (talk | contribs) 22:40, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Grab some glory, and a barnstar
Hi, I'd like to invite you to participate in the Guild of Copy Editors July 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive. In May, about 30 editors helped remove the {{copyedit}} tag from 1175 articles. The backlog is still over 7500 articles, and extends back to the beginning of 2008! We really need your help to reduce it. Copyediting just a couple articles can qualify you for a barnstar. Serious copyeditors can win prestigious and exclusive rewards. See the event page for more information. And thanks for your consideration. monosock 03:54, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
Why am I getting this message? Mono's delivery method is random, so you probably showed up somewhere Mono went. :)
Alvin Greene photo
Hi Fastily. You F7 speedied an image of Alvin Greene, saying it violated non-free content #1. As far as I can see, there is no free equivalent photograph available to describe Greene. Does #1 bar use as long as a person is alive? Gobonobo T C 04:22, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
- If a person is alive, it is always possible to take a free photograph of them, especially since the subject of the photo is a notable politician; hence, the file fails WP:NFCC#1. Hope that helps to clarify things. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:26, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
Back in action
Thanks for your patience. I've completed my response to your most recent question, warts and all. --~TPW 04:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- I really didn't expect to exceed your expectations, and that comment absolutely made my day. I've also taken a crack at that rational (and still haven't looked at the current version, because I like surprises).--~TPW 22:19, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- That lesson was surprisingly fun!--~TPW 16:00, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
Question about deletion of image files
Hi Fastily.
You deleted some image files in the David Spero article that I'm writing. What did I do wrong and how can I fix that so you can restore them? I saw the warning 7 days ago, and it indicated that I should send an email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org which I did on 6/30/10. I can forward that email thread to you, too, if that would help.
Essentially it's a thread that starts with me asking a newspaper reporter from the Plain Dealer for permission to use some pictures. It included links to Wikipedia rules on adding images and indicating the copyright tags.
She referred me to David Spero, who is well known to have a big collection of rock memorabilia, including a lot of photographs (some of which, I had thought and hoped - and, the reporter indicted, would include pictures of Spero himself).
I forwarded the thread to David and he responded -- in addition to correcting one mistake in my draft article -- that I was free to use pictures from his collection. I had assumed that email was adequate proof. What else is required?
Thanks for the help. Ludasaphire (talk) 01:27, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- Was a/Were specific license(s) that the file(s) were to be licensed under indicated in the email? (note that the license is to be determined by the copyright holder) Were the file names also noted in the email? If not, please send another email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org with that information. Once you've done that, let me know and I'll have an OTRS volunteer look into it for you. Sorry for the inconvenience. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:33, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- No inconvenience, Fastily. I appreciate the clear directions. Although I noted the file names in the email and sent to the copyright holder the list of free content licenses that I'd need to use, I failed to specifically ask that he determine which license to use. I'll do that. I'm going to assume that it's OK for me to suggest which one he should select, but let me know if that's not appropriate.
- Thanks for the help. I'll be in touch, assuming I get a response from Mr. Spero.
- Ludasaphire (talk) 01:44, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you with another question Fastily. I got a response back from David Spero much faster this time around. He specifically selected the Public Domain (as I had assumed based on our prior email thread) as the license to use. I was about to send the thread off to permissions-en@wikimedia.org but remembered that you had directed that I indicate the file names. So, then I went to put the pictures back, but read the following:
- If you are creating a new page with different content, please continue. If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the deleting administrator using the information provided below.
- 00:56, 11 June 2010 Fastily (talk | contribs) deleted "File:David Spero with his father.JPG" (F11: No evidence of permission)
So, I didn't feel like I could recreate the files without first checking with you. I described the pictures in my email to Mr. Spero. Is that enough when I forward to permissions-en@wikimedia.org or should I recreate the four files (you only deleted three, but there is a fourth picture from Mr. Spero's collection where I failed to get his specific determination of license) and refer to those four file names in my note?
Thanks, again, for the help.
--Ludasaphire (talk) 02:42, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- Just go ahead and send the email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. If the permissions on the email check out, we'll restore the images, saving you the trouble of having to re-upload. Please let me know once you've sent the email so I can ask an OTRS volunteer to look into it for you. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 06:37, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
OK, I sent the email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Thanks again for walking me through the process. Hopefully next time I'll get it right from the start. --Ludasaphire (talk) 10:52, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- Great! I've contacted an OTRS volunteer. I'll have a response for you shortly. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 22:31, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- The email has been received, archived in the Wikimedia OTRS database, and assigned a ticket number, and the files have been restored. Everything is in order now. Thanks for your patience. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 01:56, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
- Wonderful! I really appreciate you helping me walk through this. I feel like I've graduated from just re-using existing pictures (and pictures I've taken myself), and now will be able to ask copyright holders for permission. Not as hard as it used to seem. Thanks again.--Ludasaphire (talk) 03:36, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
- The email has been received, archived in the Wikimedia OTRS database, and assigned a ticket number, and the files have been restored. Everything is in order now. Thanks for your patience. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 01:56, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
- Great! I've contacted an OTRS volunteer. I'll have a response for you shortly. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 22:31, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Logos and other things
i) Wikipedia:Database_reports/Mistagged_non-free_files. Clearing that backlog would be appreicated :)
ii) You, will note from my recent contribs a lot of F2's... I am also trying to get information added to other images that COULD be moved to Commons. (See my comments on a number of User talk pages for a possible template able info-request.) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:30, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thanks for approving this request for me early! Huggle won't even start without Rollback rights. I plan on creates some test pages in my own userspace, until I get the hang of things... I would never purposely mess something up! I will wait until Monday as request by Courcelles to main mainstream edits, I want to honor both of you for helping me.
If you wouldn't mind, I am requesting that you peer-review my contributions for a while... and instruct me (if needed)...
Thanks again Cit helper (talk) 00:49, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
- Certainly! I'd be happy to review your edits and give you feedback as necessary. Oh, and feel free to drop me a line if you need anything. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 01:08, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
The reason I hadn't given that user rollback permissions was because some of his reverts I had seen were incorrect- such as [112] and [113]- entirely correct edits that he reverted, and especially this, where he returned a BLP issue to an article without fixing it. (And that was just the things he shouldn't have reverted- not counting the revertible stuff that wasn't vandalism he labelled as such... but I blame the Stiki tool for that, more than him.) I really wanted to see if he would make the same mistakes with a more controllable tool, like Twinkle, before letting him run on Huggle. I'm somewhat aggravated that he even mentioned coming to my talk page, and my reply, and you went ahead and granted him the rights anyway- it will only encourage such WP:PARENT behaviour in the future. Courcelles (talk) 08:59, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
- When reviewing this user's request, the reverts I sampled looked perfectly fine to me. I only found the discussion you cited above after digging around just now, and I see what you are referring to. If you would like me to redact Cit helper's rollback rights so you can restore them on Monday, please let me know and I'll do that. However, I feel that a certain degree of AGF and common courtesy are not present here :/ Either way, let me know if you need me to take action. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:37, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
- No need- at this point he can just be monitored for more reverts like those; which can likely be blamed more on the clumsy STiki interface than him. I was just a little peeved that he admitted on WP:PERM/R that he was admin-shopping. Courcelles (talk) 19:00, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm not making vandalism. i'm correcting Reyrefran. A user who insist that he is right —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arthurchanning (talk • contribs) 11:16, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
I would like to report user Reyrefran for saying bad words such as "asshole".
- (talk page stalker) No comment on either parties' edits, but I've warned Reyrefran that edit summaries like this one are unacceptable. TFOWR 11:51, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
How can I report user saying bad words such "asshole'. The user also reported me that I commit vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arthurchanning (talk • contribs)
- Consider them reported - I've warned them that describing other editors in such a way is not acceptable, it's a violation of WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. If they repeat it you should report them to WP:WQA, who deal with complaints like this. Alternatively, let me know and I will block them. TFOWR 11:57, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
User:87.210.232.221 is back to attacking (without evidence) Kiev and Lviv and pushing his/her private POV. --Taivo (talk) 14:38, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
- It seems that both articles are currently fully protected due to the content dispute. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:31, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
hello yes you might as well delete the RfA thanks --Jsutton666 (talk) 18:48, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
- Alright then, thank you for being upfront about it. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:24, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
18:52, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Multiple fair use rationales
Could you give me an opinion on File:STObsession.jpg? The fair-use rationale sort of slips in a second article in the body of the text. I think the use is reasonable, but should there be a second template added to make the separate rationale clear? I've never actually seen an example of how to properly do it. I'll add one if you think that's the best course of action.--~TPW 20:14, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
- A second set of fair use rationale justifying the file's use in Redshirt (character) should be added just below the fair use rationale justifying the file's use in Obsession (Star Trek: The Original Series). The appropriate policy page is at WP:NFCC#10c, if you're interested. Feel free to let me know if you have any other questions or are in need of assistance! Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 00:27, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, the exact requirements at WP:NFCC#10c weren't 100% clear, but that was my guess. Now that I'm thinking "images" I see problems everywhere!--~TPW 02:39, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
RFA/Youndbuckerz
I'm not a new user. I have been on here for about 3 or 4 years editing wikipedia and no dont delete the request for admin. Youndbuckerz (talk) 23:39, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
- Regardless, at your current standing, I'm doubtful you'll be successful. If you've heeded my warning and are absolutely this is sure what you want, let me know and we can proceed. However, I am strongly discouraging you from running. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:30, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
No, im sure i will go alright. The more admins the better. Youndbuckerz (talk) 00:33, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Very well then. Would you like me to transclude (aka submit for formal review) your RfA? -FASTILY (TALK) 00:34, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes please do so. Youndbuckerz (talk) 00:35, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Alright then - you can see it at WP:RFA#Youndbuckerz. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:42, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
I have a question what do i have to as an administrator to i have to spend most of my day on wikipedia editing articles making improvements, stopping vandalism, and what advantages do i have than normal users, do i have the ability to block users, delete pages? please answer i will maybe try again in a couple of months.Youndbuckerz (talk) 01:58, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Please see WP:ADMIN; it describes the technical aspects and the conduct that is expected of administrators. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 02:17, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Gospel of the Hebrews
I am the Anon from the Okanagan who you accused of vandalism. All my edits are good faith edits. Please explain. 207.81.154.64 (talk) 01:22, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Er...sorry? Can you link some discussions/pages/ect? -FASTILY (TALK) 02:18, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- The problem with the Gospel of the Hebrews is that there are two passionate groups. One believes that the Gospel of Matthew was written by Matthew ie (most Christians). The other group of scholars believe that Matthew actually wrote the Gospel of the Hebrews. The problem has been to get this article written from a neutral point of view. - - 207.81.154.64 (talk) 02:34, 14 June 2010 (UTC) I think we need Admin help!
Premature candidates
Fastily, by my count I see you've transcluded nine of these premature RFAs and every one was closed within a few hours. Perhaps if we just left the abandoned RFAs alone, we might save a lot of time, and possibly the candidate unnecessary stress? –xenotalk 02:37, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Nine of several hundred users I have been unable to successfully convince otherwise. I think it is only fair however, to inform and guide newbies who create RfAs that they do not stand a chance of passing RfA. While I see the merit of your approach, I do not agree with shelving a problem for later. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:45, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- In that case, perhaps you could stop transcluding it for them - allow them to step over the threshold if they don't realize they aren't ready. –xenotalk 02:49, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- How about this - I'll politely direct particularity insistent users to you. Sometimes, a second opinion is all it takes. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:51, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Sounds like a plan. Or even just change your wording a bit: instead of "Would you like me to transclude it for you?" perhaps: "In that case, transclude it whenever you think you are ready. You might consider reading Wikipedia:How to pass an RfA to see if you've covered all your bases." –xenotalk 02:54, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- How about this - I'll politely direct particularity insistent users to you. Sometimes, a second opinion is all it takes. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:51, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- In that case, perhaps you could stop transcluding it for them - allow them to step over the threshold if they don't realize they aren't ready. –xenotalk 02:49, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
3RR
Your third revert of the image description page was completely uncalled for, and that I why I wanted to discuss it on the talk page. The image is not non-free, and if you revert again, I will report you for violation of 3RR. Good day. Taric25 (talk) 05:58, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- I find it deeply amusing how you accuse me of 3RR when I have only reverted you once. Read up on your policy - WP:3RR. Either way, I think it's time for the community to decide here. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:10, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Suggested vandalism of article Alex Hartman
Hi Fastily
I have received a warning for vandalism of the article Alex Hartman. The warning relates to a statement regarding a company, Destra Corporation, that Hartman was heavily involved in, being placed into administration in 2008. The article in question has not, in my opinion, been presented from a neutral perspective and has been written in parts like a professional CV by, I suspect, Hartman himself (Headspace3) and close associates. I am a new user on WikiPedia and came across the article a few weeks ago and felt the statement in question, relating to Destra and Prime Media, needed to be clarified. I have no personal gripe with Hartman, who clearly has achieved much in his short career, but the facts should speak for themselves.
The 'cornerstone investment' in Destra Corporation by Prime Media and the subsequent demise of the company as a result of this and other investments, along with Prime's statements on the failure of the investment, have been clearly documented in the media, to which I have cited references in my edits which have since been removed. The Wiki article implies that Hartman's involvement in securing Prime's A$35m investment as a positive for the Destra and Prime. In actual fact it had dire consequences that eventually resulted in the company being placed into receivership, dozens of employees losing their jobs (I was not an employee, if you are wondering - I am not scorned or guided by revenge), and Prime writing off their entire investment. My intention in citing this fact is to present both sides of the story as in its current state many segments of the article are simply written as an advertisment for Hartman. If the other users active in editing the page, whom I suspect are Hartman's associates, did not insist on including the reference to the Prime investment in the article, then I would be satisfied, as currently it is only portrayed as subjectively positive spin. To this end, I propose that the sentence relating to the Prime investment in Destra be removed entirely from the article, as it does not present a balanced view of the events in question.
Subwayseries2000 (talk) 07:52, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Cit helper
Are you sure about Cit helper (talk · contribs) for reviewer rights ? He has been registered for only a few days. The guideline is not yet established but it looks to me like the user has too little experience (fyi, any user can be granted adminship at the testing wiki). Cenarium (talk) 03:31, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- He has my trust and has asked me to mentor his edits. I agree that maybe it was a bit premature to give this user Reviewer rights, but in all good faith, I will keep a close eye on Cit helper. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:35, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks. Cenarium (talk) 03:37, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- When something regarding me becomes a concern, please notify me... I wish to be as open-minded as possible when it comes to fixing errors that I make. Cit helper (talk) 20:16, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Besides, I haven't even started to use this right yet! Cit helper (talk) 20:16, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- When something regarding me becomes a concern, please notify me... I wish to be as open-minded as possible when it comes to fixing errors that I make. Cit helper (talk) 20:16, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks. Cenarium (talk) 03:37, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Active Banana vandalized article about Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
Hello!!
Please be inform to you that the user Active Banana even the Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not article or guideline are inserting the channel line-up (supposedly just for today before it was no violation about not to insert the current channel line, but it now include the rules courtesy of Active Banana himself inventing the rule itself at exactly 3:20 a.m. GMT)
I'm rather considered it as of vandalism about the Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not rule guide implementing himself to protect of his shameless rudeness attitude of him twisting of our mind we did violate the rules but he did. Please check the actual Revision history of Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not which include Active Banana inserting prohibiting current channel line-up himself. I'm begging you help us. I think its about time to teach him a lesson now. --Puppyph Talk 22:35, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- I've also noticed the changes and was reverted by an unregistered editor and then by a Wiki Administrator. Hence, the ruling for Channel Listings is not in effect yet and has yet to be concluded. Is there a guideline for editing policies within Wikipedia since I believe its only the Administrators that should update the policy. I do not know why Active Banana is campaigning and deliberately insisting that Channel Listings should be blocked in Wikipedia but what he did can be considered a vandalism. The said listing has been here in Wikipedia ever since and no one was making a big fuss about it except for Active Banana. I believe we can revert and bring back all the channel listings of all the pay-tv networks here in the Philippines since its not a valid policy yet. Wiki admins should also take action for what Active Banana did to the WP:NOTDIR page since it can be considered as vandalism. -143.166.255.60 (talk) 22:22, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
The ANI
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. I've left comments at the ANI. QwertyQwerpus (talk) 14:22, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
He pretty much spilled the beans by logging out and editing through this. Can we block that, too? —DuncanWhat I Do / What I Say 18:44, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Can you please restore File:Geneva mechanism 6spoke animation.gif for some minutes? I would like to add the original upload log to the description page over at commons. -- Common Good (talk) 19:02, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Done. Let me know when you're finished with it. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:04, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Done Thanks. -- Common Good (talk) 19:08, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi
Can you have a look at this edit - I think it may be a case of WP:OUTING - there is a ANI open on this editor here. Codf1977 (talk) 19:12, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- I looked through the ANI thread and it seems that there is consensus in favor of blocking CUNYTruther. That being said, I've gone ahead and blocked CUNYTruther. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:22, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)How is it outing when the top of the userpage says "If you want to know more about me, click here" and the name mentioned in the diff is prominently displayed on the external page? Also, as we're been engaging with the "disruptive editor" on talk and AN/I (granted, not with amazingly good results), blocking as disruptive may be premature. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:24, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Note: Kevbo confirmed not outing here.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:32, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
RPP
Thank You. I had no idea how to check whether it was protected or not myself short of logging out and trying to edit... But that's sockpuppetry (which isn't allowed) :). Thanks Mr. R00t Talk 02:03, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of Horiba article
I feel that the Horiba page, which was deleted, contained a lot of useful information such as its affiliation with Hitachi and its major lines of business, information that I feel is interesting and useful to know. I think the "blatant self-promotion" parts could be readily fixed, and would be prepared to give it a go. Other company articles (that have not been deleted) have lots of info. about company sports teams and the like which really have nothing to do with the company business at all. LittleBen (talk) 03:47, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
- I can restore a copy to your userspace. How does that sound? -FASTILY (TALK) 06:37, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks In Advance! LittleBen (talk) 17:08, 13 June 2010 (UTC). I have created the subpage /Horiba. LittleBen (talk) 18:31, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Wonder if you have time to review my edited version. If OK then please restore to Horiba, otherwise I can add links to refs. first or edit further if preferable. Best regards. LittleBen (talk) 11:36, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Better. Feel free to move it to the article space. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:28, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Done. Many thanks for your trouble. Regards. LittleBen (talk) 04:03, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Philippine Cable Channels Remove Again
Hello Fastily, User Active Banana is currently removing Philippines Cable Channels Article like SkyCable, Global Destiny Cable, Cablelink, Dream Satellite TV, G Sat, Cignal Digital TV, Parasat Cable TV, Royal Cable, Kalibo Cable, SPC-New World Cable TV, Telmarc Cable and GV Broadcasting Systems, Inc. among others due to unvalid reason taken from NOTDIR which is not mention about TV channels itself. He is making a Big Deal. What about the other Asian or World Cable or DTH provider article still display but he or she did'nt think to remove it??. I'm curious why the Philippine Cable Articles to removed itself for unsuspicions reason and he put unknown warning itself including Philippine Article both showbiz personalities.! He making a big mistake himself! Please help. --Puppyph | Talk 14:21, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- I have contacted Active Banana and requested that he comment on this thread. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 07:13, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello. I have seen Active Banana disruptingly editing Philippine wiki pages. Vgyu 11:40, 14 June 2010 (UTC)VgyuVgyu 11:40, 14 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vgyu (talk • contribs)
- I have noticed this as well, user Active Banana claims that they have reached a consensus about adding the Channel Line-up to the NOTDIR page but upon checking, the policy remains the same. Active Banana is only the one claiming that a consensus has been reached. He is also the one that actually proposed to have Channel Line-ups to be included in NOTDIR. I dont know why he is making a big fuss about this, as well as all the Philippine entertainment Wiki pages. I don't want to accuse the user of trying to get everything that he wants but evidences point to the same direction. I also believe that a lot of Philippine wiki readers have been irritated of what the user, Active Banana did to some Philippine entertainment pages when in face, I believe, he himself is even not a Filipino. I think we may have a case of disruptive editing or even vandalism here against the user Active Banana. -11:48, 14 June 2010 (UTC)~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.128.50.37 (talk)
- I am also in support of the other editors here. I really don't like how Active Banana edits some Philippine Wiki pages. I actually think he is not contributing to the page itself but he tags them for any policy errors and most of the time deletes some articles with no valid source instead of tagging them only. -143.166.255.63 (talk) 13:46, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Per this discussion [114] consensus appears to be to clarify WP:NOT by adding "current channel listings" as part of the "what is a directory and not encyclopedic content". Active Banana (talk) 17:30, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Your comment (or comments from any other administrators who happen to be watching this page) would be appreciated. These users tend to completely object to anything that they do not see as "stamped with approval" by an administrator. I had thought that the community consensus at WP:NOTDIR talk page would be enough, but aparently not. Active Banana (talk) 21:55, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- I would request to semi-protect all Philippine wiki pages, and revert all edits done by Active Banana. I would request to block him for a week for edit warring. Vgyu (talk) 20:49, 16 June 2010 —Preceding undated comment added 10:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC).
- I agree with what Vgyu posted. Active Banana is obviously targeting, deleting and editing mostly Philippine Pay-TV networks and Entertainment Wiki pages. If his intention is to clean up WikiPedia then why is he only targeting mostly Philippine wiki pages. I recommend Active Banana to be banned indefinitely and revert all edits done by this user. -202.128.50.138 (talk) 16:01, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- I would request to semi-protect all Philippine wiki pages, and revert all edits done by Active Banana. I would request to block him for a week for edit warring. Vgyu (talk) 20:49, 16 June 2010 —Preceding undated comment added 10:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC).
- Your comment (or comments from any other administrators who happen to be watching this page) would be appreciated. These users tend to completely object to anything that they do not see as "stamped with approval" by an administrator. I had thought that the community consensus at WP:NOTDIR talk page would be enough, but aparently not. Active Banana (talk) 21:55, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Per this discussion [114] consensus appears to be to clarify WP:NOT by adding "current channel listings" as part of the "what is a directory and not encyclopedic content". Active Banana (talk) 17:30, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- I am also in support of the other editors here. I really don't like how Active Banana edits some Philippine Wiki pages. I actually think he is not contributing to the page itself but he tags them for any policy errors and most of the time deletes some articles with no valid source instead of tagging them only. -143.166.255.63 (talk) 13:46, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- I have noticed this as well, user Active Banana claims that they have reached a consensus about adding the Channel Line-up to the NOTDIR page but upon checking, the policy remains the same. Active Banana is only the one claiming that a consensus has been reached. He is also the one that actually proposed to have Channel Line-ups to be included in NOTDIR. I dont know why he is making a big fuss about this, as well as all the Philippine entertainment Wiki pages. I don't want to accuse the user of trying to get everything that he wants but evidences point to the same direction. I also believe that a lot of Philippine wiki readers have been irritated of what the user, Active Banana did to some Philippine entertainment pages when in face, I believe, he himself is even not a Filipino. I think we may have a case of disruptive editing or even vandalism here against the user Active Banana. -11:48, 14 June 2010 (UTC)~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.128.50.37 (talk)
(talk page stalker) Are these guys all sockpuppets, or only some of them? Just curious. ×××BrightBlackHeaven(talk)××× 18:46, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- I think there are at least 2 real humans; but more than that seems less and less likely. ;-\ Active Banana (talk) 18:53, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Commons image files and en categories
I notice that you have recently deleted the en image description pages for several Commons image files of curves such as File:CissoidOfDiocles01.png. These image description pages contained no content apart from a category line which ensured that these image files appeared in the en Wikipedia category Category:Images of curves. They are now absent from that category. If an en image description page is not allowed for a Commons file, is there some other mechanism for assigning these images to an en category such as Category:Images of curves ? This is of practical importance because the category Category:Images of curves has been suggested as an alternative to the list page Gallery of curves in a recent AfD discussion, but this argument fails if an en category cannot display the Commons images that are included on the list page. Gandalf61 (talk) 07:36, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- I'm afraid not. Commons has its own categories for curves - for example: Category:Cissoid, Category:Cubic curves, Category:Plane algebraic curves. I think it would be more appropriate for the page, Gallery of curves, to be located on Commons rather than Wikipedia. Hope that helps to clarify things. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 07:41, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- I see two potential problems with your suggestion of moving the Gallery of curves page to Commons:
- The link beneath each image points to the relevant article in the en wiki. Will that be appropriate in a Commons page ? I tried to read up on the topic of interwiki links in Commons, but got very confused very quickly.
- How will en Wiki readers find their way to a Commons gallery page ? From reading Wikipedia:Redirect, I understand that automatic redirects from en wiki pages to other Wikimedia sites do not work and the best that can be done is to create a soft redirect. That does not seem very useful in an en Wiki navigation page.
- Is there really no way to put a Commons image into a language Wiki's local category ? It seems strange that each language Wiki should be forced to use Commons categorisation structure for Commons images. I can't believe no one has come across this problem before - is there perhaps some previous discussion or guidelines somewhere ? Gandalf61 (talk) 10:43, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- I see two potential problems with your suggestion of moving the Gallery of curves page to Commons:
- BTW, I notice that most of the images in Category:Featured pictures are Commons images with a one or two line en image description page containing a Featured Picture tag and sometimes a POTD tag - and then the FP template indirectly assigns the image to the en category. So is there a guideline somewhere that says what an en image description page for a Commons image file should/should not contain ? If templates are allowed but category lines are not, then I can see how a work-round might be possible. Gandalf61 (talk) 14:50, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- The only orphaned file description pages for files on Commosn exempt from speedy deletion under F2 are Picture of the Day images. As for linking to commons - use this format:
[[Commons:<INSERTPAGEONCOMMONSHERE>]]. For example, if I wanted to link the Commons category, Category:Cissoid, I would do this:[[Commons:Category:Cissoid]]which outputs: Commons:Category:Cissoid. You can use a pipe character "|" to create this: Cissoid. Hope that clarifies interwiki links to Commons. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:34, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- The only orphaned file description pages for files on Commosn exempt from speedy deletion under F2 are Picture of the Day images. As for linking to commons - use this format:
- BTW, I notice that most of the images in Category:Featured pictures are Commons images with a one or two line en image description page containing a Featured Picture tag and sometimes a POTD tag - and then the FP template indirectly assigns the image to the en category. So is there a guideline somewhere that says what an en image description page for a Commons image file should/should not contain ? If templates are allowed but category lines are not, then I can see how a work-round might be possible. Gandalf61 (talk) 14:50, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I know how to link from en Wiki to Commons - that is obvious. But you said the en Gallery of curves article should be moved to Commons, and my question was whether it would be appropriate to then have links back from a Commons page to articles in the en Wiki. Thanks for trying to help, but I will work it out for myself. Gandalf61 (talk) 08:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
F2/G6 images and Shouldn't be Commons image
Rather than me endlessly tagging them, http://toolserver.org/~erwin85/shortpages.php?lang=en&family=wikipedia&namespaces=6&filter=notemplates&submit=Submit has a list which (once you get past the very short ones) seems to be a list almost entirely of F2 images...
BTW Thanks for checking the images that are tagged as F2 do actually meet commons criteria...
There's a list of possibly mis-tagged files (that still exist on enwiki) here :- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Database_reports/Mistagged_non-free_files,
I note you reverted some of my F8 tags in respect of that list. I'd tagged F8 on a few because of the outcome of the Deletion Request and information at Commons. If you think the license is wrong at Commons, by all means challange it with a Deletion Request on Commons <evil grin>, but you would it seems have to provide at least a paragraph and some URL's to show why an image is not Commons compatible ( as I've done in a number of cases recently.)
The English Wikipedia and Commons will be 'cleaned' up eventually, Keep on with your efforts sensibly :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:24, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- BTW concering F2 list, I think what I linked was the most basic form of that list... With the options in that tool you might be able to help clear the 8000 (?) or so images on it..
- Further last message -
http://toolserver.org/~erwin85/shortpages.php?lang=en&family=wikipedia&namespaces=6&filter=notemplates&limit=500 http://toolserver.org/~erwin85/shortpages.php?lang=en&family=wikipedia&namespaces=6&filter=notemplates&offset=500&limit=500 http://toolserver.org/~erwin85/shortpages.php?lang=en&family=wikipedia&namespaces=6&filter=notemplates&offset=1000&limit=500 http://toolserver.org/~erwin85/shortpages.php?lang=en&family=wikipedia&namespaces=6&filter=notemplates&offset=1500&limit=500 http://toolserver.org/~erwin85/shortpages.php?lang=en&family=wikipedia&namespaces=6&filter=notemplates&offset=2000&limit=500 http://toolserver.org/~erwin85/shortpages.php?lang=en&family=wikipedia&namespaces=6&filter=notemplates&offset=2500&limit=500 http://toolserver.org/~erwin85/shortpages.php?lang=en&family=wikipedia&namespaces=6&filter=notemplates&offset=3000&limit=500 http://toolserver.org/~erwin85/shortpages.php?lang=en&family=wikipedia&namespaces=6&filter=notemplates&offset=3500&limit=500 http://toolserver.org/~erwin85/shortpages.php?lang=en&family=wikipedia&namespaces=6&filter=notemplates&offset=4000&limit=500 http://toolserver.org/~erwin85/shortpages.php?lang=en&family=wikipedia&namespaces=6&filter=notemplates&offset=4500&limit=500 http://toolserver.org/~erwin85/shortpages.php?lang=en&family=wikipedia&namespaces=6&filter=notemplates&offset=5000&limit=500 http://toolserver.org/~erwin85/shortpages.php?lang=en&family=wikipedia&namespaces=6&filter=notemplates&offset=5500&limit=500 http://toolserver.org/~erwin85/shortpages.php?lang=en&family=wikipedia&namespaces=6&filter=notemplates&offset=6000&limit=500 http://toolserver.org/~erwin85/shortpages.php?lang=en&family=wikipedia&namespaces=6&filter=notemplates&offset=6500&limit=500 http://toolserver.org/~erwin85/shortpages.php?lang=en&family=wikipedia&namespaces=6&filter=notemplates&offset=7000&limit=500 http://toolserver.org/~erwin85/shortpages.php?lang=en&family=wikipedia&namespaces=6&filter=notemplates&offset=7500&limit=500 http://toolserver.org/~erwin85/shortpages.php?lang=en&family=wikipedia&namespaces=6&filter=notemplates&offset=8000&limit=500
Should cover all F2's... I assume you are using somthing like AWB if so it shouldn't take more than a few days to clear the backlog? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:25, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Re: RfA
Hi. Yes I'm still planning on submitting the RfA but we'll have to postpone it for a few days. I've lost a good friend and I need some time to get over it. I hope you understand. Cheers, Theleftorium (talk) 08:40, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, of course, that's fine. I am sorry for your loss. Take as much time as you need. Best wishes, FASTILY (TALK) 00:48, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
FYI
I changed your 
Not done to 
already done ( {{done|already done}} ) here - this way we can quickly scan the archives for the 
marks to find any requests that were actually denied rather than already fulfilled. Cheers, –xenotalk 13:50, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- By the way, I think you will like this: Wikipedia talk:Requests for permissions/Archive 2#Script for easy granting of reviewer. –xenotalk 16:43, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
American Income Life
I was hoping you could help me with my American Income Life page. I have revised and included numerous outside sources independent of AIL. It is also a very neutral article detailing the history and facts of the Company. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Jaimejones87 (talk) 15:01, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Qcare
You flagged the Qcare article, so I would like to know if you could help me. I revised the article, if you could check this to see if it can be resubmitted for approval. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chris_Callas/Qcare It is an accurate article and I believe it should no longer be flagged as 'unambiguous advertisement' Chris Callas (talk)
- I think you may have a conflict of interest here. As you are closely affiliated with the subject of the article, you are strongly discouraged from writing about it for Wikipedia. If you're interested however, WP:YFA, WP:MOS, WP:GNG, and WP:ADS may be of help to you. I'm afraid your article still needs some work before it can be moved to the article space. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:41, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
DDR Freak etcetera
Those redirects are names of fansites revolving around DDR. I think at one point the actual articles existed by they now all link to Dance Dance Revolution which I don't think even mentions them. It's possible that the articles could be brought back but as of now they're unexpected destination redirects and most of them are unlikely search terms regardless. I tagged them as r1 with an explanation in the summery cause that's the closest Db to what they are. æronphonehome 00:13, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- If the redirects have nothing to do with DDR, my recommendation is that you take this to WP:RFD. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:47, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
RFPERM instructions
Please see Wikipedia talk:Requests for permissions/Reviewer#The given Howto is wrong and find a way to fix the issue if you are going to revert the changes. Since most users will press "add request", it uses {{subst:CURRENTUSER}}, and thus no username needs replaced. Only in 'autoreviewer' is the CURRENTUSER functionality not used; because you can nominate a different user than yourself for autoreviewer. –xenotalk 04:03, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- The old format was being used on the other subpages so I reverted. No worries, I'll work on a fix. -FASTILY (TALK) 04:05, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- One issue we are running into is users that are putting in an L2 section header of their own (most likely because they have the tickbox checked to warn them against such things, as saving the edit will be summaryless). Unfortunately without something changed in the 'inputbox code' (allowing 'commenttitle' with L4 headings), I can't think of a way to fix this. –xenotalk 04:11, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- Right, that is definitely an issue. Better yet, if there was some way to suppress the level 2 header box from even showing up, we could circumvent this problem entirely. I'll monitor the thread at mediawiki for a response as well. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:41, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Second Amendment page protection
Four days ago you put full protection[115] on the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. I am guessing you did this after seeing my request for page protection[116] at RfPP. (Disclosure, I am an active editor in this dispute.) In the last four days I have tried my best to encourage User:Hauskalainen to discuss this dispute on the talk page, but he seems to have essentially withdrawn. My suspicion is that he is happy with the status quo of the article because it is frozen in the POV state which he prefers. I am not asking you to take sides in the dispute, rather I am curious if you have any advice how I might encourage Hauskalainen to engage in talk page discussion while the page is locked? SaltyBoatr get wet 22:36, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- A bit unorthodox perhaps, but he'll talk now. You are right, we cannot leave the page indefinitely fully protected unless we're discussing. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:46, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- He is not just being unorthodox. he is being deliberately misleading.
- He told you at 22:36, 15 June 2010 (UTC) that
(Hauskalainen) seem(s) to have essentially withdrawn
- He had made this accusation in spite of the fact that I told him a day earlier at 16:24, 14 June 2010 (UTC) the following
I haven't disappeared (I do have a life outside of Wikipedia...)
- The reason for my relative silence is two-fold.
- As I have said, I actually do not have much time at the moment to edit, and
- As SaltyBoatr knows, I am awaiting a reply from an academic lawyer who I have asked to comment on his edit assertions. This is precisely because I do NOT to get in a war with him over Professor Malcolm's allegation. She (Malcolm) sometimes says one thing and later something contradictory. I am hoping the academic I contacted will be able come up with some source which can for sure prove the opposite of what SaltyBoatr claims to be fact. I cannot say when I will get a reply or even that I ever will.
- As for unlocking the article, I am not bothered. I never asked for it to be locked in the first place. I think it is SaltyBoatR who was frustrated that the article in its edit freeze was not saying what he wanted it to say.--Hauskalainen (talk) 12:06, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, I have patience to work this disagreement out. My bottom line is WP:V, WP:NOR and WP:NPOV policy, so checking sourcing is vital. Hopefully disclosure of the sourcing for these proposed edits to the English History section will be forthcoming sometime soon, let's wait and see. SaltyBoatr get wet 18:29, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Reviewer request
Could you please take another look at my review request (Is it currently denied?). Thanks, House1090 (talk) 01:18, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Here And Now Recordings deleted
hello, last night you deleted a page I spent along time preparing to write. I also have loads more to include related to this music scene. Having viewed Wiki's article on whether this topic is notable I will approach the article from a different angle. Here And Now Recordings is a focal point for the following notable artists.
Chaz Jankel -already ready featured heavily on Wiki Angie Brown - already ready featured heavily on Wiki Yam Who - worked with many big pop acts including John Legend, Raphael Saadiq, Incognito (they all have Wiki pages) making Yam Who notable http://www.discogs.com/artist/Yam+Who%3F?anv=Yam+Who Reverso 68 - very notable dance music outfit who remix big pop acts such as Badly Drawn Boy (Wiki page). They have had 100s of releases on such labels as Hed Kandi, Ministry Of Sound, EMI. THEY ARE MOST DEFINITELY NOTABLE http://www.discogs.com/artist/Reverso+68 DJD - Defected Records (Wiki) recording artist with 100s of dance music releases on may other labels too.
Here And Now Recordings is where all these artist meet, record together, where their paths cross! http://www.discogs.com/label/Here+%26+Now
Chanan Hanspal is one of the main artists on Here And Now Recordings...he was in 23 Skidoo (Wiki) and recorded for Here And Now Recordings with Imaani (Wiki Wiki Wiki). She represented Britain in Eurovision Song Content and came 2nd.
All this is entirely relevant to Wikipedia and very much notable.
DO yo agree?
Kind regards,
Dex. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tergo10 (talk • contribs) 09:11, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Tergo10#Re:Here And Now Recordings deleted -FASTILY (TALK) 18:10, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Ornella Barra Image
Fastily, Thank you for noticing that I did not tag the Ornella Barra CSR Image [[117]] correctly, I had added the tag "{{CopyrightedFreeUse-link|[http://www.allianceboots.com]}}" to issue this image as free use. Can you help me with the correct way to copyright this image. Thank You AbComms.
- Do you have written permission from "allianceboots" to publish this image under the license you have indicated? This needs to be forwarded to "permissions-en@wikimedia.org". See WP:PERMISSION and WP:DCP for more information. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:07, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
What is the purpose of this? [118]
It was bad enough that the article has been frozen from editing for several weeks. Now you have left it in a very bad state.
If you want to get involved in the rights and wrongs of the the article content then please do so at the talk page. Please do not on the one hand agree that the article should not be frozen indefinitely and then reinstate the very edits that are objectionable whilst it is still frozen.
These edits cite the personal opinion of one writer (Professor Malcolm) as though they are fact. Yes, we need secondary sources, but those secondary sources have to cite primary sources. Professor Malcolm has no primary source for the implied position that there was no pre-existing right to have arms before laws started to be passed obliging certain people to have arms. If that was the case there would have to have been a law PREVENTING people from arming themselves because the history of warfare and indeed human nature is that people have used weapons for both hunting and for self preservation ever since the first proto human beings picked up a bone and used it as a club. If there is evidence for a law being passed preventing people from arming themslves in England in the period before 1100 then it is incumbent on those making such a claim to prove the point. Professor Malcolm is being cited as a secondary source but she has no primary sources. We are interested in valid claims not the peronal opinions of historians who have no primary source for their beliefs. Malcolm is "friendly" to the pro-gun lobby and therefore she represents an "opinion". It does not make her "opinion" any more valid than anybody else's.--Hauskalainen (talk) 12:33, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- That is correct. The page was protected to initiate a discussion with the hopes of reaching an agreement. Since you have decided not to engage in any form of discussion since the protection of the page, I reverted your edits. Now, as you can clearly see, SaltyBoatr is more than willing to discuss. Once an agreement is reached, contact me or any other administrator and the page can be unprotected. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:09, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Oops!
I realised this had been mis-tagged as F2, as I was trying to clear some unrationaled images at the same time.
Can you restore it? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:32, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Reviewer script
Hey Fastily. Don't know if you've heard but there's a script available for quickly granting reviewer rights. It's the last entry in my monobook.js if you want to copy and paste. It's quicker than the old fashioned way and it automatically drops them a template. All the best to you, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:37, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, yes - I have actually. Xeno also recommended I use it. I guess I just haven't quite gotten around to using yet... Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 18:45, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
HELP PLEASE
hi Fastily! i am from hindi wikipedia and i am an admin there. i want to know how to introduce more tools in edit option, can you help me to tell about the file in which these codes are filled. like in mediawiki:edittools but in this only lower side tools are given.i watched you on recent change list and i hope you will surely help us--IMayBeWrong (talk) 18:56, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- If I'm not mistaken, it looks like you have the full set of characters/symbols - [119], but the code is broken somewhere. If it helps, please feel free to copy and paste from MediaWiki:Edittools as a temporary solution. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:04, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
block of 202.249.50.60
Hello, can you review your block of 202.249.50.60? Special:Contributions/202.249.50.60 seems pretty reasonable to me, especially for a (presumably) newbie editor. Guilty of adding unsourced content perhaps, but I wouldn't characterize it as vandalism. My two cents... Cheers, AndrewGNF (talk) 18:58, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- I don't know. Some of those edits are a bit iffy - [120], [121]. If the IP makes an unblock request, I'll unblock on the condition they agree to source their additions and add information in a reasonable fashion. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:06, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks. FWIW, those two examples (and the others that I spot checked) seem perfectly plausible to me. Obviously they would be much better if they included a citation, but again, I don't see anything in there that's "vandalism" as noted in the block log. Especially since all the edits follow a theme of chemistry and toxicology, my guess is that we have a newbie student editor with potentially good stuff... Anyway, I think your plan is reasonable... Cheers, AndrewGNF (talk) 19:47, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Yet another list
Also been trying to tackle the issue of images without rationales.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Database_reports/Non-free_files_missing_a_rationale
Want to go for the higher hanging fruit I don't catch? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:22, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Fastily. Notability for this subject is probably borderline, but I would like the subject to have a full and fair hearing at AfD if it's to be deleted. There were several citations in the article to substantial coverage. Would you consider restoring and listing at AfD (or letting it be?). Freakshownerd (talk) 21:54, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- Check with the nominating editor. If they agree to AfD - I'll restore the page and list it there. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Autoreviewer
Hi Fastily,
I didn't follow the pending changes discussion, but from the policy page, I think as a long time admin, I should have the autoreviewer status. But I checked my user rights, where the autoreviewer bit is not set. I can change it myself, but before doing so, want to check if admins are getting autoreviewer status. Can you please clarify this (And set my autoreviewer bit if needed)? Thanks. --Ragib (talk) 00:24, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, autoreviewer rights comes with the "administrator" right. See Special:UserRights/Ragib. As an admin, everything under "rights you can change" has already automatically been applied to your account. So actually, you've been an autoreviewer all along. Hope that helps to clarify things. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:29, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of TTCSP page
Hi,
I would like to ask for an explanation for the deletion of the Think Tanks and Civil Societies Page. I am part of a team of interns that is responsible for creating a website for the TTCSP. It is a non-profit, no-budget academic program with one aim: fostering civil society and the free flow of information. While we are working for the TTCSP, our goal in creating a Wikipedia page for it is not mere promotion, but sharing information. The TTCSP and its director, Dr. James McGann, are well-known in among academic circles in the world of international relations. It conducts important research on the role of think tanks and other organizations of the "fifth estate" in the creation of public policy and an informed public. We plan to add a description of the program, its aims, its history, a list of its publications, and references to it in the media. The program's website has yet to be published on the web, but once it is, we will cite the website for all information placed on this Wikipedia page.
We think this page would be useful in providing a home for a program responsible for very important work. I assure you our intentions are firmly in line with the goal of free-flowing information that Wikipedia holds in such high esteem. If there is anything else we can do to make this article more encyclopedic, please let us know.
TTCSP (talk) 00:55, 17 June 2010 (UTC) Sincerely, Keith Colella
Move deleted article
Please provide me a copy of Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Empty Buffer to User:Heymid/Empty Buffer. Heymid (talk) 15:31, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Done -FASTILY (TALK) 00:37, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
As you seem to be involved in images, can you please delete the previous versions? The iPhone 4 versions appear to be from a press kit (see the "daylight glare" on the top right of the image), thus making the source invalid and another user has indicated on the talkpage that the image is from confidential apple developer images, which are clearly not self-made wikipedia user screenshots. --Terrillja talk 19:28, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Done. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:42, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- Can you do the same for File:IPhonehomescreen.PNG per the comments on that talkpage, it is a possible copyvio and the image is not one of the ones on the apple website, and is clearly not a screenshot by a wikipedia user since the OS isn't even released yet. Thanks, --Terrillja talk 06:12, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Fastily, I feeling really bad that this page got deleted even after adding hangon tag. Even user User:Themaxviwe accepted that to remove adv promo is to be removed please see User_talk:Themaxviwe. Also I request you to reconsider as there are lots of similar article available wikipedia see List of hotels in Dubai, List of hotels in Burma, Hotels in Istanbul so on. The user User:Themaxviwe pretty new(less than 3 month old to wiki) he doesn't even know that he can remove the promo tag as per Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion please see his talk page. I again request you to reconsider and revert this page, as this list only contains list of names nothing more than that, there is nothing more than that on that list which can be considered as promo/adv. Lastly I know that I should have started discussion on talk of List of hotels in Delhi. Thats must be the reason to get deleted speedily. Thanks KuwarOnline Talk 06:07, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- Let Themaxviwe know that I am willing to restore the deleted page to his userspace. He can work on improvements to the article there before moving it to the mainspace. If he's up to it, please let me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 06:27, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Fastily, Thanks for reconsidering it. But the article is created by me, I was working on it to improve so let me work on it. Thanks KuwarOnline Talk 06:54, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- Done at User:KuwarOnline/List of hotels in Delhi -FASTILY (TALK) 20:00, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Fastily, I heard about List of hotels in Delhi and I agree with you that you should restore it to userspace.After some improvement I will move it to mainspace.
Best.$Max Viwe$ (talk) 07:02, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
New Article Added
Hi,
I've added a new article to Wikipedia. As you may recall or not :) I specialise in business and corporate profiles for specialised business men in South africa. He is an inspiration to many in south africa and the UK.
Please see my sandbox article that I've created and let me know.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Southwiki/Jacques_duyver —Preceding unsigned comment added by Southwiki (talk • contribs) 14:22, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- To be honest, it reads somewhat like an advert and may not survive from being deleted for very long if you go live with it now. Consider checking out WP:YFA, WP:MOS, WP:ADS, and WP:GNG for further steps to take. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 20:03, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of Karen Fisher Headshot.jpg
Hi Fastily,
You recently deleted an image indicating that there is no record of permissions. However, I did receive permissions from the copyright holder and forwarded it to Wikipedia. Permission was granted through an email granting permissions for the head shot as well as the image of the logo used in the article. I just contacted the copyright holder again and requested them to send permissions to Wikipedia. Once that is done, can the image be restored? Or do I have to re-upload the image under a different file name? Please advise me in the appropriate course of action. Thank you. Strohlnco (talk) 15:53, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, once permissions are recieved by the OTRS team, and assuming that you followed the instructions at WP:PERMISSION and WP:DCP, the file will be automatically restored with a ticket number. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:05, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Social Style
Hello - I'm disappointed that you have deleted the information about Social Style. I feel like there was plenty of research to back up the topic. Social Style can be compared to Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and is proven to improve leadership and interpersonal communications. I'd be happy to rework the article if it had something to do with how it was written. Semprecis5 (talk) 16:30, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- The article was deleted per the WP:PROD process. You are welcome to resubmit the article, but be sure it complies with WP:ADS, WP:GNG, and WP:MOS. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:07, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of Iowa School for the Deaf
Can you tell me specifically what was wrong with the page. We are attempting to create an entry about the school and tell about our history, etc.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwolfisd (talk • contribs) 18:16, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
My page got deleted due to "unambigous promotion" ...I want to userify it, please
I believe my page was incorrectly deleted. The article was not aiming to describe a product at all, neither does it describe a company, as there is NO PRODUCT involved. It is purely about technology and open source reference implementations described, that other people can LEARN from. It is the whole idea with the initiative is to educate the world and start discussions.
I am willing to rewrite the article, but I don't want it deleted. Can you please help me get it Usified?
Thanks, and sorry...I am new to wikipedia compositions...
/AzulPM —Preceding unsigned comment added by AzulPM (talk • contribs) 20:08, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- Done at User:AzulPM/Managed Runtime Initiative. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:10, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Saradini page
The page has been deleted and I would like to resume it and link it to proper sources. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Balestrazza (talk • contribs) 06:56, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of Premiere Hotel article
Hello, You have recently deleted this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premi%C3%A8re_Hotel. You put the reason as "Unambiguous advertising or promotion". Can you please explain that?
- Which part of the article is considered as advertising or promotion?
- Which part of the article is promoting that the premise is "better", "cheaper" or "more comfortable" with the others?
- Which part of the article is advertising the hotel? I do not see listing down the number of rooms or the type of facilities available in the hotel as advertising. Because it is just a fact.
Just like if you look into wikipedia pages of IBM or HP, you can see the listing of its business divisions, those are facts, not advertisement. Certainly not promotion either.
I would also thought that you should have the courtesy to talk to the page creator first before you unilaterally decide to delete the page. Thank you for your response.
Kelangboy (talk) 09:04, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Kelangboy#Re:Deletion of Premiere Hotel article -FASTILY (TALK) 20:40, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of Jessica Biel Image
File:Jessica Biel on the cover of the magazine Gear.jpg is still Talk:Gear (magazine) being discussed and awaiting clarification from an Admin discussion on how magazine covers are allowed to be used. Could you please revert and hold the deletion. There is commentary on the image and it is arguably the most notable cover of that magazine, I'm still trying to see if is allowed to be included. You'll note the image is now a much smaller image and I made the extra effort to fill out the fair use rationale. -- Horkana (talk) 12:49, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- I'm afraid not - per WP:NFCC#9 - non-free files are only allowed in the mainspace, which is why the file was eligible for deletion under WP:CSD#F5 in the first place. It would be better if you could find an external link of a website that hosts the file and link it to the discussion. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:02, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- I intend to use the image in the main body of the article. From the discussions it seems as though the infobox image will be replaced with a logo but that I have reason to include the image in the body of the Gear article on its own basis. The image has been commented on enough to be considered the most notable cover of the magazine, and I'm working on gathering additional sources. Having to reshrink the image and recreate the fair use rationale will be a lot of wasted effort. I ask again that you please restore the page. -- Horkana (talk) 11:25, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- I'll second their request. I believe there are sufficient sources to support its use under WP:NFCC in the body of the article. VernoWhitney (talk) 13:51, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- I intend to use the image in the main body of the article. From the discussions it seems as though the infobox image will be replaced with a logo but that I have reason to include the image in the body of the Gear article on its own basis. The image has been commented on enough to be considered the most notable cover of the magazine, and I'm working on gathering additional sources. Having to reshrink the image and recreate the fair use rationale will be a lot of wasted effort. I ask again that you please restore the page. -- Horkana (talk) 11:25, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Re image deleted (File:Sso trudeau.jpg)
Hello: I don't understand why the image File:Sso trudeau.jpg was deleted. I got permission from the author whom I know personally, he wrote me a letter, I sent the copy of that letter to your dept. called permissions-en@wikimedia.org, and placed that information at the file page.
You seem to be ignoring our efforts to back up our copyright permission. What is the use of obtaining that information if you ignore it anyway?
You gave no explanation for not accepting all my efforts to explain the permission. I am not happy. Skol fir (talk) 22:25, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- Did you follow the instructions at WP:PERMISSION and WP:DCP? Did you include the local file name and the license the file is to be licensed under? -FASTILY (TALK) 23:45, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi there Fastily. I really hate to be "that guy", but I missed the fact that NaSHA had been prodded right up until you deleted it a few minutes ago. Do you mind reversing the prod? This hash function was accepted into the NIST hash function competition, and I believe that discussion of the hash function in relation to that competition establishes notability, despite the fact that it also established that the hash function in question shouldn't be used. Compare FEAL, for example - a completely broken cipher design that is extremely notable because it is frequently discussed as the standard example of a broken cipher design. If you or the editor who nominated it for prod want to take this right to AfD, that's fine, but it should receive more consideration than an automated prod. My apologies for not previously noticing that it was tagged, and thanks for reading. — Gavia immer (talk) 00:38, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- Done. I should say that I don't do what I just did very often. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:15, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a bunch for the prompt response. It looks like the article is desperately in need of third-party sourcing, so I'll have to fix that. I've kind of been watching the NIST entrants, but apparently not well enough... — Gavia immer (talk) 01:22, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- Would be nice if the original prod'er get a message saying you had restored it after deleting it. :D Although I still don't think it's notable, I'll wait to see what changes take place before considering whether to AfD. -- KTC (talk) 22:04, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
My second opinion
I blocked on sight. I don't care how innocuous his edits were, we just don't allow that sort of username. Daniel Case (talk) 02:55, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Project tagging, part deux
You recently deleted File talk:PortageLakeLiftBridge.jpg. I've recreated the page, but once again, I remind you that your deletion reason is not supported by policy. You cited G8 to delete it, but from that policy, with the applicable section emphasized:
G8. Pages dependent on a non-existent or deleted page, such as talk pages with no corresponding subject page; subpages with no parent page; image pages without a corresponding image; redirects to invalid targets, such as nonexistent targets, redirect loops, and bad titles; and categories populated by deleted or retargeted templates. This excludes any page that is useful to the project, and in particular: deletion discussions that are not logged elsewhere, user talk pages, talk page archives, plausible redirects that can be changed to valid targets, and image pages or talk pages for images that exist on Wikimedia Commons. Exceptions may be sign-posted with the template {{G8-exempt}}.
Do I really need to spam that template to ALL of the talk pages to get you to stop deleting the project tags from images used in Michigan highway articles? I mentioned this a month ago, discussion of which is now logged at User talk:Fastily/Archive 4#Project tagging. Please let me know what we need to do going forward. Imzadi 1979 → 07:09, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- Which file talk pages do you want restored? I believe I asked you that last time. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:02, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- Each time you've deleted the pages, I've recreated them, but the problem is that you deleted them in the first place, citing a policy that doesn't support the deletion. Imzadi 1979 → 20:05, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- Do you want me to restore the pages or not? List what you want restored below and I'll do it; otherwise, we have nothing left to discuss. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:35, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- The deleted talk pages are already recreated. The issue though is that you deleted page in May that I had to recreate to keep photos in use by WP:MSHP tagged. I notified you that CSD G8 doesn't support the deletion of talk pages for photos hosted on Commons. You seemed fine with that, but you did it again a month later. Every time you delete the pages, I'll recreate them, so I'm just letting you know that 1) your actions are not supported by policy and 2) will be undone the only way I can as soon as they are discovered, which is usually when the WP1.0bot updates the assessment log for the project that evening. You never did answer my question though, do I need to spam the exemption template to all of the tagged photos to keep you from deleting the talk pages? Imzadi 1979 → 20:59, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- Do you want me to restore the pages or not? List what you want restored below and I'll do it; otherwise, we have nothing left to discuss. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:35, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- Each time you've deleted the pages, I've recreated them, but the problem is that you deleted them in the first place, citing a policy that doesn't support the deletion. Imzadi 1979 → 20:05, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Article restoration
Hello, You have recently deleted this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premi%C3%A8re_Hotel. You put the reason as "Unambiguous advertising or promotion". Can you please explain that?
- Which part of the article is considered as advertising or promotion?
- Which part of the article is promoting that the premise is "better", "cheaper" or "more comfortable" with the others?
- Which part of the article is advertising the hotel? I do not see listing down the number of rooms or the type of facilities available in the hotel as advertising. Because it is just a fact.
Just like if you look into wikipedia pages of IBM or HP, you can see the listing of its business divisions, those are facts, not advertisement.
I would also thought that you should have the courtesy to talk to the page creator first before you unilaterally decide to delete the page. Thank you for your response. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.51.109.206 (talk) 08:54, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
in regards to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somesso
Hi Fastily - Yesterday you deleted the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somesso. Was this solely because of the username and/ or the logo we picked; will it be allowed if we use another user name? I've read through the conditions well and couldn't find any other reason. I wanted to describe in a non-commercial way what the platform is that I have built (just like IBM does for example). I wanted to get in touch with you to learn from any tips you might have to prepare this article in such a way to still publish it. Thanks for your help.
AJ
- I believe you may have a conflict of interest. In a nutshell: since you are affliated with "Somesso", you are strongly discuoraged from writing about it. If you wish to continue, be aware that it will be difficult to write an unbiased article about an entity you are closely affilitated with. At any rate, I recommend you look through WP:YFA, WP:MOS, and WP:ADS, WP:GNG before proceeding. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:09, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Deleted Page
You deleted the page Ovingham Middle School as it was not noteable. This should mean that the other Middle school's are not noteable. Sco1996 | I will respond. 12:23, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- The page was deleted per WP:PROD. You were given a week to contest the deletion, so, would you like to explain why are you doing this now? -FASTILY (TALK) 19:18, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Barnstar
|
|
The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar | |
| For all of the work you do mopping up images around here (and correcting those of us who try to do it incorrectly). VernoWhitney (talk) 13:42, 18 June 2010 (UTC) |
Cheers! VernoWhitney (talk) 13:42, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Page deletion issue
About a month ago you deleted File talk:Unix history-simple.svg as the talk page of a deleted file. The issue is that the file was deleted in favor of a successor file at File:Unix history-simple.en.svg, whose talk page simply points to the now-deleted old talk page. Presumably the old talk page contained information on the resources used to make the chart, the decisions of which versions to include, etc. As that info is still valid for the newer version of the file, I was hoping that you or another admin can rescue the content from the deleted talk page and place it on the talk page of the newer file. Thanks. oknazevad (talk) 15:22, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- The file is now located on Commons. For what you're requesting to happen, the file talk page would have to be transwiki moved to Commons. If I'm not mistaken, I believe you have to be a steward or a importer to do that. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:26, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, please take a look at the article isn't it look like an advertisement?I had put tag to propose deletion two times, so that administrator can review it.but the author deleted it twice.Please give reply.$Max Viwe$ (talk) 17:51, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- List it at WP:AFD. It will get a review there. However, I recommend you use a more specific reason other than "It should be reconsidered for deletion". Explain why the article should be deleted. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:28, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
76.69.35.97
Can you hide edit summaries by 76 (here) as pure harassment.. as well being over-the-top gross?Thanks. – Tommy [message] 20:46, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Bob Turner for Congress
Hello Fastily,
This evening I spent a significant amount of time submitting an article to Wikipedia for Robert (Bob) Turner for Congress and it appears that you have rejected the article. Can you please advise me on what grounds this article is being rejected? If there was some content (personal quote??) that you thought needed to be removed, that is understandable, however, this is a legitimate entry. Robert Turner, Republican Candidate, is running against Democrat, Anthony Weiner, for the 9th Congressional District (Queens and Brooklyn) this coming November.
Can you please advise me on what I need to do in order to have this entry listed correctly on Wikipedia. If you wish to speak to him directly to confirm any of this information I would be happy to put you in touch with him. You can also reference his website www.bobturnerforcongress.com as the information provided is consistent with what has already been disseminated to the public.
Sincerely, Dawn Nacional dnacional Dnacional (talk) 04:00, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- Since you have indicated that the page is a draft - I have restored the page. However, from what I can see so far, the page looks like an advert and will not survive long if moved to the mainspace. I encourage you to read WP:ADS, WP:MOS, WP:GNG, WP:YFA for some more starting points. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:01, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Removal of File:KDAQ facilities.jpg
Fastily, you removed another of my files, for which I obtained permission. Yes, I did "follow the instructions at WP:PERMISSION and WP:DCP? [I did] include the local file name and the license the file is to be licensed under." What is your problem with my submission? I spent a lot of time following your directions for obtaining permission. I am protesting your removal, since you appear to have deleted File:KDAQ facilities.jpg without justification. Did you check the email of --permissions-en@wikimedia.org--? I sent them a copy of my email with the permission. I quote the author: Email Redacted In case you were wondering, the "photo of the proposed facility" she mentioned was a completely different photo. All you have to do is go to the link I gave for this photo and see which one she means. She was allowing my photo called File:KDAQ facilities.jpg. I even went to the trouble of using the exact template you suggest on Wikipedia for obtaining said permission. I am really getting discouraged here. :-( Skol fir (talk) 04:31, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- I am sorry - did Ms. LaPierre specify the license, or did you yourself choose a license? The license needs to be chosen by the copyright holder or a representative of the entity that holds the copyright. If you specified the license yourself, then your claim is invalid, which is probably why it was ignored. -FASTILY (TALK) 04:37, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- I quoted everything she said, and she was responding to my form letter, which specifically stated the name of the file and the license (CC by SA). The form letter you give as an example specifies the license! If she chose to shorten her side of it, why is that my fault? Did you not even look at the letter? It has my extensive request and my cover letter to the Permissions dept., with the author's reply in between. Skol fir (talk) 04:42, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but I am not interested in bothering the Permissions department if you did not even take the time to send sufficient information. Your situation is regrettable, but unless you send anther email to OTRS permissions with the proper information (even if you have to bother the Ms. LaPierre again), there is nothing more I can do for you. Remember, requesting of permission and republishing files online has legal implications, so for your sake, I hope that the information you are submitting to Permissions is valid. -FASTILY (TALK) 04:57, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- Boy, you sure have a quick tongue! All I was asking was why the form letter says to specify the license when you contradicted that and said I have to leave the license up to the author? What is the use of your form letter to which I gave the link above? If you are the one who removed my file, you should have the courtesy to help me improve my submission, and tell me what is wrong about the form letter. I did everything they asked and more. Skol fir (talk) 05:01, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- Hey hey - my job requires one. I will reiterate what I have said above - I am not interested in soliciting the Permissions department unless I am sure you have forwarded the appropriate documents and licensing/copyright information to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. By appropriate documents and licensing/copyright information, I mean the email from Ms. LaPierre in which she specifies gives permission for the file to be used on Wikipedia and the license to use, which you forward to permissions-en@wikimedia.org and indicate the local file name on Wikipedia. If you can confirm this, I will speak with permissions on your behalf. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:15, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- I quoted everything she said, and she was responding to my form letter, which specifically stated the name of the file and the license (CC by SA). The form letter you give as an example specifies the license! If she chose to shorten her side of it, why is that my fault? Did you not even look at the letter? It has my extensive request and my cover letter to the Permissions dept., with the author's reply in between. Skol fir (talk) 04:42, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- If this helps, I am giving you the full text of what I sent to "Permissions." Please tell me what I did wrong, or what the recipient of my request failed to do right...
Email redacted
- Skol fir (talk) 05:42, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily, thanks for doing that. BTW, I found this at an archive for Wikipedia:Media copyright questions
- Hi there. Has he explicitly said which free license to use? A simple "You can use this image" is not enough, unfortunately. Commons:Email templates gives some insight about how to get the proper permission from the author.
- The usual procedure is usually one of two: the copyright owner of the image sends an email like the one I pointed at to the address point there, with the image attached, and a OTRS guy will upload it after certifying the mail. Or you can upload the image yourself, and then forward the email you got to the OTRS (the email address found there) stating the image you have uploaded (both the name of the image in the site and the link to the image you have uploaded), and a OTRS guy will slap a tag verifying the image is indeed free. -- ReyBrujo (talk) 15:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Bronco Engineering.png
Thanks for uploading File:Bronco Engineering.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is 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).
PLEASE NOTE:
- I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
- I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
- If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
- To opt out of these bot messages, add
{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}to your talk page. - If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:18, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Would you compare this to Sahar TV (English) (which you deleted as "Unambiguous advertising or promotion") and proceed accordingly? 69.181.249.92 (talk) 10:11, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you + More non-compliant images needing deletion
Hi Fastily!
Thank you for deleting the previous versions of images I uploaded that did not comply with Wikipedia:FAIRUSE policy, mostly Harry Turtledove book cover pix.
I would ask that you delete the previous non-compliant image versions here, here and...
Update: Calmer Waters is also apparently on the case.
Thanks again! --Shirt58 (talk) 11:17, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Tb
See here. Thanks, –xenotalk 13:45, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Could you please explain
Why have you deleted this image [122] It is used in an article, and no free image is available.Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:03, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- BTW, if you deleted an image, should you not delete it from the article at the same time rather than leave a red link there? Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:07, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- As a rule of thumb, files of buildings tend to be easily obtainable under a free license. I look forward to hearing your explanation as to why your case is so different from the norm. Also, we have a team of bots that automatically remove redlinked images from files, so that won't be necessary on my part. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:24, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you for response. I am not sure how the bot works, but I ended up deleting the link to the flle myself from the article 40 minutes after you deleted it. I agree that it should be easy to get a free image of this building, except I am nor sure how to get it. There's none on Wikipedia. I could not find any on Flickr. I even asked a user, who lives in the country to take an image of the building but.... At last I wrote to Bern's library. They said they will look into it, but so far they did not not get back to me. Only after I've done all of that I uploaded that fair use image. Maybe you could give me an advise me how to get an image for the article. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:36, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- Consider checking the Wikimedia Commons. If there is no such file on Commons, consider using a search engine to find one online, such as Google's advanced image search, where you can specify a license - [123]. Please bear in mind that WP:NFCC#1 is based on the principle that someone (not necessarily you) will be able to take a image of the subject in question, license it under a free license, and make it available to the public. -FASTILY (TALK) 04:43, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- When I said I looked on Wikipedia, I meant commons of course, and of course I did image search on both Google and yahoo. The image you deleted was the best out of only four images I found, and none of them had a free license.Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 05:04, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- Once again I was not able to find any free licensed image. Please consider undeliting this one at least untill a free image is found. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:47, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- Consider checking the Wikimedia Commons. If there is no such file on Commons, consider using a search engine to find one online, such as Google's advanced image search, where you can specify a license - [123]. Please bear in mind that WP:NFCC#1 is based on the principle that someone (not necessarily you) will be able to take a image of the subject in question, license it under a free license, and make it available to the public. -FASTILY (TALK) 04:43, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you for response. I am not sure how the bot works, but I ended up deleting the link to the flle myself from the article 40 minutes after you deleted it. I agree that it should be easy to get a free image of this building, except I am nor sure how to get it. There's none on Wikipedia. I could not find any on Flickr. I even asked a user, who lives in the country to take an image of the building but.... At last I wrote to Bern's library. They said they will look into it, but so far they did not not get back to me. Only after I've done all of that I uploaded that fair use image. Maybe you could give me an advise me how to get an image for the article. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:36, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- As a rule of thumb, files of buildings tend to be easily obtainable under a free license. I look forward to hearing your explanation as to why your case is so different from the norm. Also, we have a team of bots that automatically remove redlinked images from files, so that won't be necessary on my part. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:24, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
FYI
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#It would be nice to be informed of deletion sometimes. –xenotalk 15:10, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Regarding my images
hello , i have just noticed you have deleted two images which i had uploaded.The images were taken by me, and iam the sole owner of them, i had uploaded this images as free to use, i dont get online much opfted so i dont get a chance to check more frequently,I will try to upload them again so please dont remove them, hope you do the need full , best regards
Omar Mahfooz —Preceding unsigned comment added by Getstarted1212 (talk • contribs) 15:37, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- Could you please explain the purpose of User:Getstarted1212/ omar mahfooz? -FASTILY (TALK) 18:23, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Deleting Aristide Razu article photos
Hi Fasily,
My I ask why you delete my pictures from "Aristide Razu", about my ggrandfather article ?All the pictures he has received as gift from the regiments he Commanded at the time.
Why deleting the picture of my ggrandmather ggrandfather and grandfather?
Are you by any chance from Turkey ,Hungary or Germany?the Central Powers -use to be.
Thanks a loot.Aristiderazu (talk) 18:44, 19 June 2010 (UTC) Aristiderazu
- You failed to provide a license tag. Per our non-free content policy point 10b, files that do not have a license tag are subject to deletion 7 days after being tagged. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:47, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Threeafterthree
This is not "all hell breaking loose", but a just another voice who respectfully disagrees with the action taken against Threeafterthree (talk · contribs). Although the editor is not without controversy, he also has a long history of constructive contributions. The deletions in question were all done with stated reasons relating to WP:RS, WP:Undue, and WP:Forum. While I do not necessarily agree with the actions, they do seem to stem from this editor's tendency to interpret and apply these guidelines more strictly than other editors, which is not always a bad thing - especially for BLP articles. I also saw this as a content dispute, and don't believe blocks should be used to resolve such issues. This is why I initially declined the block request, although I probably should have expanded on my reasons at the time. The request had been pending for close to an hour, so I suspect it may have been reviewed by other admins who took no action. As to whether editor's actions are a violate policy, represent a biased application of the guidelines, or are disruptive in general, I think this is a question that deserves the attention of more than one or two opinions. I think a summary judgment and indefinite block was premature.
I propose we submit this to WP:AN/I to that the actions can be further reviewed and discussed. Thank you. -- Tom N (tcncv) talk/contrib 20:59, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
An indef block does look a bit severe, is there some disruption or some discussion I am not seeing? Off2riorob (talk) 21:09, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- Reblocked for 72 hours. Fences&Windows 21:54, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- You've not been notified: there is an AN/I thread about this at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#block_review_of_admin_fastily.27s_indef_block_of_Threeafterthree. Fences&Windows 22:06, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
User 82.1.229.0
Hi! I see you recently temporarily blocked 82.1.229.0 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) for vandalism. Alas, the user at this IP address still seems to be making unconstructive edits without regard to WP policy on reliable sources, original research, encyclopedic tone etc. and doesn't appear to be willing to engage in debate with other users. Perhaps some further sanctions are warranted? Letdorf (talk) 12:07, 18 June 2010 (UTC).
RE: My request for reviewer status
It seems you misunderstood me here. I don't think I should have been blocked for removing negative information from the Tony Abbott article, a high-profile BLP which gets a lot of contentious edits. Because I am an experienced editor, a caution would have sufficed. What I plan on challenging is the comment by User:Orderinchaos (in the collapsed discussion at Talk:Tony Abbott#Budget Reply 2010) that the ABC Television program Lateline is automatically a reliable source because it is produced by the ABC, which was used as a pretext for the block. Cheers, Ottre 07:52, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- I have cross-posted this to AN/I to ensure the matter is resolved quickly. See WP:AN/I#User:Ottre's request for reviewer status. Ottre 12:02, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- See also related Wikipedia talk:Reviewing#On denying requests for reviewer permission. –xenotalk 15:05, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of The Linc (newspaper)
Hi there,
Why did you delete this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Linc_(newspaper) ??
Cheers,
Shane —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.12.80.171 (talk) 16:12, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi again - please can you respond asap, as I'd like to get this deletion reversed. Thanks, Shane.
deleted page on James G. McGann
I found that the page made for James G. McGann was deleted from wikipedia because of copyright issues even though the resource of the biography was cited from FPRI. It was not a promotional page for any group for any commercial interest. How do I get the page on James G. McGann re-enacted? Gotothinktank (talk) 19:02, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Good time
Have a good vacation. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:41, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you James. I'm having an excellent time in San Diego at the moment. I'll be sure to upload some photos to Commons once I get home. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:49, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of Rizespor.jpg
Dear Fastily,
You deleted Rizespor.jpg, was added by me. It was used by Rizespor after changing their colors from yellow-green to blue-green between 1968 and 1990. It was replaced with current one due to changing their name was Çaykur Rizespor before starting 1990-91 season after Çaykur's sponsorship is begun. Consequently, it isn't included copyright questions. Please, you revert this deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cemsentin1 (talk • contribs) 20:57, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- I think you may have me confused with someone else - I did not delete File:Rizespor.jpg. See [124]. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:51, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
New problem editor
When you get back, if this problem isn't solved by my post at ANI (WP:ANI#Range block needed), could you take a look at User:Ryulong/Sandbox#Mumbai-based vandal?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 13:38, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- It looks like Tnxman307 has already gone ahead and done a rangeblock. Feel free to let me know if the problem persists after the block expires. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:53, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Image deletion
Hi Fastily. Is it possible to get this image File:GreenAlvin1418.jpg deleted? I'm not active on Commons and I don't know how to discern who here is. Thanks. Freakshownerd (talk) 15:00, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- Krinkle on Commons has deleted the file. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:56, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Adminship
I am staying in the race! I am not a new user! I have been on Wikipedia for 2 yrs. I strongly advise you not to delete my "Ballet". Thank you --Smalln 16:45, 20 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smalln (talk • contribs)
Enjoy your vacation!
I've finished the next lesson, so please take a peek when you have a chance after you return. This one was tougher since I wanted to consider my actions, not just the policies underlying them.--~TPW 13:38, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks TPW!! And thank you for putting down so much effort on the questions!! I look forward to reading them when I get home! Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 06:01, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
RfA
Thank you very much for your contribution to my Rfa. I have made a comment about it at User talk:JamesBWatson#Your Request for Adminship which you are, of course, very welcome to read if you wish to. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:32, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Deleted page on Peter G. Ray
hi. the page on Peter G. Ray was deleted. i re-read the guidlines and understand why. G.Ray is a relatively unknown person and it wasn't my aim to use the article as promotion, sorry it was a mistake. i just want to create an article that people could use to get more information on this artist so i would really like some help in creating this page. thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miracolixxx (talk • contribs) 17:46, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Miracolixxx#Help re Peter G. Ray -FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:59, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
RfA cropped up on my patrol
Fastily (or some talkpagestalker) should take a look at this, and warn the user. monosock 23:54, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
- Already deleted. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 06:02, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Deleted listing
You deleted "Modulus Financial Engineering". There are news results on news.google.com, which I believe is the primary reason you deleted it. Please check again and reinstate the listing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.110.73.24 (talk) 05:51, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
- I saw the new source, so I went ahead and moved it to the incubator. It is now located at Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Modulus Financial Engineering, and requires cleanup before it should be moved back into mainspace. NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 06:33, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Veritas Operations Services Wikipedia page
Hello Fastily,
I work at Symantec and responsible for our Veritas Operations Services application. We had a Wikipedia entry up until June 17th but it looks like you removed it due to an assessment of the written text.
Can you help me understand the specific reasons for its removal? I want to be sure we rewrite it more appropriately for the Wikipedia site. Also, would it be possible to get the latest version of the text that you removed so we can better understand what information was offending. I have an older copy but I'm not sure if I have the most recent information.
Thank you.
Jeff Martin Symantec Corporation
Jmartin0500 (talk) 19:15, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Jmartin0500#Deleted article -FASTILY (TALK) 07:16, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of Angry Birds
I'm kind of perplexed why a totally revamped and fully-cited article was deleted, especially since it's as notable a release as so many other video games, such as Halo 3 or New Super Mario Bros. Wii. I agree that as it was created the article was a shambles, but it was rescuable, and I do honestly believe I had rescued it with plenty of reliable third-party sources. Any insight would be most appreciated. Thanks. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 13:36, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily apparently didn't notice the earlier good version when he deleted it. I've restored the article and reverted to your version. Nice work. –xenotalk 13:44, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- After xeno recovered the article, I saw what happened after I got done with the article. Can't say I blamed ya for deleting that mess. I'm glad it's back and will keep working with it. I'm trying to find production information on the game, and there are some discussions in the articles I've found on how profitable the game is compared to boxed games, so there's more to work with, I think. Thanks again to both of you for your hard work on Wikipedia! --McDoobAU93 (talk) 14:04, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Re: June 2010
Hi Fastily! You have send me this message:
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Republic of Ragusa. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.
I apologies if you have seen my edits as an act of edit war. I just reverted "Sock" two times on the article Republic of Ragusa, after excessive IP vandalism and sock activity on that page. Regards, Kebeta (talk) 18:24, 23 June 2010 (UTC).
- Just don't keep reverting Pjesme; I'd hate to have to block you. If Pjesme reverts you again, feel free to let me know or file a report at WP:AN3. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:26, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Hey there Fastily, I just wanted to inform you that the image that you declined for speedy has been put up for FfD here, if you wanted to voice your opinion. Best, Mifter (talk) 19:16, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- I've left a comment at FFD. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:23, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
File:Case Of the Missing Hare 1.JPG
It's a frame from a cartoon. What's the appropriate license to use for a fair-use usage??? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:16, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- Either {{non-free television screenshot}} or {{PD-US-not renewed}}. Is this one of those bugs bunny episodes where the copyright was not renewed? -FASTILY (TALK) 23:50, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- Far as I know, the cartoon's copyright is still good. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:35, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- So, what should I do? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:56, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- I've added the {{non-free television screenshot}} license tag to File:Case Of the Missing Hare 1.JPG. I know that the copyright of a number of bugs bunny cartoons created between 1923 and 1963 was not renewed, which resulted in the cartoons' falling into the public domain. I just wanted to be sure of the file's copyright status before applying a license tag. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:59, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you for fixing. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:45, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- So, what should I do? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:56, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- Far as I know, the cartoon's copyright is still good. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:35, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
98.177.155.42
If it's just because of edits in my testbox I would like to request Special:Contributions/98.177.155.42 to be unblocked. Otherwise, I can't really intervene. mechamind90 00:39, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- Done -FASTILY (TALK) 00:45, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
No rationale?
I think when you tagged this file as not having a rationale, you may have been mistaken. There is one there.--Rockfang (talk) 04:06, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
A deleted page
HI,
It seems that the page I created about the Jewish Family Services of Kansas City was deleted due to copyright issues. Is that issue from the website? The organization (with their website) would actually be happy if this page was put up...
Is there anyway around that?
Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Echesir (talk • contribs) 15:57, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- That is correct. We cannot accept copy & pastes from (especially copyrighted) websites. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:52, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
A discussion on your talk page archives has been referenced at ANI
A discussion from your archives has been mentioned in relation to another user's actions at WP:ANI [125] Active Banana (talk) 16:37, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- Looks like Black Kite has already addressed that issue. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:53, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Veritas Operations Services Wikipedia page
Hello Fastily,
Based on confirmation of your comments from another Wikipedia administrator while you were out, we started providing revised content to the VOS Wikipedia page. We should have our edits completed by Friday if you would like to review them.
Thank you for your feedback.
Jeff
Jmartin0500 (talk) 18:13, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
RFPP
Hi, thanks for the semi-protection restoration, but I've noticed that you forgot to restore the original move-protection. Could you please address that? Thanks! Connormah (talk | contribs) 04:10, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Kiwi Alpha
Hi, I've just seen it was you who deleted the Kiwi Alpha article. As I'd like to include some information from that article into the GnucDNA article, I'd ask you to get a copy of that article to be able to continue my work.
mfg, OldDeath - 17:32, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- The page was deleted per the WP:PROD process. If you like, I can restore a copy to your userspace. Will that work? -FASTILY (TALK) 07:17, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, that would be nice. Thanks in advance!
- mfg, OldDeath - 14:28, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- Done at User:Old Death/Kiwi Alpha -FASTILY (TALK) 03:50, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you! I'll use the provided data once I get the time to ;) mfg, OldDeath - 16:02, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
World Fireworks Championship
Dear Fastily You recently deleted my article on the World Fireworks Championship. Firstly, I apologise if it appeared as advertising, upon receiving a notice it was marked for speedy deletion, I did my best to modify the article to make it more encyclopedic. There are many other articles regarding other international competitions (World Pyro Olympics, Clebration of Light), which I based my article on. I would like to resubmit the article but fear it being removed again- how can I ensure it stays?
Many thanks Kris —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fieldington (talk • contribs) 08:13, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Fieldington#Re:World Fireworks Championship -FASTILY (TALK) 20:25, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Sustainable Event Management
Hi,
It appears you have decided to delete the article I have created on Sustainable Event Management. Something about PROD which I have searched and have no idea what that means.
Something also about COATRACK, which I think means that you, or whoever decided that COATRACK applies, thinks that Sustainable Event Management is not a significantly different subject, say to Event Management or Sustainability. I can't believe that is the reason and if I have got that wrong please explain how COATRACK applies?
Obviously I have a lot to say on that matter.
The reason I set this wiki up, was that in my various positions in this industry, I was preparing to advise the international community of sustainable event professionals that the wiki is up and that they should contribute. I really don't want to have to go through and do all that work again.
If the reason for its deletion was not content based, then could you please tell me exactly (rather than in Wiki code) what the problem is and how to address it?
We will be having a wiki on Sustainable Event Management and I want to try and prevent having to repeat all the work I already did in writing this article.
Thanks
Meeganjones (talk) 13:46, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
- Sustainable Event Management was deleted per the WP:PROD process. You were notified here and given seven days to contest the proposed deletion. Since you did nothing, the page was deleted. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:29, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of NX Software page
Fastily, why did you remove the "NX (software)" page?
The page has been updated by multiple users over time and gives quite a nice description of the product.
If you think that there are some inappropriate bits, let us know and someone in the community will fix them up. But Deleting the page completely is a bit harsh.
There are many other pages for software similar to NX that are still up (and the NX page read less like an ad) CATIA, PROE, etc...
Jsarfati (talk) 14:31, 25 June 2010 (UTC)jsarfati —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsarfati (talk • contribs) 14:27, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 21:21, 25 June 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Fludd's diagram of perception
Hi, where can I post that information that you deleted from the page of Fludd's description of perception please ? thanks. Alan347 (talk) 22:13, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
- Commons:File:RobertFuddBewusstsein17Jh.png -FASTILY (TALK) 22:15, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Please undo the deletion of Zathura (software)
The article I just started on Zathura a new Open Source pdf viewer first released 2009/09/18 may not be mainstream notable with articles written about it in the PC-world magazine which the delete tagger thought was required. However it is highly noticed amongst the users of the Archlinux distribution for being the first pdf viewer that keeps to the philosophy of keeping it simple. Lord Metroid (talk) 04:38, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Lordmetroid#Re:Please undo the deletion of Zathura (software) -FASTILY (TALK) 05:02, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
I've looked at it and asked a few other admins (3) to as well. We all agreed that the article does not meet G11, although - IMO anyway - is is of questionable notability. The article has only two sentences and an infobox. The second sentence and the beginning of the first are entirely factual. The second half of the first sentence does seem to have POV wording. However that doesn't make the article an advertisement, and definitely not unambiguously so. There is no reason to throw out an entire article because part of one sentence is wording promotionally - that would definitely be a situation where collaborative editing can improve the article. For the notability concerns that isn't a CSD, a PROD or AfD situation. Looking at this article's history, the article was proposed for deletion, but the tag removed. That the CSD tags were added by the same person who added the prod tag should have been a red flag for you. I'm going to go ahead and restore the article. Prodego talk 05:56, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
FASTLY I AM STAYING IN THE RACE!!
I already responded to you, I am still going for adminship!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smalln (talk • contribs) 16:09, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) There is no need to shout at Fastily who has given you good advise based on his extensive experience.
Did you even notice that no one has even bothered to comment, much less vote for or against you, on your RfA for the seven days it has been open? That should tell you something, so open you eyes and take the friendly advise.While I am sure you are well-intentioned, looking at your edits, which is all we have to go on, you have not contributed or even discussed on any policy or guideline pages which indicates you don't interact with other editors over such matters which are basic requirements to becoming an admin. You did make 3 edits for your admin request, five for the Claire Redfield AFD and one to join a project, and 16 talk pages other than to your own page; this is not a record that will impress anyone nor shows that you understand anything about policy or admin-like matters. Personally I advise you to withdraw, get more experience and apply later. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 16:45, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- From his other edits, I gather he's typing in all-caps out of unbridled, seemingly inhuman excitement, rather than anger. And his RFA hasn't actually been transcluded to the main RFA page yet (though I expect the same outcome you do when that happens). --King Öomie 16:57, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- Oh dear, sorry about my misinterpretation I thought the RfA was active already. The capitalisation may even be exuberance at the anticipation of the support votes waiting in the wings. However my comments about his experience will hopefully give him a change of heart and allow him time to gain the experience needed by showing how he can be a constructive editor and possibly an admin in time. ww2censor (talk) 17:45, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Actually it was to get his attention —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smalln (talk • contribs) 02:35, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- Right. Your RfA has not yet been transcluded (i.e. submitted for community review). Would you like me to do that for you? -FASTILY (TALK) 21:14, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
I have been thinking lately, so I will allow you to make this decision fastly.. I think you know whats best for Wikipedia, So I will allow you to choose for me... Should I run for Adminship, or Should I gather more experience.. than you can choose to Transclude it or not. Thank you.--Smalln 17:02, 26 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smalln (talk • contribs)
- Well, IMHO, I recommend you do not run at this time. In my experience, editors with your level of experience who attempt RfA often are unsuccessful, receiving harsh criticism and sometimes even hurtful comments during the course of the RfA. It's ultimately your choice to go through with RfA - these are just my thoughts. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 17:33, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
Lofty Large image - no rationale?
Hi - you've tagged an image I uploaded as having no free use rationale. I went through what I thought was the correct process - see media copyright questions thread here. I had added what I thought was a sufficient rationale:
"This picture is uploaded to illustrate the eponymous "Lofty Large" article. As subject is dead no other alternative fair use image is available, image is encyclopedic, i.e. not defamatory or inappropriate, no commercial considerations exist that I'm aware of, image has been previously published (1987)."
If this is inadequate, please can you advise on what else I should be doing, as I'm afraid I find the whole issue of image use/copyright/fair use pretty baffling. Arthur Holland (talk) 08:37, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- You are missing information on the portion of the original image used and you did not indicate whether the file is of low resolution or not (it is by the way). -FASTILY (TALK) 03:52, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I've added those details. Hopefully that's ok now, but please let me know if any other isssues need addressing. If it's ok, can I take the "to be deleted" template off the image page? Thanks. Arthur Holland (talk) 07:48, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
- Looks better. And Done. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:01, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- Splendid. Much obliged. :-) Arthur Holland (talk) 07:55, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- Looks better. And
- Fair enough. I've added those details. Hopefully that's ok now, but please let me know if any other isssues need addressing. If it's ok, can I take the "to be deleted" template off the image page? Thanks. Arthur Holland (talk) 07:48, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Request for restoration of deleted images (they are licensed to us)
The following images were deleted from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Confluence_Festival page:
File:CONFLUENCE-Gyomo-Nakamura-12-650x432 copy-1.jpg
File:Confluencesite.jpg
File:Location-confluence-1.jpg
File:Talvin-singh-at-confluence.jpg
File:Film-tent-confluence-ladakh.jpg
File:Kids tent.jpg
File:Workshop-confluence.jpg
Under Lack of licensing information. I probably missed out your warnings, kindly let me know how can I provide you with licensing information so that the images can be restored. Shivam Sharma 10:01, 25 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shivam.s88 (talk • contribs)
- Your files were missing license tags indicating their copyright status and source information. Such files are subject to deletion under speedy deletion criterion F4 within seven days of being flagged as missing information on copyright status. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:27, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
RE: Okay, so what's the procedure of again uploading the article and images, since you've deleted the page. Assuming that I'll put the copyright and licensing info now. Shivam Sharma 08:15, 26 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shivam.s88 (talk • contribs)
- You are certainly free to upload the files again, but note that if you resubmit the article, please make sure it is compliant with WP:ADS, WP:MOS, and WP:GNG. If it isn't, it is likely that it will be deleted very quickly. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:04, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Alright, will go through the links. Thank you. Cheers! Shivam Sharma 15:42, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Blocking
Could there please be some kind of one-on-one discussion if/when a block could be reinstated. I'm aware of NLT, and have recently read it through from top to bottom and find nothing in it that has anything to do with the current situation. I think the comment from Golbez about "don't be a vigalante" is appropriate, however leaving such an image up for public view while things are decided doesn't seem acceptable either. It would seem that out policies which are meant to encourage openness and contribution are also our downfall in this matter. Anyway, I'm willing to listen... - Stillwaterising (talk) 17:57, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
- I noticed you redacted the legal threats at the very end of the ANI thread right after blocking you. Up until then, consensus at WP:ANI#Things are getting worse was clearly in favor of blocking you. At any rate, since you have decided not to pursue legal action, I guess there isn't a problem anymore. Again, sorry about the block. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:02, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
BlazeDVD
Hello. I believe there was an error in the BlazeDVD creation protection request. The request is now marked as "fulfilled", but no action has been taken. You said "User(s) blocked", but Haiyangzhai is not blocked, as you can see from his log. Haiyangzhai was blocked on June 2, but only for 24 hours, and that block was not relevant to this protection request from 26 June. He was blocked for removing the deletion template from the BlazeVideo (not BlazeDVD) article ([126]). He was repeatedly recreating the BlazeDVD article after his block expired. The BlazeVideo article has been creation protected ([127]), but the BlazeDVD article is not creation protected ([128]), and the user is not blocked, so nothing stops him from recreating it yet again.—J. M. (talk) 18:24, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
- I have given Haiyangzhai a final warning. If Haiyangzhai continues editing disruptively, please make a report at WP:AIV or let me know here, and I'll block them indefinitely. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:00, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Reviewer bits
Thank you! --Mr. Vernon (talk) 05:18, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
A bit ahead of schedule
Hi there Fastily, I noticed you recently deleted the files at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 June 20. Those weren't due to be deleted until June 28, 00:00 (UTC), but what done is done. Anywho, I just wanted to point out that you missed a second file here, which was added a few days after the initial nomination as it seemed that the user was trying to avoid deletion of the alternate album cover. — ξxplicit 05:22, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- -headesk- Well that was good. Restored everything. Thanks for letting me know. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 05:29, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Please undo the deletion of How (greeting)
Hi - I see you have deleted the How (greeting) article, following a PROD, your stated reason being 'Unencyclopaedic Controversial'.
The article acknowledged that the assumption or pretense that Native Americans historically greeted each other in that fashion was likely to be considered controversial or at least childish, but surely that does not make the Wiki article itself controversial? The article gave an interesting historical reference, and could have been usefully supported, I agree, with additional references to, e.g., [129]
As to being unencyclopaedic, I would note that, for instance, the Italian greeting Ciao has an extensive article and a link to the Wiktionary; so it seems that greetings aren't unencyclopaedic per se.
Indeed, for completeness, I would suggest the How (greeting) article should be required within Wiki, rather than deleted.
I'm afraid I missed the 7 day PROD - would you please reinstate the article? I would be happy to edit and add additional links to e.g. the article Hello.
Kind regards Pierrelapin (talk) 15:37, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
- I can restore a copy to your userspace. Will that work? -FASTILY (TALK) 17:59, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
- Many thanks - the article seems to be back in the main wiki-space - I will edit from there. Regards Pierrelapin (talk) 23:24, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
COMPASS-2
Hallo Fastily, I already send a permission to wikipedia because the content is the same as on http://www.raumfahrt.fh-aachen.de/compass2/ and the content on the Homepage is from an paper we, the COMPASS-2 Team,compose. So what can I do now?
Yours faithfully, UnoiCsmZpTlkinrmKACc —Preceding unsigned comment added by UnoiCsmZpTlkinrmKACc (talk • contribs) 19:03, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- Did you explicitly follow the instructions outlined at WP:PERMISSION, indicate the file name in the email you sent to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, include the email(s) from the copyright holder indicating the copyright status of the image(s) and what license to use? -FASTILY (TALK) 02:16, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
I send a "Grant Permission" E-Mail to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. I used the template and the Mail was send from our official E-Mail Address: compass2@fh-aachen.de... everything from copyright holder to license included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by UnoiCsmZpTlkinrmKACc (talk • contribs) 07:39, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
User:Vamsintl/Visual Arts and Music for Society International Article Deletion
Hi Fastily. You recently deleted the draft article User:Vamsintl/Visual Arts and Music for Society International. I was just wondering if you had specific justification for doing so since we typed up a lengthy defense of the article. We feel strongly that it is not unambiguous advertising and is simply informing others of the purpose of the organization, similar to the sites for other charity nonprofit organizations. Also, since this was just a draft article it was still in development it is unfair to simply delete it. Could you offer some commentary on how this article falls under the category of "unambiguous advertising or promotion" so that we can see your justification for deletion? We would also appreciate if you could restore the draft article so that we could make changes and continue to work on it. It is a little harsh to immediately delete a draft of an article instead of offering commentary on how it could be fixed. Thanks! Vamsintl (talk) 01:00, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Fastily,
you deleted this prodded article. According to Johnstone, Patrick; Schirrmacher, Thomas (2003). Gebet für die Welt. Hänssler. p. 405 ISBN 978-0813342757. it has 200,000 members in India. Hence I ask you to restore this article. Kind regards, Sarcelles (talk) 12:48, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- I see you were notified of the deletion and given 7 days to contest it. Could you please explain why you are asking me to restore the article now? -FASTILY (TALK) 01:52, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
- I added a number (with a reference) into the article a few days after the article had been prodded.
Kind regards, Sarcelles (talk) 18:43, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Would you please userfy this to me. Bridgeplayer (talk) 18:00, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- Done at User:Bridgeplayer/Search engine test. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:54, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you. Bridgeplayer (talk) 02:11, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
About the Pac-Man 3D show article.
IT. DOES. NOT. ADVERTISE. ANYTHING. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JMTHEFOX (talk • contribs) 01:15, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
There are no ads on that article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JMTHEFOX (talk • contribs) 15:12, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
adversiting deletion
Hi Fastily:
You deleted an upload page I submitted several hours ago for Dr. Eric M. Jackson because you said it was advertising. I am not sure if this is because it included a link to my firm and a description of the firm. However, I went back and edited those aspects out of the bio. I contested the speedy deletion and added a reason why to my "talk" page. Everything in the entry is fact-based. You can confirm this with Angela Beesley of Wikia and see this other Wikia page which Angela helped me with several years ago, when I used a wiki to help bank shareholder support to oust Terry Semel as the CEO of Yahoo! http://shareowneractivism.wikia.com/wiki/Yahoo
Thanks,
Eric —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drericjackson (talk • contribs) 12:52, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Drericjackson#Re:adversiting deletion -FASTILY (TALK) 15:03, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Shreysoni31
I see you've deleted a bunch of the photos I nom'ed as copyright infringements from user Shreysoni31. Judging from this user's talk page, I think it's clear this person has no respect for Wikipedia's image policies. I've seen admins mass delete a user's uploads in similar situations based on the user having proven untrustworthy. Can this be done here? All the model photos are obviously copyright infringements, and it looks like the user's other uploads are government logos uploaded as own work. Mbinebri talk ← 14:58, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
- I've deleted all of Shreysoni31's file uploads and given them a final warning. If Shreysoni31 continues to upload copyright violations, consider reporting them to WP:AIV or leave me a note here and I'll deal with them. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 15:02, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash
I notice you declined semi-protection after an IP inserted conspiracy theory claims to the article at least five times and was reverted. Since it's only one IP I have requested the new Pending Changes protection as I feel this might be a good article to trial it on anyway and it might help keep blogpost-sourced rubbish off a highly sensitive article. As the admin who declined semi, I feel it is only right to inform you of this and solicit your input. Thanks. N419BH 15:04, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
- Alright, thanks for letting me know. I've commented at the WP:RFPP request. -FASTILY (TALK) 15:10, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
- I've locked the article for 24h. I've posted on the talk page that the article can be unlocked at any time without further reference to myself if an admin determines that consensus has been reached over the issue. IP warned to find a reliable source to back up claims or they will be blocked if further disruption occurs. Mjroots (talk) 17:31, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
File:Castofrubi.jpg move image to appropriate name?
This logo was uploaded over an existing image which was for a different show cast of Rubi. Can this image be moved to more appropriate name reflecting the actual content as being the promo logo for a different show Elias Paniki? Active Banana (talk) 15:40, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
- What would you like for the file name to be? -FASTILY (TALK) 18:24, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
- How about: "Elias Paniki Logo" Thanks! Active Banana (talk) 18:26, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
- Done -FASTILY (TALK) 18:28, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Active Banana (talk) 18:43, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
- How about: "Elias Paniki Logo" Thanks! Active Banana (talk) 18:26, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Pallada Asset Management
Hi, sorry for disturbing, but you recently deleted my page Pallada Asset Management with a reason of unambigious advertising and promotion. Well, I respect your job, but please give me an answer. I wrote in my talk page that this were traslated article (oh, it seems I wrote there it was transcipted one. my fault no doubts.) So I translated it from russian into english. You suupose there is too much advertising? Then I'd be glad if you show what are the concrete advertising and promotion there. Sorry for wasting your time. You make your job and I'm mine therefore I'd like to get an answer from you. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artflam (talk • contribs) 18:33, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Artflam#Re:Pallada Asset Management -FASTILY (TALK) 18:37, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello
Hello Fastily,
I am new to Wikipedia, but I find this site has been very useful to me over my lifetime. With that being said, I am interested in creating articles for companies based in the San Diego area. I had recently started an article titled "Mushroom Networks" in which you had deleted due to promotion. I have no ties with this company, except that I had bought one of their products and know a little bit about it. Will you let me continue writing articles or should I not write them at all?
Thanks, Gyamasak (talk) 18:57, 28 June 2010 (UTC)gyamasaki
- I noticed that this was a draft article. Page restored. Sorry for the inconvenience. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:41, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Pallada Asset Management (the last question)
Fastily, I disturb you once more. I'll try to rewrite the article but now I've got a problem. I don't have the origin of it. Can you restore for me tu put it into my userspace again or just send it to my email? I'll also consider your proposals. Thanks, Artflam —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artflam (talk • contribs) 19:13, 28 June 2010 (UTC) P.S. - Sorry forgot to sign it. Artflam (talk) 19:18, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
- Done at User:Artflam/Pallada Asset Management -FASTILY (TALK) 19:43, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
RE: Recent Contributions
I was unaware I needed to sign using four tildas whilst issuing warnings; it's something I've been doing for quite a while. I'll be signing in future, and thanks for letting me know! JaeDyWolf ~ Baka-San (talk) 20:05, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I would like to reinclude the Floatsation page that you deleted. Floatsation was developed by a physiotherapist and was awarded the CBI/Toshiba invention of the year in 1993. I believe its inclusion on Wikipedia is in the wide public interest as it is a device designed to facilitate movement in water for people with severe impairments. Please feel free to contact me on paulvkaye@hotmail.com for further information. Paul V Kaye (talk) 22:54, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Paul V Kaye#Re:Floatsation -FASTILY (TALK) 03:34, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Page Protection Extension
Hi there, thanks for approving the page protection on my user page, I wonder if the protection can be extended to my talk page as well, as my request was actually belong made for the talk page since it was the one being attacked. My userpage had also been attacked in the past so that helps too. Do I have to make a separate request for the talk page?Zhanzhao (talk) 23:23, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
![[5]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SMACx-DiploScreenshot1.jpg){kind=link}
![[7]](http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/1071/screenshot3x.png){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![[23]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AFeatured_picture_candidates%2FFile%3ASarcophaga_africa.jpg&action=historysubmit&diff=333452786&oldid=333452441){kind=link}
![[33]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AIkorta_church.JPG&action=historysubmit&diff=338478664&oldid=338083495){kind=link}
![[39]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Alyandaj.jpg&diff=prev&oldid=342368303){kind=link}
![[40]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Sears_store.jpg&curid=5033183&diff=342386872&oldid=340823773){kind=link}
![[41]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3ASearsGrand_exterior_lo.jpg&action=historysubmit&diff=342386855&oldid=340823249){kind=link}
![[43]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:6208-MarineLandPilotWhaleShow-Bubbles-1.jpg&oldid=342300098){kind=link}
![[44]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:6208-MarineLandPilotWhaleShow-Bubbles-1.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[54]](http://images.yandex.ua/search?sp=2&p=4&rdrnd=959317&ed=1&text=%D0%B2%20%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B5%20%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE%20%D0%B2%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F&spsite=www.afisha.ru&img_url=s.afisha.ru%2FAfisha7Files%2FUGPhotos%2F090503203651%2F090505145951%2Fp_f.jpg&rpt=simage){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![[56]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Chartered_Institute_of_Arbitrators_Logo.JPG&action=edit){kind=link}
![[57]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Fly_You_Fools_Banner.JPG&action=edit){kind=link}
![[75]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Pirates_of_the_Carabian_PA190094.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&diff=364238211&oldid=180745144){kind=link}
_from_east%27.jpg){kind=link}
![[91]](http://worldmilitaryinsignia.com/images/StauteOfLibertyPatch.gif){kind=link}
![[93]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Thylogale_billardierii.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
![[94]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Schneider-EddieAugust_70761022_c740c4f306_o.jpg&diff=365579282&oldid=365579264){kind=link}
![[96]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:DelValle-Reginald_001a.jpg&diff=prev&oldid=365575519){kind=link}
![[97]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_talk:HubbardBell.gif){kind=link}
![[98]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Roman_Empire_full_-_Referenced.jpg){kind=link}
![[102]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Houdini_1918_draft.jpg&diff=prev&oldid=365575377){kind=link}
![[103]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Edward_Curtis_76.jpg&diff=prev&oldid=365575125){kind=link}
![[105]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_May_21#File:FingaskMural.26LoftyBuchanan2008.jpg){kind=link}
![[106]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_May_21#File:FingasFollies2007KateF.jpg){kind=link}
![[107]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_May_21#File:GubanovaThreiplandGovorkov.jpg){kind=link}
![[111]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3ASmpabouturluv.jpg&action=historysubmit&diff=367485709&oldid=173405539){kind=link}
![[117]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ornella_Barra_CSR.jpg){kind=link}
![[122]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Herrengasse_23_in_Bern.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![[124]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=&page=File%3ARizespor.jpg&year=&month=-1&tagfilter=){kind=link}
Pallada Asset Management
Hi, Fastily
Thanks for restoring the page in my userspace. Artflam (talk) 02:09, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Re: File:Ana Galarza.jpg
A non-free image of a living person, which should be easily replaceable with a public domain image, with no license info and lots of other missing required info does not meet CSD? ----moreno oso (talk) 03:24, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- I forgot - it's not a small res pic either. Probably an original. ----moreno oso (talk) 03:25, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Recreation
Could you check these two recently created articles, at least one of them is a recreation of one you speedied: Words_in_Color. The Silent Way which was a redirect to Silent Way and find out if they're substantially different from what was deleted.--Crossmr (talk) 06:24, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of The Linc (Newspaper)
Hi there,
Why did you delete this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Linc_(newspaper) ??
Cheers,
Shane —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.12.80.171 (talk) 10:47, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Ok, then I challenge your reasoning. It was merely a detailed history of the publication, as well as some of its achievements. You may note other student publications like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varsity_%28Cambridge%29 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nouse and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Steel_Press to name just three of many. They all do exactly the same. So unless you're going to delete every other Wiki page for a student newspaper, I kindly ask that you restore The Linc.
Cheers,
Shane —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.12.80.171 (talk) 15:39, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Following an interaction on his talk page, i would like to unblock this editor whom you indefblocked for vandalism. Could i ask you to take a look and comment? --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 18:27, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
About requests for adminship
I'm not really new to wikipedia. I have my own wiki and everything. I know how to use tools. I know what its like. I don't intend to be the most powerful person. I just don't want this place to have spam. I need it with good info. Please, don't delete my request. -Infinitygem3541 (talk) 12:44, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Pallada Asset Management
Fastily, ok, I see. well thanks for explaining. I'll try to rewrite the article so it would be less advertising. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artflam (talk • contribs) 18:42, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Fastily
It was brought to my attention this afternoon that an article called 'The Jolly Pilgrim' had been created on Wikipedia. I went to the article and noted that it was not written in an appropriate - i.e. neutral and encyclopedic - manner, and that there was a note from yourself pointing this out. I then moved to correct this myself by creating an account in order to re-write the article. However, by the time I had created the log in the article had been deleted. Are you able to allow me to re-write the article in an appropriate manner, which you can then check for appropriateness? Otherwise I can create it from scratch and you can check it that way? I am very familiar with Wikipedia's conventions and will be able to draft the article in a way that conforms to them. My new log in name is 'stylemanual'.
Please advise.
Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stylemanual (talk • contribs) 18:51, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
- Please feel free to restart the article. Just be sure that it complies with WP:MOS, WP:ADS, and WP:GNG. You may also find WP:YFA of some help. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:05, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I was referred to find you concerning this page: It was deleted by CSD A7 / Company this morning, 11.27 BST after I nommed it. I just found from my logs it was started again less than an hour later by cut and paste recreation. The company is totally NN, has been open less than a year, doesn't appear to have done very much at all, and I'm now torn as to whether I should CSD again under A7/Company or place it up for AFD. Your input would be appreciated. BarkingFish Talk to me | My contributions 15:59, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- I see the page was deleted again, so I guess that solves the problem. For future reference, yes, if a page clearly satisfies a CSD criterion, feel free to retag if the page is recreated via copy+paste. You may also find it helpful to leave warnings on the talk page of the offending editor. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:07, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Response to speedy deletion request
A few days ago, I requested that this image be deleted: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:LUwithShield-CMYK.svg
I am responding to your decision to undo my request. The reason for my request is that the image was taken from a secure area of the Lehigh University web site, modified (part of the logo and the TM symbol were removed), and uploaded to Wikipedia. Lehigh does not allow anyone to reproduce or modify its trademarked images without permission, so on those grounds this logo should be deleted from Wikipedia. Please advise on this situation. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Les306 (talk • contribs) 21:24, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- The file is currently used on Wikipedia under a claim of Fair use. I think the page, Fair use, explains the situation fairly well. If you have any other questions or concerns, please feel free to drop me a line. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:10, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Huh?
Please explain.
[130] This file is up for deletion per WP:CSD. using TW
Please explain WHY "This file is up for deletion per WP:CSD."
The tag you added says: "This file does not have information on its copyright status."
That statement is false.
Awaiting your reply. Pdfpdf (talk) 13:10, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
![[130]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:UAHSLOGO.jpg&diff=next&oldid=370609509){kind=link}
- WP:NFCC#10b. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
- Also, I don't like the fact that you have been refactoring my talk page posts. Please refrain from doing so in the future. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:13, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
I posted a comment about this editor a little way above here, but I note that you are busy in real life and not always here. In your absence, after careful consideration of this user's edits and my talkpage interaction with him I have decided to unblock him. I seriously hope that you will not see this as wheel-warring, but please feel free to complain if it seems appropriate. I hope it does not. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 19:54, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
- Anthony, I trust your judgment on this matter. You have my support with whatever action you decide (or have decided) to take. Best, FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:14, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
hi i delited my yoville game by axadent can you help me get it back, i dont no what to do..please help dont want to lose everything i have jeannie hucks coolnanaof6@hotmail.com facebook. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.186.117.135 (talk) 03:19, 1 July 2010 (UTC)