User talk:Fastily/Archive 2
 | 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. |
User talk:CloudKade11 uploading copyrighted images under false licenses
I sent this to Cirt a few days ago:
- I was wondering if you could help (or send me to an admin that can) with a user uploading images and giving them a [false] license of public domain or either CC-by-SA-3.0. I've already CSD three (there are many more). See here, here, here and here is their upload log. This one I don't even understand. They have been warned on their page... but apparently is not willing to engage in any discussion or desist in fallaciously uploading copyrighted work.
But you had already deleted the three images in question after I sent it. So now my question to you is: Do I have to go through all of their other uploaded images and find the image on the web they copied? Or should all the remaining images be deleted now since they are all the same (obvious non-free images given a fake CC-SA license)? Thanks. :) Mike Allen 21:14, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, it looks like the rest of CloudKade11's uploads are indeed copyright violations. No worries, I'll nuke the pages asap. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Cheers, FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:08, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you Fastily. Mike Allen 03:43, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
- And... they've just uploaded another one after formally being asked three times to stop. Mike Allen 03:45, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you Fastily. Mike Allen 03:43, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
adminship request
Very well. Thank you for you and all the other admins' comments. You can delete it now.Eridani (talk) 03:35, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) I processed the closure. 7 04:29, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Dear Fastily
Today i created the page for "Puku ltd" which you have subsequently removed. I would like to ask you to reconsider this action as the information on the page was entirely encyclopedic and in no way promotional. No pricing, or advertising material was included in any way and the page only served to inform the reader of the basic functions of Puku Ltd. We do not sell any products. We only assist in the design, development and licensing of new fastening and other technologies.The article was based on the introductory paragraph style of Nike's page, perhaps Nike's page should aslo be removed?
Sincerely
The Creator —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.58.168.202 (talk) 06:13, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Dear Fastily
Im sorry I just sent you a message concerning Puku Ltd's page yet sent it without leaving contact information.
I can be contacted at henrythehawk@gmail.com
Sincerely
Henry —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.58.168.202 (talk) 06:16, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Krav Maga Survival
Why was this article deleted?
Nick
Rick Lazio2.jpg
I work for the campaign and have rights to the headshot that I uploaded onto Wikipedia. I don't know how to best describe that in wikipedia terms, but it's the property of Lazio 2010, Inc. and I am authorized to use it. The picture that they keep reverting to is from the early 90's and is completely outdated. Any idea how I reinstate the picture? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Littleelephant (talk • contribs) 17:26, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
- Any given file uploaded to Wikipedia must cite a verifiable source. We do this as to preserve the integrity of this encyclopedia. Any files that are missing adequate source information are subject to deletion within 7 days of being flagged as missing source information. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:08, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
We have an OTRS ticket for this image now. If this image was a copy of a file on SaadAdam.Com, could you please restore it? If it was from some other site, could you let me know what site? Thank you. VernoWhitney (talk) 21:22, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
- What's the ticket number? I need it so that I can put the appropriate template on the file description page when I restore it. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:37, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
- Ticket:2010070210004077. I was going to add the OTRS tag, but there ya go. VernoWhitney (talk) 21:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Done Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 21:50, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks! VernoWhitney (talk) 21:54, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
- Ticket:2010070210004077. I was going to add the OTRS tag, but there ya go. VernoWhitney (talk) 21:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
I have to protest the indef blocking of the above editor. The person who reported them for vandalism did so incorrectly given the fact that WP:RS supports Lovegames additions. While a short-term block for 3RR might be appropriate after proper warnings, an indef block for vandalism seems extremely bitey. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 22:30, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
- I encourage you to speak with the original AIV reporter, User:Everard Proudfoot, on this matter. The evidence against Lovegames is fairly strong. If Everard Proudfoot agrees to an unblock or block reduction, I will happily implement that. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:43, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
- Take a look at my talk page and/or my last post to Lovegames talk page. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 22:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
- I'm very inclined to unblock. This was a content dispute, an arguably incorrect assertion of BLP violation, and a reasonable disagreement regarding the usability of information from a verified Twitter account. I don't think the stuff belongs in the article, but at most it's edit warring, not vandalism. --jpgordon::==( o ) 23:35, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
- Take a look at my talk page and/or my last post to Lovegames talk page. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 22:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Please correct me on how my photo should have been presented to avoid being deleted.
You STILL have not spelled out how to properly mark a foto so it will not be deleted. You ARE telling me why, and I DO get that-you've communicated that quite well and repeatedly, but what I need to know is how and for what exactly your looking. Stop making me engineer this myself please. Please give me a direction or a hyperlink to examples of proper citation, and not just "good luck". We're not getting anywhere/this is ineffective, and others have the same issue. For what do we look on websites giving permission & exactly how to you want it cited & where? Thanks. Adam. Aug. 9th., 2010. The image can be found here: http://www.healthline.com/channel/goiter_images?id=nwaz_01_img0114
I uploaded this jpg earlier and it was promptly deleted. I thought I correctly added the hyperlink to the permission, the correct permission, etc.
figure9b.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adambein (talk • contribs) 00:34, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) You cannot use any images from that website according to section 7 of the terms of use webpage unless you obtain their permission. Did you get permission? BTW, the link you provided does not show any images. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 02:13, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
EMSpanol
Hi: I was writing to ask a bit more about why you deleted my article about EMSpanol. In particular I would like to know what violated Wikipedia guidelines such that you decided to delete the article.
I have been looking this evening through Wikipedia and see articles far more "self-promoting" than mine was (which is ironic since I'm writing about someone else...)
In particular I looked up Scotty Cameron, the putter maker, and Pimsleur Language Learning Systems. Taken from a certain perspective, these articles do nothing but promote a product or business... so how did my article differ really? I'm not angry, just confused. I'm new to Wikipedia and am somewhat taken aback by the unwelcoming attitude...I spent a long time writing that article, sought feedback, improved the article, all the things I was supposed to do, and poof. You decide it's not worthy...
I'm sure you get this type of letter all the time since I see you are on the upload police, but may I at least have an explanation? What do I have to do to make the article acceptable?
Thanks, JP Paramedicjames (talk) 02:57, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Paramedicjames#Re:EMSpañol -FASTILY (TALK) 18:29, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Confirmation
What I want to add is not controversial, purely his own responding statements regarding apostasy in black and white (i.e. says it's OK to convert out of Islam but punishable by death if propagated against etc..) from publicly videotaped lectures put up on youtube. And also add some about the fate of an apostate who got in trouble and was put in protective custody and arrested at the same time when publicly renouncing his faith and for asking some very uncomfortable questions, which inadvertently angered alot of devoted Homo Sapiens during one of those recent lectures of pure enlightenment on the Maldives.
Even if those opinions of Dr Zakir are considered controversial to more emotionally reactive people it's still no basis not to allow it to be published, Wikipedia was not a place to just promote good PR and Orwellian spins but access as much accurate information possible last time I checked.
/Snark off
I'd also like to specifically put that text in a new topic; "Zakir Nafiq's views on Apostasy under Islamic Shari'a law" which would be more suited to place there than under "lectures and debates" so that won't get too polemic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Antidotic (talk • contribs) 05:49, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I have added the confirmed right to your account. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:28, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Reviewer permission
Hello Fastily, I have retrieved a request you denied from the archive and would like for you to comment at WP:PERM/RW#User:Huwr. Thank you —DoRD (talk) 18:08, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- I have responded at WP:PERM/RW#User:Huwr. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:26, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Do please read the edit summary before reverting
Do please read the edit summary before reverting. You might also read the starfish article.
- Fair enough. Restored your edits. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:42, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Aron Winter
I see that you have twice undone my edit to Aron Winter. Could you explain why my edit is unconstructive? Could you explain why the information doesn't belong in the lead? 83.80.18.68 (talk) 22:36, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- When the words "Jewish" and "Muslim" are interchanged on Wikipedia, it's usually vandalism. At any rate, I have restored your edits. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:43, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- The words "Jewish" and "Muslim" were already in the lead, that was not the edit. You could have found that out, and in my opinion you should have. Did you seriously undo my edit without checking what I actually added? 83.80.18.68 (talk) 22:47, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Why do you delete my edits on Oxygene?
You're already reverted my edits on Oxygene section, which lasted about a minute available on-line. First time I thought it was a breakdown, but later I saw it was intentionally deleted. Why? I told about things that are not in the article yet, as album stylism and the Gallipoli film. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.158.159.26 (talk) 22:37, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Restored your edits. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:45, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you. I see you're engaged in anti-vandalism, so I let you know I plan to add some well-hearted paragraphs in Jean Michel Jarre's article in order to expand some data. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.158.159.26 (talk) 22:55, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Bojan Djordic
The UEFA Website said that he has been sold to Videoton in Hungary [[1]]
Thanks i-king@sky.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.195.163.231 (talk) 22:39, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- Rather than adding an external link directly behind text, which statistically is often seen as advertising/vandalism, consider following the instructions at WP:CITE to add source citations. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:48, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
User:SchmuckyTheCat
Could you please help counter his trolling? This user has been getting around labelling whoever he doesn't like as sockpuppets of Instantnood. He is a ultra-nationalist identifying himself with the communist Beijing government, in the sense that he'd be disturbed whenever he finds Hong Kong being presented in the same manner as other dependent territories do, be it an article, a category, a list sort by country, whatever. 112.118.163.236 (talk) 22:42, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- The above appears to be from a sock of banned User:Instantnood. — Jeff G. ツ 22:43, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- Please do help. There are many users being labelled as such for working against his nationalitic trolling. There are many dependent territories around the round, but User:SchmuckyTheCat is working only on Hong Kong, and sometimes Macau. 112.118.163.236 (talk) 22:46, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- Looks like MuZemike got 112.118.163.236 before I could. Meh. -FASTILY Happy 4th of July!!! 07:53, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- Please do help. There are many users being labelled as such for working against his nationalitic trolling. There are many dependent territories around the round, but User:SchmuckyTheCat is working only on Hong Kong, and sometimes Macau. 112.118.163.236 (talk) 22:46, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Pride page edits
Hello
I am struggling to understand how to edit the pages in a special way. For instance I was using hypertext and headers, which is not what I normally do. You also suggested that I use an informative edit summary as I did do.
Can you let me know what I am not understanding? Try and make it easy to understand, I am not very good at communicating with other Wikipedia users about editing, as this is something that I have never done before; unlike what I do on Yahoo messenger, it is totally different. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.56.133 (talk) 22:50, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- WP:OR, WP:NPOV, WP:V. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:51, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Can you make suggestions on how to do this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.56.133 (talk) 22:54, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- I suppose what I mean to say, is that while your edits are appreciated, they are not suitable for Wikipedia. Sorry, FASTILYsock(TALK) 22:59, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
What should be done to make it 'suitable' for Wikipedia. Should I add dictonary references etc, or encyclopedia reference from trusted sources? For instance if it siad this in Encyclopedia Britanica. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.56.133 (talk) 23:01, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- Your text reads strongly like original research. We have a guideline here on Wikipedia which prohibits original research. Even if you source your addition, it will probably still be removed. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:16, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
I have read the page of 'Original research' and I understand what it says, in terms of both not making your own research or making certian kinds of interpretations of referenced research; but how do you know it is not a violation of the orriginal research regulation, if I cannot copy the information from a given source? Copying the information would be a breach of copywrite law, is that correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.56.133 (talk) 23:20, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Nice Job
Nice job at beating me to reverting this vandalism. Didn't have time to hit a key. Mr. R00t Talk 23:03, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- Hah Thanks :) -FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:16, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Is Mr Root suggesting that he was reported for vandelism for no reason and that Fastily admits doing this on purpose? Or was that sarcasm? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.56.133 (talk) 23:24, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Abigail Williams
This is why i consider revisions from Rzrscm and Michig vandalism.
This is written to Rzrscm
"I consider your revision vandalism and fictitious because you state that Ken Sorceron often wore dresses and played in various hardcore bands. If you check the facts Ken Sorceron was only in Victims In Ecstacy towards the end of the band which at that time they did not wear dresses at all, but suites, which is a far cry from dresses, the problem is not including his membership in the band in the past but mentioning wearing dresses often which he did not is simply not true. Also various hardcore bands is false. Ken Sorceron played in 1 hardcore band called Kyds Vs Coumbus and never another one prior or after that. While your at it why would you not mention his membership with Belgian death metal band Aborted, or the briefly signed to Roadrunner metal band Born Of Fire? He also is the ex drummer of Arizona death metal band, Reign Of Vengeance. There is fare more relevance to the article with those more recent bands but instead of including them you start the article out with half truths. THAT is vandalism by definition. If you can revise the article to include these things and remove the part about dressed and VARIOUS hardcore bands and be more specific then that would be a worthwhile addition to this article but until then it is vandalism." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.89.233.174 (talk) 23:12, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- WP:TLDR. I encourage you not to add "wiki" like you did here. Seriously. If that isn't vandalism, I can't say I know what is. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 23:18, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Good coaching
Yes, I did let see you updated it but I wanted time to digest what I did right and wrong, and then it went into the Pile of Things To Do. I appreciate the friendly reminder! I also appreciate that this is getting hard, because I'd be really disappointed if I didn't feel challenged. (I'm actually quite surprised how easy it was for awhile there.) There are endless explosions in my corner of the world right now, but I will endeavor to get some more answers done before the dramaout renders me briefly silent. Thanks again!--~TPW 01:59, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- Of course! Thanks for the kind words :) Cheers, FASTILY Happy 4th of July!!! 07:52, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Fastily. I noticed you reverted additions by editor 88.235.89.167 (talk · contribs). I out found it was also a copyvio of istanbulvisions.com, including spelling errors! FYI, regards --220.101 (talk) \Contribs 02:14, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- And now I find that Bendaydots (talk · contribs) has returned about 5k of it to the article! --220.101 (talk) \Contribs02:34, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- I've left a final warning on both talk pages. If the disruptive editing continues from either user, consider making a report at WP:AIV or leave me a message on my talk and I'll personally deal with them. Regards, FASTILY Happy 4th of July!!! 07:55, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Abigail Williams
I have proof that the singer of this band is directly involved in the editing and vandalism that's been going on on the article. Since this is considered conflict of interest, what should be done? rzrscm (talk) 02:39, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- Consider leaving a note/warning on the IP or Username, explaining conflict of interest. If the singer does not edit in line with policies/guidelines such as WP:NPOV, WP:POV, WP:PEACOCK, WP:BLP, ect. despite warnings, they can be blocked for disruption. If the singer editing at Abigail Williams starts becoming a probelem, please feel free to drop me a line and I'll personally see to it that the disruption stops. Regards, FASTILY Happy 4th of July!!! 07:58, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted Page
Hello, recently you deleted The Methos Chronicles, and in the summary, said it was a fan production. However, it was actually produced by the creator of Highlander, and I have references. Can you please provide the code from the deleted page (you can place it in my sandbox here) and I can get it up to standards before re-creating. Hooper (talk) 03:56, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- Done. Regards, FASTILY Happy 4th of July!!! 08:00, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Hey, I did not create the page for promoting it.. I was searching for Country Vacations and I could not find any wiki page. That's why I thought of creating one wiki page :) I made sure that it did not sound like advertising content —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raghavsuryadev (talk • contribs) 09:10, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Raghavsuryadev#Re:Country Vacations India -FASTILY Happy 4th of July!!! 16:43, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
article "Pledgemusic" ... what is the problem???
The screenshot and logo are permitted for use on wikipedia???
Please put back the article. It is an important crowd-funding reference source
Jannw —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jannw (talk • contribs) 17:22, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Jannw#Re:Pledgemusic -FASTILY Happy 4th of July!!! 18:09, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Why was this page deleted it is an existing karate organization, all be it not directly associated with JKA or ISKF, but still. I find it confusing why it would be deleted aside from it's likely nobody updated it. Linked to one of the pages for the associated schools. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_International_Karate_Center http://www.jikc-hq.org/History.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.251.10.242 (talk) 18:29, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Page Deletion
Hi Fastily, you deleted the page "Chuck Spezzano" for copyright infringement from the page http://www.healingkeys.com/ChuckSpezzano.htm I am applying to the copyright owner for full permissions to freely use this information. What is the process for getting a page restored? I am new here, appreciate your help thanks. Regards, Matt_Blythe 21:28, 4 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattblythe (talk • contribs)
- (talk page stalker) Contact OTRS when permission is granted by the holder. —I-20the highway 21:38, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Fridae'§Doom | Talk to me 22:10, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
A question about editors with repeated page deletions for G11
Hi there. You just recently deleted Kevin Feng, which I had nominated for speedy under G11. The page has been created and deleted 5 times within about 5 weeks. There have also been a number of related pages deleted several times, all dealing with the same basic topic. ABCs of Attraction, The Asian Playboy (and Asian Playboy, after the first title was creation protected), and once JT Tran. There are two editors involved in the creation of these pages, User:Lucywriter and User:Princetoncc. Is there anything that can be done to stop these editors from recreating these pages again and again? It seems to me that they are putting little (if any) effort into actually trying to make the articles meet Wiki guidelines/criteria. --Logical Fuzz (talk) 23:12, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- I've warned both the users. If either account recreates any of the pages you listed above, please let me know. I'll block and salt as necessary. Regards, FASTILY Happy 4th of July!!! 03:21, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, will do! --Logical Fuzz (talk) 12:17, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Help
Hi Fastily, I need some help with my userboxes. I want to create a box like the one that Phantomsteve has at the bottom of his user page but the problem is I keep adding useless parameters... could you possibly give me a shell, or rough template which I can use? Thanks Fridae'§Doom | Talk to me 23:21, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- I think you may find Help:Wikitable useful. It gives a general description on how to use wikitables. If that doesn't cut it, let me know and I'll see what I can do to improve your code (if necessary). Cheers, FASTILY Happy 4th of July!!! 03:16, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Looking for advice
What would you do with this page? MANTA BEACH BUGGY --mboverload@ 06:11, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- It is supposed to be a subpage of WT:AFC. I have moved it there. Regards, FASTILY Happy 4th of July!!! 06:15, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
An editor left a {{hangon}} after you deleted the article. I deleted it along with the talk page since there was nothing there. Looking at the deleted edits, I think it was an IP that added all of the promotional text in there. Would you consider undeleting the article and reverting back to the February 8, 2010 revision? That revision would be a stub, but it would be without the advertising prose. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:22, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- Done -FASTILY Happy 4th of July!!! 07:27, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
File:Mizraabnewlineup.jpg
I'm a little confused. You said I used the wrong CSD tag. I tagged it as CSD-F7 as it clearly fails the unacceptable use criteria WP:NFC#UULP - since the people in the photo are still the current members (assuming the article is correct). How is your tag any better? Ronhjones (Talk) 23:32, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- Files in violation of non-free content criterion #1 are eligible for speedy deletion under CSD criterion F7 only after having been tagged with {{subst:rfu}} for more than 2 days. There is nothing wrong with my tag, which flags the file as having no license tag. I hope that helps to clarify things. -FASTILY Happy 4th of July!!! 03:19, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
About deleting Sons of Admirals...
I am very new to the Wikipedia community, so please forgive me, but...
... because of this:
•Press Release 22/06/2010 - New Cover of "Here Come My Baby" Leaps From YouTube To BBC Radio 1 Indie Chart
•Press Release 16/06/2010 - Indie Band, Sons Of Admirals, Rides YouTube Popularity To Break iTunes Top 100
... and the respective solo careers of the members, it seems like they are well known enough/qualify to have their own page.
If not, please explain. Thanks so much! -Katie
PS: Press Release information from their website; sonsofadmirals.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by YouCanFlyPig (talk • contribs) 19:03, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) What is required for an article is coverage by third party reilable sources, not self issued press releases or links to you-tube sites. Most non-blog hits that you find at news.google.com (and the archives) and most hits at books.google.com (except for those published by Icon Inc. or Author House or other print on demand publishers) will help validate that the topic meets notability requirements. Also note that the content must be presented from a neutral point of view and not as an advertisement. Active Banana (talk) 19:18, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Reversion and warning
Hi Fastily. Regarding this IP warning – it's probably better to revert edits such as this as "good faith" edits. While the text wasn't within the keeping of the tone, it certainly wasn't a bad intentioned one. Perhaps it's probably best to just revert and only warn IPs which have persistent bad edits. This way, it means that new users aren't scared off by warnings on their first few edits. Cheers! Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)Join WikiProject Athletics! 00:39, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
RE: in regards to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somesso
Hi Fastily. thanks for the tips you gave me on June 18. I have heavily studied the links you sent and am now ready for a new start. I'll also refrain from writing it myself though to keep things neutral. One thing I'd appreciate to receive from you is the text of the article I uploaded about somesso. Would this be possible? I didn't have a backup as I thought at least the account would continue to exist. I've been working on the text for days... Thanks in advance. AJ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Strijkertje (talk • contribs) 15:19, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
- Done at User:Strijkertje/Somesso. Feel free to move it into the mainspace when you're ready. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 06:53, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Archaeologist deletions!
Hola Fastly, I noticed you deleted the page on Ezra B.W. Zubrow. I'm not exactly sure why since I can't see and didn't write the original, but I would be happy to give it a look over and see if I can't bring it up to snuff. Zubrow is def worth a wikipedia article. Can you send through the original? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Radiotik (talk • contribs) 19:33, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
- I can restore it to a subpage in your userspace. Will that work? -FASTILY (TALK) 06:54, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Global Classrooms Wiki page
Hello Fastly, my name is Jason and I am the Media coordinator for the United Nations Association-USA. About a month ago I tried to create a page for UNA-USA's Global Classrooms program (globalclassrooms.org) but it was deleted for reasons of propaganda/advertising. I have created a new account, hoping I can fix my mistakes and finally post an article.
Can you please give me the specifics on why the page was deleted?
Thanks.
P.S. I am creating a page separate from the existing UNA-USA wiki page, because Global Classrooms will soon become an independent education program. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaso86 (talk • contribs) 23:05, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
- Could you please specify the original title of the article? I'm not exactly sure what you're referring to. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 06:55, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Green Party of Nevada
When is the Green Party of Nevada entry going to be reinstated, what was wrong with it? Can you contact whomever posted it and get them to fix it? Preferably while we are still living? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.77.207.196 (talk) 05:19, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
- Could you please log in to edit? It would really make it much easier to respond to your query. Thanks, FASTILY (TALK) 06:56, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Global Classrooms Wiki page
The name of the article was Global Classrooms —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.55.52.242 (talk) 14:35, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Answer from Confirmed access question
In response to your request for further information regarding specific changes to Senator Grassley's wiki page -
Since the death of Senator Byrd, lines of seniority have changed, this would be corrected with a date of June 2010 [1]
Addition of Senator Grassley being named hardest working lawmaker of 2010 [2]
The date of Grassley taking the role of ranking Senator on Finance Committee is incorrect, should be changed to January 2007
Grassleyworks (talk) 15:17, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
RFA Thank spam
|
Thank you for voting in my RfA, which failed with 10 support, 26 oppose, and 13 neutral. Your comments were much appreciated. |
On a personal note, I will work on distancing myself from the editing patterns that got me blocked back in Jan/Feb. See you around :) --White Shadows There goes another day 16:43, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
In relation to 'Fair use' cleanup
Rather than using DFU to mark short rationales (which seems to annoy people), I've created a new template, whose inclusions you should perhaps monitor...
Template is {{Short-Rationale}}, the wording on the template should be reasonably clear.
I've also created {{Standard-Rationale}}, to mark non-free images that have FUR, but where the FUR given is not in one of the standard template forms (most often derived from {{Non-free use rationale}} IIRC ).
The creation of these templates is a BE BOLD attempt to clear the backlog of images on the relevant WP:DBR report, and hopefully to ensure the removal of some of the false-positives the report into images lacking rationales generates..
Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:03, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- You know, just go ahead and mark incomplete rationales with {{subst:nrd}}. If anyone starts giving you a hard time, let me know and I'll see to it that they stop. There's nothing wrong with adding a {{subst:nrd}} tag to a file with an incomplete fur. I'll definitely keep an eye on these tags you've created - I think they're fantastic ideas. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 02:33, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
- Well given the recent WP:ANI thread concerning this, (I got blocked for a time as people thought I was bot that had malfunctioned and gone on a rampage.. :( ) , I would be cautious of using the approach you suggest. In reviewing, it's possible I might have converted some of your {{nrd}} tags back to {{Short-Rationale}} tags. You may wish to review the relevant category.
- This morning, I've toned down {{standard-rationale}} somewhat to address some concerns that were raised, apparently there isn't (currently) a policy requirement for rationales to be in a standard form provided they address all the point in the relevant guidelines/policy. The intent of the template (and why it's been re-worded) is to encourage 'standardisation' such that automated tools and reports, can quickly skip the media that's already adequately meeting those guidelines/policy, and so that the human contributors following up can concentrate on the media that 'genuinely' doesn't. It's only a personal view, but the use ofthe newer templates might be more in keeping with WP:AGF then the DFU/NRD 'gunshot to kill a fly' approach (something I noted in the relevant ANI thread.)
Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:30, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
- For an example of how {{Standard-Rationale}} should/could be used see File:BillyCoutu.JPG Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:32, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
- What?? Dude, if something like that ever happens again, please email me. It's foolish to block established contributors for editing, in-line with policy, too fast :/ Still, I think your new approach is an excellent conception - it's certainly less bitey to newcomers as opposed to the current method we employ. I'll go ahead and start using these templates too. If there's anything else I can do to help, please do let me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 17:30, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
- For an example of how {{Standard-Rationale}} should/could be used see File:BillyCoutu.JPG Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:32, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
EMSpanol
Hi Fastily: You deleted my previous article about EMSpanol for being non-encyclopedic and promotional. You invited me to rewrite and submit for feedback. I have done so. I have only included factual, encyclopedic information, and have reviewed other articles on similar topics and copied their style. I studied Wikipedia formatting guidelines and followed them, and included outside sources for the information in the article. If you still object to elements of the article, please tell me now so that I can improve it before having it deleted again. Thank you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Paramedicjames/Emergency_Language_Systems
Paramedicjames (talk) 16:32, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- Looks better. I think it still will need more work to get in line with WP:ADS however. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:31, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I made another major rewrite focused on the increasing rate and severity of contact between EMS and Hispanic Patients. I removed all references to EMSpanol books in particular, outside of the simple statement that Emergency Language Systems maintains a copyright for EMSpanol books. Other than that I focused on the bilingualization of MCI Triage tools and Refusal of Care Forms.
Have I reached an acceptable threshold yet?
Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paramedicjames (talk • contribs) 19:02, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
- I think the article looks significantly better than from when you first started. I think you may find it helpful to post at Wikipedia:Requests for feedback. I think the more attention and opinions you can garner for your article, the better. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 06:50, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
I did. It's been up for four days now. I haven't gotten any feedback. Thanks for your help. Paramedicjames (talk) 14:03, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, can you please restore this article? I missed the PROD notice, and I believe the List/Article has merit. --HighKing (talk) 20:54, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- If I restore the page, would you be willing to improve the page and address the concern noted by the PROD tag? -FASTILY Happy 4th of July!!! 21:07, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- I didn't see the PROD tag, but yes, the intention is to improve the article. I believe a separate List style article is a better solution that listing the stores in the main Dundrum Town Centre article, as it changes periodically. --HighKing (talk) 09:38, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Best Buy Connect
How else can I explain a new nationwide service besides explaining its features? G11 is very ambiguous and it is difficult to contribute to wikipedia in my opinion, which maybe it should be. Paraplegicemu (talk) 02:23, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Paraplegicemu#Re:Best Buy Connect -FASTILY (TALK) 17:20, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
User:Pdfpdf at ANI
Your name was briefly mentioned in the new thread at WP:ANI#Pdfpdf, since you had warned the editor against personal attacks in a previous ANI thread. EdJohnston (talk) 17:34, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the note. I have dealt with the situation accordingly. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 17:42, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi Fastily,
I dont know any admins but saw you on some page thus its you I contact. I wrote a few original articles on Wikipedia. One, Alexander Pechersky, I feel deserves a high rating than a C. Unfortunately the person reviewing it is making (in my view) unreasonable demands with edits. I would just like to have a neutral person (you) to take a look at the demands (on my talk page) and at the article and give your view. I understand you are expert with images, but after reading the article I am sure you can form an opinion. I feel its a solid article on which I spend over 40 hours researching and referencing and it deserves better than a C. I default to your judgement. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 11:35, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
- Certainly! I'll have a look at the article and get back to you as soon as I can. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 06:51, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I agree with Taleus in that it was an excellent read. I think some improvements to the summary/introduction can be made, otherwise, I think it should easily be in range of a B-class article. If the introduction was the only noted issue, I recommend fixing up the introduction and then resubmitting it for review. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:17, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Permissions Request
Hello, You asked what I will specifically change on the Sarah Jessica Parker section. Actually, very little. In the Filmography section, The Little Match Girl is listed and someone wrote in the Notes section "Cameo: Uncredited". That is completely inaccurate. Not only is SJP in every single scene in that program, but she is listed in the closing credits as Sarah Parker. So I was going to simply remove the the existing notes replace them with "as Sarah Parker". Minor I know, but I have always been a perfectionist and errors like this are always unsettling for me to read. As I mentioned, I would be happy to let someone else make these changes on my behalf. I am not a SJP fan or expert outside of her work on that one special, so I doubt I would need access to her page beyond this one update. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bestaroundsoul (talk • contribs) 04:52, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- Alright, fair enough. I have added the right to your account. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:55, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
You deleted file O.DXQ.jpg due to no copy right permission. I have uploaded the permission. Please review and upload the file. I attached the permission here:
I hereby affirm that [I, Quan X DINH am] the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of Judge Đinh Xuân Quảng- (see http: above) the work to be released in detail). I agree to release that work including the 2 pictures of DinhXuanQuang.jpg and TheCabinetBuuLoc.jpg into the public domain.
I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.
I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be attributed to me.
I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.
[Quan X Dinh the creator of the work qdinh2@yahoo.com 2221 N. Heliotrope, Santa Ana, CA 92706 – Tel: 714-972-1126] (to allow future verification of authenticity) [Santa Ana, CA 92707 June 27, 2010]
thanks,
Ngoc ly —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ngoc ly (talk • contribs) 06:56, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- This should be emailed to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Follow the instructions at WP:DCP (if applicable) and WP:PERMISSION. Once you have done the latter, the files will be restored and your email regarding the permissions and/or copyright of the file will be archived in the OTRS database. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:57, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
'Thankbacks'
Thanks for selecting me as a reviewer! Well, I want to ask, why they become administrators?--Sainsf<^> (talk) 15:29, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- No problem! Er, I'm not exactly what you mean by your last question. If you're looking for information on administrators, you may find WP:ADMIN helpful. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 20:59, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Mayumashu
Where was the content of this page moved to when it was deleted for "non-controversial" maintenance? - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 15:25, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Floydian. I deleted the page because it was tagged with {{db-g6}} and because of the first line of Template:RfC. Hope that helps to explain. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:01, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
????????????I was editing that —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeepjam1 (talk • contribs) 18:33, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello
I don't understand why you deleted my page about Acme Mills...I was still editing it and rewriting it. It was not an advertisement its actually I company I did a report on for college. I would like to figure out how to get my page approved. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeepjam1 (talk • contribs) 18:37, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Hello, try drafting your article in your sandbox User:Jeepjam1/Acme Mills. Once you have the third party sources required to indicate notability request another editor or two to review and ensure that it meets our neutral point of view requirement, then you can request to have the article that meets our basic requirements moved into live Wikipedia space without having to worry that it will be deleted while you are working on it. Active Banana (talk) 18:41, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
so I need to make it in the sandbox and then get it approved by an admin???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeepjam1 (talk • contribs) 18:45, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- You dont need to, but doing so ensures that it wont be deleted while you are still drafting it. Active Banana (talk) 18:47, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
And how would I go about doing that I cant figure out how to even make a new page? and basically Ill be fine as long as I stay away from subjective claims and reference everything right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeepjam1 (talk • contribs) 18:51, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Bacio Divino
Hi,
You deleted the page for our winery - Bacio Divino. I just noticed it's gone now and am trying to find an archived copy of the page to re-create. The winery is definitely notable as it has produced numerous 90+ Robert Parker rated wines - not at all a common feat. Please contact me for additional information, or if you can offer any help in getting this re-created as now I have to find the page and start over :(
-Alex Uher alexuher@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Auher (talk • contribs) 20:40, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- The page was deleted per the WP:PROD process. If you like, I can restore it to your userspace so you can work on it there. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:03, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
User page for Jillathrilla
Fastily,
Good evening. I'm a media professor at the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications at Syracuse University and writing regarding the removal of this User page on Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jillathrilla
The user, Jillian Anthony, is part of the Newhouse graduate program and as part of her first assignment for news reporting class (along with 75 other students) was asked by me to create a Wikipedia profile. The purpose is to give students a structured writing exercise as well as work with a Content Management System on a site that is well known.
I hope there is a way Jillian's user profile can be restored along with suggestions as to where she needs to tone down the promotion.
The assignment is due at 9 a.m. Monday so will need a response by Sunday for Jillian to make her deadline for a grade.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Jnglass (talk) 01:24, 10 July 2010 (UTC) Jon Glass Collaborative Media Room General Manager TheNewsHouse.com Executive Producer – http://thenewshouse.com S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications Syracuse University tel. 315-443-8612 e-mail: jnglass@syr.edu Twitter: jonvibe
- Of course something can be done. I have restored the page. Sorry for the inconvenience. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:13, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Feel free to delete it
I got messages from others saying that i wont be accepted and I understood, i didnt know how to withdraw so i just left the page like it was before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saimcheeda (talk • contribs) 07:40, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
IP hopping vandal
Don't know if it's faster to do this here, or via AIV, but our IP jumping vandal who loves to make bogus AIV reports is back again, this time as 207.69.137.7. Majorclanger (talk) 18:19, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
- Either way works. If the disruption continues, please let me know and I'll see if a rangeblock is applicable. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:45, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you sir! He's on Earthlink, but repeatedly gets the same handful of IPs. I haven't checked for clustering of the addresses, but on the face, there's a pretty large range. Majorclanger (talk) 18:49, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
- Looks like a rangeblock may be feasible. Here's the IPs he's used since I've been monitoring (pardon the broken indentation):
- Thank you sir! He's on Earthlink, but repeatedly gets the same handful of IPs. I haven't checked for clustering of the addresses, but on the face, there's a pretty large range. Majorclanger (talk) 18:49, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
207.69.137.7
207.69.137.10
207.69.137.20
207.69.137.23
207.69.137.24
207.69.137.27
207.69.139.138
207.69.139.142
207.69.139.144
207.69.139.146
207.69.139.147
207.69.139.155
207.69.140.22
209.86.226.21
209.86.226.23
209.86.226.24
209.86.226.25
209.86.226.50
209.86.226.56
209.86.226.61
- And he back again now at 207.69.139.135. Majorclanger (talk) 19:03, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
- I've just rangeblocked 209.86.226.0/26 and 207.69.136.0/21. If our IP hopping vandal keeps coming back, whack-a-mole is fine by me. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 19:12, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again. I had might as well get it on record that he's got a much-less-used secondary connection from a different ISP. IPs used from there include 4.226.228.232 and 4.226.111.91. If the usage of these 4.226es picks up in the wake of the rangeblock, I'll probably just bring them to your attention. Majorclanger (talk) 19:21, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
- I've just rangeblocked 209.86.226.0/26 and 207.69.136.0/21. If our IP hopping vandal keeps coming back, whack-a-mole is fine by me. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 19:12, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
- Okay i admit it, It was me, I did bad edits, I'm really sorry. Can you forgive me Fastily 4.226.111.198 (talk) 19:36, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
- As I suspected, he's moved on to using the other account, though one block per day seems to stop him. Here are the IPs I know of so far, all of which are from the same ISP:
- 4.90.0.195
- 4.90.4.254
- 4.90.7.153
- 4.226.111.79
- 4.226.111.91
- 4.226.111.198
- 4.226.228.163
- 4.226.228.232
- 4.90.0.195
- I don't know how many you need for a second rangeblock, but clearly patterns seem to be emerging already... I'll append any further ones to the list above. Majorclanger (talk) 01:39, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry Fastily, I apologize for block evasion, Unblock 4.90.4.0/22, 4.226.228.128/25 and 4.226.111.0/24, and can you forgive me? 4.90.0.195 (talk) 04:32, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Well, there's another one I've added to the list. Not exactly good at this, is he? Majorclanger (talk) 10:38, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, well, if it starts becoming a problem, please let me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:09, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Been another false edit since you denied the semi-protect. I gather they'll be a bunch more if its not protected. That's how these pages of free agent athletes tend to work. Most IPS/new users don't edit these pages maliciously as they want to be the one to break the news, but it becomes very disruptive and bad for the page to keep changing. I hope I'm wrong in this case, but the proof is in the pudding, haha. --Airtuna08 (talk) 07:15, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
- Pages are generally not preemptively protected. If the vandalism picks up, please make another request at WP:RFPP or leave me a note on my talk and I'll deal with the vandalism. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:59, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
- I understand they generally aren't, but this is just a one,two week period where every user and their mother comes on to edit in new speculation without the correct sources. I re-listed it because there have been two more changes since the rejection 12 hours or so ago. --Airtuna08 (talk) 19:35, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Rollback Rights
Hello, I am kindly requesting that you grant me rollback rights. I have learned from previous mistakes with Wikipedia and have taken time to reflect and improve on these problems. I now think I am ready to use the rollback tool. I have read the vandalism guide and know the difference between good and bad faith edits.
Thank you --Ratinator·Talk 17:59, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily, you may want to be aware of this: [2], [3], [4]. Regards, • CinchBug • 18:04, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
- I know. I just noticed that :/ Ratinator, I agree with all the other administrators who have declined your requests. A couple weeks of solid work reverting vandalism at Special:RecentChanges would be desirable. Once you've done that, please request the tool again, but please don't engage in forum shopping. Thanks, FASTILY (TALK) 18:07, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
How is the description at Getty not enough? It's rights-managed (restrictions on usage, such as limitations on size, placement, duration of use and geographic distribution) and copyright 2010 Getty Images. It obviously wouldn't pass any fair use scenarios. What do I need to provide so that we can get rid of blatant copyright material? Does Getty often make an exception to grant Wikipedia free use of it's copyright images? --Onorem♠Dil 18:13, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
- I am well aware that the file is a press agency photo. A copyright violation only exists when an uploader claims work they did not create as their own OR when an uploader claims blatantly non-free/Copyrighted media under a free license. In the case of File:LBJ MIA.jpg, neither condition has been met, so I declined your speedy. Also, please note that files from press images are not prohibited on Wikipedia; their use is only strongly discouraged. The reason for use of press agency photos is outlined at WP:NFC#UUI, point 6. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:21, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
- F9 has 4 conditions from what I see on the template.
- is copied from X, which does not have a license compatible with Wikipedia
- no credible assertion that the file is public domain
- no credible assertion that the file is fair-use
- no credible assertion that the file is available under a free license
- is copied from X, which does not have a license compatible with Wikipedia
- Process for the sake of process I guess, but I'm still at a loss. --Onorem♠Dil 18:24, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
- F9 has 4 conditions from what I see on the template.
deletion of coffeetom/coffeeexpressco
Fastily: this is not a case of blatant advertising. I was told when I first created the article that I didn't supply verifiable references. I have now done that. There is a lengthy article in the Ann Arbor Observer, June, 1993, by Peter Ephross, titled Tom Isaia's Coffee Express. Another (of many) appeared in a January 11, 1995 issue of the Detroit Free Press, by Patty LaNoue Stearns, called High on the Good Stuff.
Coffee Express impacted the early days of the nascent specialty coffee industry and I am providing references to substantiate this. While I'm not adept at providing content to Wikipedia, I would appreciate help and suggestions as opposed to summarily deleting everything I'm attempting.
Thank you.
Coffeetom (talk) 19:19, 10 July 2010 (UTC)Tom Isaia
Please undelete article so I can work with you or other Wiki editors to make it acceptable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coffeetom (talk • contribs) 20:28, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
- I think you may have a conflict of interest. You are strongly discouraged from writing about a subject/entity that you are closely affiliated with; it will be very difficult, if not impossible to avoid bias of any sort. You're welcome to resubmit your article, but please be sure it complies with WP:ADS, WP:MOS, WP:GNG. Otherwise, you run the risk of having the article deleted again. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Agreed. I'll have someone else write the article. Can you make it available to re edit and re write? Thanks again for the help.
Coffeetom (talk) 12:08, 12 July 2010 (UTC)coffeetom
Training
I'm ready for your response. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:38, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
deleted images question
Hi, I've noticed you deleted some images that were in an article I wrote [5] under F11 which seems was indeed the case. I was just wondering if you could tell me who the original uploader of these images was so that I could contact them and see if the authorship/copyright status of the pics can be established. Because the images have been deleted I don't know how to check who it was. Thank you very much in advance.radek (talk) 10:22, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
- The user in question is User:Krzysztoflew. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:17, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
This user might not be right for Reviewer
I'm not trying to be a bother, but this user has made only 45 article edits, some of which have been reverted, including adding a picture of some bananas to HIV. You decide. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:01, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
- Incidentally, the HIV bananas incident was awhile ago. Admins have been instructed to assign the reviewer right on a fairly liberal basis, due to the fact that before the PC trial began, all autoconfirmed users could edit semi-protected articles. At the moment, I can't see anything seriously wrong with the user's edits, but if they start becoming disruptive, I'll revoke the right. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:21, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
comment
can you please comment here [6] thank you Aisha9152 (talk) 14:42, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Kudos
I just wanted to say I think you are doing a good job WRFEC (talk) 19:28, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
FPP to Genesis Creation Narrative
You recently protected the Genesis Creation Narrative page for 1 week per User:Gniniv's request. Please note that this user is a disruptive editor who has a history of requesting full page protection when his edits are reverted. He's more than once threatened to do this repeatedly until his POV is added to an article. He tries to use page protection not to stop legitimate edit warring, but as a bargaining chip when his own edits oppose consensus. If you have the time, could you take a closer look into this issue? Thank so much! Jess talk cs 01:28, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- I did indeed notice that. Gniniv's edits at Genesis creation narrative were reverted before I protected. Is that going to be a problem? -FASTILY (TALK) 01:31, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if I came across clearly. I'm not so much concerned about the edits as I am about the precedent being set here. Gniniv has a history (which he's repeating here) of adding POV content to articles, which gets reverted for good cause by other editors, and then requesting disruptive administrative action 'in revenge'. This includes repeatedly nominating articles for GA delisting many times in a row, and protecting pages so other editors can't make legitimate contributions. His threats to repeatedly page protect articles until his demands are met (here) are a good example of this. Surely this violates disruptive editing policies, no? I appreciate you taking the time to respond! Jess talk cs 01:40, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- Very well then, I've unprotected the page. Please consider leaving Gniniv a warning, informing him that his disruptive editing, threats, edit warring, and forum shopping will not be tolerated. If he continues his disruptive editing spree in spite of a warning, let me know and I'll block as necessary. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:47, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Gniniv is a problematic editor who is pushing a YEC POV and refusing to compromise, listen or adjust his editing to be in compliance with established protocols. He has a LONG (many months) history of this type of behavior, either abandoning a page when his edits are not accepted or trying to hold it hostage with a FPP. Please refer to my talk page (User_talk:Raeky#What_do_you_think_of_this.3F) where I've been having a conservation with admin Dougweller about his recent activities. This user can safely be classified as a troll, imho (and others). By granting his FPP request, your just aiding in his disruptive behavior. — raeky (talk | edits) 01:53, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- Apparently it was reversed, didn't see that due to an EC. — raeky (talk | edits) 01:55, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
I am curious if there is another route I can take to resolve my conflicts with the editors of these articles. It seems that protecting the article to prevent edit war is not acceptable. The method I have been given is to protect an article that has strong conflict to prevent edit warring, and then discuss the problem. Is there a different method I could use?--Gniniv 02:44, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- You may wish to consider dispute resolution. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:16, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily: Thanks so much for your time on this issue! I've done as you've requested.
- @Gniniv This isn't really the place for that discussion. One is already taking place on Raeky's talk page, so I will continue it there. Thanks Jess talk cs 03:23, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Will do!--Gniniv (talk) 03:30, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Something Else
I am sending you the consent letter on the "Judge Đinh Xuân Quảng" for the below:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%90inh_Xu%C3%A2n_Qu%E1%BA%A3ng http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries
I hereby affirm that [I, Quan X DINH am] the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of Judge Đinh Xuân Quảng- (see http: above) the work to be released in detail). I agree to release that work into the public domain. I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws. I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be attributed to me. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project. [Quan X Dinh the creator of the work qdinh2@yahoo.com 2221 N. Heliotrope, Santa Ana, CA 92706 – Tel: 714-972-1126] (to allow future verification of authenticity) [Santa Ana, CA 92707 June 27, 2010]
Please advise what step I should take next to have the picture reappear on the article. Thanks, Ngoc ly —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ngoc ly (talk • contribs) 01:52, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Recreation of G11 deleted articles
Hello. Just letting you know per our previous discussion that Kevin Feng and JT Tran have again been recreated after G11 deletions last week, this time with a different editor Scribesunlimited (talk · contribs). IMO, they still seem like advertising/promotional material. Please have a look when you have a chance. They are currently tagged as a new, unreviewed article. I wasn't sure if such articles could still be nominated for deletion? Thanks.--Logical Fuzz (talk) 03:43, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- I have deleted the pages and salted to prevent recreation. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:23, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. I hate to have to do that, but the editor(s) seem to be trying very hard to keep those articles up, but not trying to make them neutral. --Logical Fuzz (talk) 04:30, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
My work is not disruptive
I am trying to do the job that was assigned to me. :-(
I have gone over this article with a fine tooth comb, and I have NOT advertised anything.
Why are you calling my edits "disruptive"?
Regards,
Paul Scribesunlimited (talk) 05:32, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Just reported some users at WP:UAA and WP:AIV, there are also some other users that have been reported too. Just thought I'd give you a heads up. Fridae'§Doom | Talk to me 06:13, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- The pages look pretty clean at the moment. But thanks for letting me know. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 06:31, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Re: Editing
"Please see WP:ADS and WP:COI. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 06:30, 12 July 2010 (UTC)"
I want to address this. I have checked this article for any advertising, and could find nothing to indicate this. Please explain where you see the violation.
Regards,
Scribesunlimited (talk) 13:25, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Kuala Lumpur Metropolitan Univeristy College (KLMU)
Hi, Fastily.
I saw this page Kuala Lumpur Metropolitan Univeristy College (KLMU) in the new pages listing today and I reviewed it. After I tagged the page with a expanding tag, the page was added to my watchlist automatically. Well, then I saw where you deleted the same page yesterday. Soooo. I dunno. Is it still supposed to be deleted? I was curious about this after I saw that it was deleted yesterday and recreated today. O_o; Thanks! Tamer_of_Hope talk 03:26, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- The version of the page created yesterday was a copyright violation. Today, it is an advert. I've deleted the page again. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:04, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- You're welcome! :] Tamer_of_Hope talk 15:32, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Re: Editing
Let me please explain about the conflict of interest claim. I run a writing company, and am frequently assigned to write articles by third parties. There is NO conflict of interest if I am paid by a freelance company to complete an assignment given to me. I have never met these individuals, and until I was given the assignment, I had never heard of them.
There is no conflict of interest here, and I need to know what else is wrong with my work, so it can be quickly fixed and completed.
I am being paid a substantial amount of money to get this done, and you are impeding it.
Regards,
Scribesunlimited (talk) 13:51, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- I have referred your case to the Wikipedia community at WP:ANI#Paid_Editing, as, I'm not exactly sure how I should proceed at this point. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:28, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello
I am trying to get my article approved and I was hoping I could send it to you and get some pointers? Thanks
dan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeepjam1 (talk • contribs) 14:33, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- Looks better. It could use some more work in terms of cleanup so I'll tag it as such. However, it isn't a blatant advert so it shouldn't be deleted. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:30, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Entertainment Software Association of Canada
I'm trying to write an Article for the Entertainment Software Association of Canada which was deleted by you the otherday for infringing copyright. However, the content in question was from our own website, and was our own work. I am attempting to recreate a page for this association on wikipedia and have changed the wording and content and would like to publish it. However it has asked that I talk to you about it first. Sthomps6 (talk) 17:07, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- I think you may find WP:DCP helpful. Company websites are almost always copyrighted (frankly, it would be foolhardy to release corporate property under a free license) and should not be copy+pasted onto Wikipedia, which licenses all text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License and GFDL. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:33, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Yeah so Ive been working with some other people to make my article more acceptable...can you help out? thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeepjam1 (talk • contribs) 18:26, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Peace Centre - deletion of
Dear sir
I am a representative of the Peace Centre in Warrington, England. The Peace Centre is a registered charity set up following the killing of 2 children in Warrington by the IRA in 1993. It is a charity and its objectives are purely charitable and non profit making. It has many significant patrons who include John Major (former UK Prime Minister) and Emma Thompson (actress).
I have reviewed many other charitable organisations who have a presence in Wikipedia and they follow the same format as the page I created. You are therefore entirely wrong and it is inappropriate to delete this page on the basis of advertising. Please refer to the following webpage for further information on this charity: http://www.foundation4peace.org/
I would be grateful if you could revert to me with reasons as to why you have deleted the page. If you can suggest changes I will be happy to incorporate them. However, ultimately, I believe you are wrong to delete it.
regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hadianm (talk • contribs) 19:05, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Hadianm#Re:Peace Centre - deletion of -FASTILY (TALK) 19:11, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleting IP talk pages
I'm curious why you consider this to be lacking "meaningful, comprehensible content related to Wikipedia". Are you reviewing these individually or have you used a mass-deletion script? If it's, the latter this course of action is ill-advised (as is using a script to clean Category:Temporary Wikipedian userpages without first paying mind to the important caveats at the top of the page). See also relevant discussion here. –xenotalk 19:33, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- Firstly, this is a fairly weak example of seriously meaningful content. An old quick reminder perhaps, but not anything with historical content that would be horribly detrimental if deleted. And secondly, if it helps to know, yes, I have painstakingly reviewed each IP talk page. That's the difference between what I'm doing and what MZMcBride did - he neither checked what he had his bot delete nor was he responsive to complaints. If you don't trust my judgment, I invite you to waste time and double check each talk page I just deleted. Frankly, if letting backlogs sit and marinate is your idea of maintaining the encyclopedia, well go for it; but please don't impede the way of those who actually want to do the tedious work no one else wants to do of checking, verifying, and cleaning the project. It's beyond me why you're constantly soliciting me for doing the exact same damn work other people are doing. Take this for example. I sometimes don't think it's even worth my time and energy to do this work if this is the bullshit I'm going to get as a reward for my work. Sincerely, FASTILY (TALK) 19:49, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- It seems we simply differ on whether deleting a good faith message regarding content from one IP to another made less than 2 months ago is appropriate.
- I hadn't noticed Tiptoety had conducted a similar mass-deletion, since none of the pages he deleted were on my watchlist.
- For what it's worth, I don't think that this is a particularly pressing backlog (which is why I made this edit some time ago); but if you are reviewing them, please forgive the interruption. I only ask because I know that some folks (in particular, those involved with the spam project) don't like seeing these deleted when the individual was blocked for spamming, and the like. –xenotalk 20:04, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry if I came off as rude, but I am not happy to discover that I must defend myself while working my ass off doing perfectly legitimate work. I am aware that some editors don't like it when the talk pages of prolific vandals/spammers are deleted, so I tend not to delete those. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:18, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- Don't sweat it. For what it's worth I really think your time would be better spent elsewhere than deleting these (see my comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 July 12#Category:Temporary Wikipedian userpages). –xenotalk 20:23, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry if I came off as rude, but I am not happy to discover that I must defend myself while working my ass off doing perfectly legitimate work. I am aware that some editors don't like it when the talk pages of prolific vandals/spammers are deleted, so I tend not to delete those. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:18, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
I believe you have now made a mistake
Sending my issue to : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ANI#Paid_Editing does no good whatsoever. Now I am made to feel like I'm a "Red herring", and a liar.
While I appreciate your "help", all you've managed to do is cause more problems, and my next step will be arbitration - and if that is not solved, I will be billing Wikipedia $150.00 for my time, and the money I should have received for this project.
Instead of helping me and pointing out what needs to be done with my article, your only solution is to send me to the wolves.
Thank you very much.
Scribesunlimited (talk) 20:07, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- Surely you can't be serious? Wikipedia is under no obligation to allow you to use it for your benefit and Wikipedia's detriment - if the articles you are being paid to create do not meet our inclusion guidelines they will be deleted.
- That being said, please review WP:YFA for assistance in writing appropriate articles. –xenotalk 20:17, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- You may also find WP:ORG to be useful. If you're going to set out to write promotional copy, it will not be accepted here, paid or unpaid. If you're going to contribute information about a notable company or person, before you accept commitments to do so, you need to learn the rules of the medium for which you're writing. DGG ( talk ) 00:11, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
IP editor on cartoon edits
He's back at it. I cannot re-report him for his POV edits - and now I see he's reported me. Can you look further please? Many thanks. --Manway (talk) 20:27, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- Just blocked the IP for 31 hours. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:29, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of user talk page
I see that you have deleted User talk:Armadia16 as a "Temporary Wikipedian userpage". While user pages are regularly deleted in this way, user talk pages are not normally deleted except in exceptional circumstances, such as serious libel. Was this a mistake, or was there a reason for making an exception in this case? Quite often there are good reasons for wanting to check talk pages of banned or indef-blocked users, such as for SPIs. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:44, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
- Ditto for User talk:Amanpreet Sokhi. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:46, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
- Talk pages of indefinitely blocked users have been routinely deleted per CAT:TEMP for some time (it's even one of the drop-down reasons for deletion; though these two in particular seem to have come rather quickly on the heels of the block). The category/practice is currently under discussion at CFD. –xenotalk 13:48, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
AAC Account Creation Interface
I applied for the interface and was rejected on it. You told me I need to hit the 6 accounts per day for accountcreator, is there another way to create accounts or if the tool is the only way can you please approve my account so I can start. Joe Gazz84 (user)•(talk)•(contribs) 10:38, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- I think you may find Wikipedia:Request an account/Guide useful. The Account Creator right is granted to users who are active in this area. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 17:09, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- I mean I cannot see the accounts that need to be created without that tool, I was wondering if you can give an OK for the access to that tool, otherwise I can't be active in that area. Unless, there is a way TO become active I would however like to use that tool to create accounts, you asked I create 6 accounts and so far I can't without that tool, if I can please give me instructions, like where to go how to see the requests. Or give an approval for me to use Account Creator, I was told I need like 1000 edits, but I see no reason for edits to be necessary, I am a trusted user and have rollbacker and reviewer, HJ will vouch for me on the trusted with that tool, I haven't abused those tools, so I have NO reason/intention to abuse this. Thank you, Joe Gazz84 (user)•(talk)•(contribs) 01:22, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
- Until you are deemed to have the necessary experience for use of the ACC interface, no administrator is going to grant you the right. On top of that, I do not like the fact that you have been doing some major forum shopping: [8], [9], [10], [11]. Please stop now. This is only going to prolong your wait for the userright. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:17, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
- I mean I cannot see the accounts that need to be created without that tool, I was wondering if you can give an OK for the access to that tool, otherwise I can't be active in that area. Unless, there is a way TO become active I would however like to use that tool to create accounts, you asked I create 6 accounts and so far I can't without that tool, if I can please give me instructions, like where to go how to see the requests. Or give an approval for me to use Account Creator, I was told I need like 1000 edits, but I see no reason for edits to be necessary, I am a trusted user and have rollbacker and reviewer, HJ will vouch for me on the trusted with that tool, I haven't abused those tools, so I have NO reason/intention to abuse this. Thank you, Joe Gazz84 (user)•(talk)•(contribs) 01:22, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
FREEDOM4 WiFi
Hi you have just deleted FREEDOM4 WiFi whilst i was working on it and seeking advise from two administrators - why? --Rbcunliffe (talk)20:18, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Rbcunliffe#Re:FREEDOM4 WiFi -FASTILY (TALK) 19:19, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
So are you saying its OK for Vodafone and O2 to use exactly the same content, but not FREEDOM4 WiFi??? --Rbcunliffe (talk)20:21, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
- WP:OTHERSTUFF, WP:OSE -FASTILY (TALK) 19:24, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Can please outline the areas which you thought were adverts? --Rbcunliffe (talk)20:25, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, well, um, pretty much the whole thing. Per WP:ADS and speedy deletion criterion G11, adverts are deleted on sight. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:28, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
You are joking!! The article was marked under construction / maintenace. I have been working on this on and off all day! Mid afternoon an adminstrator stated "It appears that this article has a few reliable sources (not much), but it also has enough news here to justify notability" - and you deleted it? --Rbcunliffe (talk)20:37, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Continue To Work On Coffee Express Article
Can you put the deleted Coffee Express Co. article in a spot I can get to? I have a third party to work on it, and have learned more of Wiki's guidelines as to acceptable,even beneficial!, content. Thanks. Coffeetom (talk) 20:07, 13 July 2010 (UTC)Coffeetom
I sent this request while you were out of the country. Could you restore to a space I can have a third party rework? Thanks. Coffeetom (talk) 21:25, 10 August 2010 (UTC)Coffeetom
Council of Canadian Academies
Hi. You deleted article Council of Canadian Academies per this log. A question has come up at User talk:Jeff G.#I_can.27t_work_out_what_you_mean concerning one of the edits to that article. Would you or one of your talk page stalkers please either research the question or userfy that article at User:Jeff G./Council of Canadian Academies so that others may do the research? Thanks! — Jeff G. ツ 17:02, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
requested due to Fastily's offline activities for two weeks per User talk:Fastily/Editnotice. — Jeff G. ツ 00:03, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Done –xenotalk 00:21, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, xeno! I have fixed the problems and restored the article to Council of Canadian Academies. — Jeff G. ツ 01:23, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Telesphere page deleted
Hello Fastily,
You recently deleted the page "Telesphere" and i want to re-create a similar page. I was directed to you, the one who deleted it, before proceeding. When the speedy deletion notice went up i responded to the talk page question with why the page was legit and made changes per their request. What do i need to do to get this page up? Thank you.HostedPBX (talk) 20:35, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
You need to: 1) Quit being vague. 2) Spell out how exactly & with an example, to post a photo and to find it's copyright status.
That's great that you communicate the need to clarify copywrite status, the concept of copyrights, etc., but you really need to come up with a way to accurately teach intermediate users how to correctly implement & research copyright status. I'd sure like to keep editing pages, but if you are going to make it THIS difficult to do so, why would I want to waste my time/why would ANYBODY want to waste their time?
You need to communicate the method-not just the concept or your disappointment.
Ie: "Hey, I deleted your image because there's no copyright tag. Perhaps I can help you with this? Here's how to do this, have a great day! Go to the site from where you got the image. Now we're going to find out if you CAN use that image. Does the image fall into any of these categories: (a photo taken before 1922, blah blah blah, etc.), (more ie's/criteria), does the foto look like a publicity foto, a _____ foto, etc? Search the website for the page called "_________" and look for anything marked "images"... Sometimes it looks like this: _______. Think you can use the image? Okay! Upload it & in the area where you se this: __________ insert this: __________ or this: __________ or choose from one of these: ___________.".
Something to that effect. Because as it stands now, what you've got is a big, user-unfriendly mess. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adambein (talk • contribs) 04:37, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Adam: It would be nice if all Wiki administrators had time to do things like that. But guides to do all that are already on Wikipedia. For instance, check out WP:Images and WP:FAQ/Copyright. Admins are there should you need help. But look for it yourself first. Here's a tip: In the search box, type "WP:" and a word describing what you want to find out about. It should bring up something regarding what you're looking for.
- BTW, I'm answering for Fastily. He's out of the country for another 3 weeks or so. I'm sure he could put it much better than I did. But you sounded like you wanted an answer now. Hope this helped. Regards, --Manway (talk) 05:14, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
IP
Hi, Can I request to block this Ip User_talk:203.191.35.22 after you gave him warning he/she still vandalize pages see Capgemini, he added NIRAJ IS A GADHA!! literally means NIRAJ IS A Donkey!!. (please add talkback template on my talk page) KuwarOnline Talk 10:55, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Please try WP:AIV next time. Fastily is currently away (as evidenced on the user page and editnotice), and I would block them for you, but they've gone away already. —fetch·comms 21:37, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, for next time onwards, I always use WP:AIV, thanks again :) KuwarOnline Talk 04:21, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Undeletion of Christian Karasiewicz page
I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Christian_Karasiewicz, which you proposed for deletion, because I think that this article should not be deleted from Wikipedia. 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!
The person that claimed this wasn't true obviously didn't do their research. Check the Guinness Book of World Records, starting in 1993.
(Ckarasiewicz (talk) 14:46, 16 July 2010 (UTC))
Surprise wikibreak
Hey Fastily,
Hope China is treating you well. I just realized that a number of Wikipedia items (okay, all of them) have been slipping to the bottom of the to-do list this month, and that I've actually been on wikibreak but too busy to notice it. I'm making it official now, and will return a week or so after you do (although if I can find the time to copyedit one or two more articles to assuage my guilt, I will). The banner is going up on my page and I will ping you once I've actually completed the most recent assignment. All the best, and thank you for all the help you've given me so far! --~TPW 12:30, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Hey I was hoping you could go through my Acme Mills Article and let me know what still needs to be added to it. Thanks again
dan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeepjam1 (talk • contribs) 16:00, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Telesphere page deleted
Hello Fastily,
I recently left the below message for you and have received no response. I want to re-create a wiki page for Telesphere. Please advise! HostedPBX (talk) 16:28, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Telesphere page deleted Hello Fastily,
You recently deleted the page "Telesphere" and i want to re-create a similar page. I was directed to you, the one who deleted it, before proceeding. When the speedy deletion notice went up i responded to the talk page question with why the page was legit and made changes per their request. What do i need to do to get this page up? Thank you.HostedPBX (talk) 20:35, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
- Hello HostedPBX. This notice is at the top of Fastily's page: "FASTILY will be in China attending to business in real life from 13 July 2010 to 27 July 2010 and may not be able to respond immediately to queries. I probably will not have access to the internet during this time but will pop in if I do." Give him a chance. He'll be back. I'd help, but I'm not an admin. Regards, --Manway (talk) 17:21, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Deletion review for TweetUp
Please repost the page you deleted on TweetUp. Your reason being G11: unambiguous advertising or promotion. Every statement was sourced with an article from a legitimate and recognized news source. There was nothing in it that was promotional, now plow for getting use, it was simply a page about the company and what it does, properly source. Please provide explicite examples in the text where you believe it to be unambiguous advertising or promotion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamiebelsky (talk • contribs) 20:58, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
- Jamie - Fastily is in China for another 4 days and may not be able to respond. This is just a guess on why it was deleted, based on a few minutes research, but here's my take on the matter.
- First off, (and not being able to read the article in question) you have a Conflict of Interest. A few moments googling and I found your name listed as Bio Manager of Strategic Partnerships for TweetUp. See the linked Wiki Conflict Of Interest article.
- Second, this article had been created and deleted before. This is a sign that maybe you should create the article in your userspace, and ask for help in making sure your writing is neutral before it is moved to mainspace.
- I'll let Fastily make any decision regarding this. I could not anyway, as I am not an administrator. I'm simply trying to let you know that it may be a few days before you get an answer, and my take on the situation. Regards, --Manway (talk) 21:43, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
reposting Sustain Our Planet page
I am about to repost my page and it said that I should contact you first and so I am —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sendaula (talk • contribs) 12:56, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Appeal of Deletion for ISO-Enamel Page
Dear Fastily,
I would like to appeal against the delection of the article: ISO-Enamel, on the grounds of G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion.
I beleive this is incorrect, as the company name in this article had been included to state who had created this material.
The article intended to highlight the qualities or the material & it's uses, as a point of reference unlike the article refering to Vitreous Enamel. Please advise how this article can be submitted without falling foul of the G11 regulation?
Kind Regards,
Robinsonj.84 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robinsonj.84 (talk • contribs) 12:12, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) responded on the users talk page. Active Banana (talk) 15:21, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
SM City San Pablo
I don't know how to report vandalism. These user 119.92.188.114 always edit this page by putting the gross floor area of the mall is 80,000sq m. The user don't have a source. I have a source that indicates that the gross floor area of the mall is just 34,409sqm. The user always edit that the opening of mall is this August 2010. I have a source that the opening is on Sept 24, 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arthurchanning (talk • contribs) 07:24, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of The Linc
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 81.155.173.107 (talk) 19:19, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Request for Editing/Suggestions on Harbour Results
Fastily - I did some drastic changing to the Harbour Results that was speedily deleted. I was hoping you might have a moment to review the changes and provide some feedback about how you think I can make it better. Please find the subpage here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Eisbrenner/Harbour_Results
Thanks for your help and advice. Eisbrenner (talk) 03:09, 28 July 2010 (UTC)Eisbrenner
File:DavyJones400px.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:DavyJones400px.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. — ξxplicit 07:22, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:PlantsVsZombies800ppx.png
Thanks for uploading File:PlantsVsZombies800ppx.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) 05:34, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Deletion review for Bacio Divino
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Bacio Divino. 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.
InkHeart again?
Hey. Due to Special:Contributions/Jenaveev18's recent actions, I suspect that she may be InkHeart. I can't be certain, so is there a way for you to do the checkuser to verify? Thanks. Ωphois 19:22, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
How do you become a administrator? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Inka 888 (talk • contribs) 04:08, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of NX (Software) Page
I would like to help get the NX Software page in shape so that it meets all of the notability requirements and avoids the advertising issues for which it was deleted. To be clear (as it says on my user page) I am employed by Siemens so I am not going to recreate the page directly. I see two possible paths to get a better page created:
- create one in my userspace and then get someone (who?) to look at it and create the page from it
- contact the users who felt the page was valuable when it was being considered for deletion and see if they are interested in starting a new page (if this is preferred can you provide me with their user pages so I can contact them as I can't seem to get to the discussion page for deletion anymore).
Can you advise on which approach is preferred or if there is another that I didn't consider? Thanks in advance. Aakelley (talk) 18:40, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
- Consider WP:AFC. There are plenty of editors there who will be happy to help you get an article off the ground. -FASTILY (TALK) 09:51, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Image
Why did you delete File:ZintaonMainPage.JPG? I can't see it available on Commons. Please restore it, this image was uploaded by a friend for me. Shahid • Talk2me 16:19, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Hey
Are we going to see you back at some point, bro? Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:18, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- Hey, just got back today. I'm very jet lagged at the moment but I'll get to admin coaching as soon as I have time. -FASTILY (TALK) 09:58, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
No worries now, you're just a week later than stated and I was getting a bit worried beforehand. Magog the Ogre (talk) 13:34, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
VladoD deleted
Fastily, looks like you deleted my account VladoD. That's not cool. I have an account Vlado, that I am unable to use because I forgot my password and Wikipedia staffers will not reset it for me. So, I had to create a new account. In my new profile description I described this. Here are articles I wrote for wikipedia as far back as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Vlado%7Carticles.
Please restore my account VladoD. If you have an issue with something with something specific, please let me know and I would be glad to address it. Alternatively, help me restore password access to my account Vlado.
I've known Jimmy Wales since 2003 and supported the wikipedia project since throughout the early days. My articles were among the first to spawn wikipedia.hr.
I am a real person: http://www.linkedin.com/in/vladod and saddened by this experience. —Preceding unsigned comment added by VladoD (talk • contribs) 11:33, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- I've restored User:VladoD. It makes more sense now that you've provided an explanation. Sorry for the inconvenience. -FASTILY (TALK) 11:40, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Old non-fair use compliant image deletion - thank you!
Hi, Fastily,
Thank you for deleting the non-fairuse-compliant previous versions of File:BroadwayBooks ImprintofRandomHouse 1999 VikramSeth AnEqualMusic FirstEdition Cover.jpg and File:Arrow 1976 Rendell ADemoninmyView 2004PaperbackCover.jpg.
--Shirt58 (talk) 12:16, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Deletion review for Standard Resources Fund
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Standard Resources Fund. 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. There is no copyright infringement of Standard Resources Fund from Standard Capital Group as they are legally the same entity. Yesterday an administrator merged the two names which is what I asked to be done. Please review the history to verify.
Your assistance please
The record shows you deleted File:AlNaimis father and brother and Joshua Congolese lawyer.jpg -- for lacking a fair use rationale.
I request access to the supporting information provided by the uploader, including the image's URL. I suspect that drafting a compliant fair use rationale will be possible, and I would like to try to do so.
Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 00:14, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- The "what links here" doesn't provide any links to a discussion of the deletion of this image. Are you aware of one? If so I would appreciate being told where to find it. Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 00:19, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily has not been active lately. Here is the copyright info from the deleted file:
{{di-no fair use rationale}}{{Non-free fair use in|Abdulla Majid Al Naimi}}- Source: Guantánamo: Pictures from Home. Questions of Justice art exhibit
- Rationale: Low-resolution, non-commercial photograph which represents no financial loss to photographer, non-reproducible photograph
- The picture was uploaded by User:Sherurcij on 22 January, 2009. Speedy deleted by Fastily on 15 May 2010 per "F6: Non-free media file with no non-free use rationale". I did not see a URL. You may be aware of the art exhibit 'Guantánamo: Pictures from Home.' EdJohnston (talk) 00:43, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the update.
- The caption to where the image was used had a reference to this page.
- IMO the Guantanamo captives' habeas attorneys had problems earning the trust of their clients. Unscrupulous interrogation teams would send new interrogators to some captives, who pretended they were their attorneys. So lawyers having their picture taken with the captives' families is, I believe, an important phenomenon, and this is the only published instance of this important phenomenon. If I had uploaded this image I would have stated this in the rationale.
- Do you think I should take this to DRV?
- FWIW, Sherurcij got the lawyer's name wrong. Initially I thought a vandal had changed the name referenced for the pic, so that the actual image got deleted because it wasn't being used. The lawyer's actual name is Joshua Colangelo-Byran. Geo Swan (talk) 03:21, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily, User:EdJohnston wrote: "Fastily has not been active lately." Since then you seem to have returned to activity -- but you haven't weighed in on my request.
- There are some WP:CSD criteria where there is no fix. An article that was entirely a copyvio would be an example. But, it seems to me, a deletion based on the lack of a valid fair use rationale is at the other end of the spectrum. It seems to me someone supplying a valid fair use rationale is a good reason to review that deletion.
- I think we can all agree that the file did, in fact, have a fair use rationale. It appears that you thought it wasn't a valid fair use rationale, and recorded the deletion as lacking a fair use criteria. I've suggested an alternate fair use rationale. At this point I would appreciate further attention from you. Geo Swan (talk) 04:20, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- I was under the impression that EdJohnston had already resolved the issue. Looking through the deleted edits, I can see that the file has a scant few lines of what can be viewed as fair-use rationale; this is nowhere close to sufficient documentation for a non-free file on Wikipedia. -FASTILY (TALK) 04:58, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Kimberly High School
Hello. You deleted Kimberly High School (G6 Housekeeping and routine (non-controversial) cleanup). But this page Kimberly_High_School_(disambiguation) redirect to Kimberly High School, and it looks like that Kimberly High School used to be a disambiguation page? If this is not the case, Kimberly_High_School_(disambiguation) should be deleted too. -- Christian75 (talk) 12:47, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for checking in. JHunterJ was kind enough to ask if I wanted to be nominated and - after reading more about it - I decided to wait until I had more main article page contributions. Feel free to delete at your leisure. --John (User:Jwy/talk) 15:06, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- Alright then. Thank you for being upfront about it. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:28, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Hiya. Just out of interest, how did you come to the conclusion that the result of the discussion at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 July 21#File:Kentlogo.png was to delete? Best, Matthewedwards : Chat 15:30, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- You yourself noted that the file "might be free" at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 July 21#File:Kentlogo.png. The purpose of WP:PUF is to investigate files with questionable copyright status. Unless you have cold, hard evidence indicating that the file is indeed free, it cannot stay on Wikipedia under a free license, hence the Delete close to the discussion. At any rate, if you can prove the file is free, I'll restore it for you. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:32, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, I just noticed User talk:Fastily#Kentlogo.png -FASTILY (TALK) 18:37, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of University of Nevada Cooperative Extension
You recently deleted University of Nevada Cooperative Extension and I wish to have it reviewed or request further explanation. To make my case, University of Nevada Cooperative Extension is a college under the University of Nevada, Reno, of which an article already exists - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Nevada,_Reno. Within that article you will find a reference to "Cooperative Extension Service." The Cooperative Extension Service that is referenced is known as University of Nevada Cooperative Extension. Furthermore, cooperative extension service "is a non-formal educational program implemented in the United States" - which, again, there is a Wikipedia article for cooperative extension service - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_extension and you will see that University of Nevada Cooperative Extension is listed on that page. And finally, there is an entry for Alabama Cooperative Extension System - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alabama_Cooperative_Extension_System - which contains extensive information on what they do. The entry that was posted for University of Nevada Cooperative Extension should stay as it is something that would be found in an encyclopedia and there is nothing more than factual information that was written from a neutral point of view. University of Nevada Cooperative Extension is an educational institution and is the educational outreach arm of the University of Nevada, Reno and it has nothing to sell or promote (does not grant degrees or have enrollment of students). Also, all references cited an educational institution website (.edu). In fact in terms of Wikipedia's own guidelines - "Academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources where available ...Electronic media may also be used, subject to the same criteria." University of Nevada Cooperative Extension only conducts peer-reviewed research.
H2oscj (talk) 16:32, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- Are you the same person as User:Uncewebmaster? -FASTILY (TALK) 18:34, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Yes. I have since created a username/account properly. H2oscj (talk) 19:56, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, alright. Just wanted to be sure. I have replied at User talk:H2oscj#Re:Deletion of University of Nevada Cooperative Extension. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:34, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Kentlogo.png
I'm wondering why this was deleted. First, no discussion was ever given to its status after the initial question and then the explanation by the editor who moved it to Trademarked but not copyrighted status. I had originally uploaded it as a copyrighted logo complete with a rationale and during the recent laborious Kent, Ohio FAC process there was question about the purpose of the seal in the article (citing WP:NFCC) and in response another editor believed it wasn't copyrighted at all for the reasons specified and thus NFCC wasn't an issue. Seems a bit rushed to delete it after all of two comments and not even looking at its edit history to see that it was previously listed as a copyrighted logo with a valid rationale. --JonRidinger (talk) 18:04, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- Hmmm. I see it now. I'll restore it as such. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:36, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for your time! --JonRidinger (talk) 19:10, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
RFPP
Could you re-review my RFPP, as only more IPs are getting reverted on Joe Jonas. Allmightyduck What did I do wrong? 18:38, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:40, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Editing and respecting COI: Need your advice
Dear Fastily, I am new to Wikipedia, and could use help understanding how to edit correctly. I came here at the behest of a journalist at Engineering News Record, who suggested that I should correct and amend inaccurate information on Gensler and Shanghai Tower as listed in Wikipedia articles. I am doing my best to do just that, but am experiencing problems. Images I post, for which I have full copyright, are gettting removed. These images are indeed used widely on the web, but I own them.
Secondly, edits I make to Gensler, or to Shanghai Tower, are deleted. I do work for the company that is the subject of the articles. I am attempting to correct inaccurate information (including removing images that we own, but have not released or given permission to use), add images to augment points made by previous authors, and add citations to support the correct information.
Yet all my text changes are erased and images, citations, and factual corrections are reverted by other editors. What can I do to improve the accuracy of the article, yet keep from violating any conflict of interest? My intent is to make the information on Wikipedia more correct. For example, in the "Gensler" article, the founders of the company are incorrect. The correct names of our company's founders are "Arthur Gensler, Drue Gensler and James R. Follett." There was no Jimmy Williams when we opened our doors. Additionally, the list of locations in the article is incorrect. These are two examples; there are others I attempted to correct, and when I did so, I cited sources. What should I do differently?
Thanks for any help you can offer.
Best wishes, GenslerOnCities (talk) 18:49, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- Please see WP:DCP for information on donating copyrighted materials and WP:ADS for our policy on how advertising/spam is dealt with. I hate to tell you this, but it would seem like you have a textbook example of a conflict of interest here. Bear in mind that if you continue editing articles where you have a conflict of interest, you run the risk of being blocked from editing and having your edits reverted. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 20:13, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Block
What was the reason for blocking Danilo Hegg (talk · contribs) indefinitely for vandalism? Now, sure, their edits are somewhat self-promotional, but no-one bothered to explain that to them. I just don't see why blocking them for repeated vandalism is right, when clearly, what they were doing was not vandalism. Please explain. Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 22:08, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- Danilo Hegg was reported to WP:AIV by User:Odie5533. I blocked Danilo Hegg on the basis that their edits were vandalism/advertising. Now although we differ as to what constitutes vandalism, if you can reach an understanding with the user, I will be more than happy to unblock. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:13, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I saw that he was reported to AIV. I watch AIV a lot, seeing as I constructed a lot of what you seem to use a lot, {{aiv}}. I was questioning your rationale for the block in the first place. Didn't you check the talk page to see whether they were told why their edits were being reverted, as opposed to just having their edits called 'vandalism'. Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 22:16, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- They were unblocked, by the way. Just letting you know. Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 23:19, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Unblock review
I have reviewed the block you placed on 222.89.92.106 (talk · contribs) and have made the suggestion that the block be lifted. I have put the unblock request on hold so you can comment. CT Cooper · talk 13:51, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Don't worry about it now, while I don't regret putting out an olive branch, I have declined the unblock request myself given the user has demonstrated on the talk page in exchanges with other users that nothing helpful will come from an unblock. CT Cooper · talk 15:19, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Help with posting an Article
hey I was wondering if you would be able to help me with posting an article. I tried yesterday but it was deleted because it looked like an advertisment. I understand why it was deleted and I would like to try and avoid having it deleted again. I have been working on it on word, instead of just copying and pasting from the website, and I think I have something that is more fact based about the company I am writing about. Could you possibly look at what I have and give me sugjestions to help me avoid having it deleted again.
Spel4134 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spel4134 (talk • contribs) 15:38, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Spel4134#Re:Help with posting an Article -FASTILY (TALK) 16:58, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Poincaré Complex
Excuse me, but you just deleted an article I had created. I had placed a {{hangon}} template at the top of the page. I had left two posts on the talk page too. Did you read them? Could you give me your thoughts? — Fly by Night (talk) 16:40, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- Per Wikipedia:Copyrights, any text you post anywhere to Wikipedia is automatically licensed under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL (see the fine print below the edit box). Unless you know in certainty that the webpage you copied text from is licensed under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL (or a less restrictive license), the text cannot remain on Wikipedia. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:03, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- Could you please answer my question: Did you read my comments on the talk page? The article was made up of mathematical definitions; how can one copyright a definition? If I write "An integer is called even if it is dividable by 2" then am I infringing copyright? (It's in every elementary maths text book, so it must be copyrighted by loads of people) I also posted asking for advice on how to stop the article from infringing copyright. I think you ignored the {{hangon}} template, and you didn't read the talk page. It wasn't an attempt to plagiarise; everything was meticulous referenced. But instead of taking five minutes to help me, help the article, and help the project you decided to click "delete" instead. — Fly by Night (talk) 17:11, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- I think my reply at the help desk here should clarify things. By making this post, you essentially, albeit inadvertently, declare you committed copyright infringement. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:15, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- If it helps, know that you are welcome to recreate the article. Just this time, please do so without copy+pasting from external sources. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:17, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- What really makes me sad is that you picked all of this up on the help desk. But instead of help me you deleted the article. I asked for help at the help desk and on the article's talk page. But you didn't help; you just deleted. Thanks a lot. — Fly by Night (talk) 17:27, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- If it helps, know that you are welcome to recreate the article. Just this time, please do so without copy+pasting from external sources. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:17, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- I think my reply at the help desk here should clarify things. By making this post, you essentially, albeit inadvertently, declare you committed copyright infringement. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:15, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- Could you please answer my question: Did you read my comments on the talk page? The article was made up of mathematical definitions; how can one copyright a definition? If I write "An integer is called even if it is dividable by 2" then am I infringing copyright? (It's in every elementary maths text book, so it must be copyrighted by loads of people) I also posted asking for advice on how to stop the article from infringing copyright. I think you ignored the {{hangon}} template, and you didn't read the talk page. It wasn't an attempt to plagiarise; everything was meticulous referenced. But instead of taking five minutes to help me, help the article, and help the project you decided to click "delete" instead. — Fly by Night (talk) 17:11, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Telesphere page deleted
Telesphere page deleted Hello Fastily,
I recently left the below message for you and have received no response. I want to re-create a wiki page for Telesphere. Please advise!
Telesphere page deleted Hello Fastily,
You recently deleted the page "Telesphere" and i want to re-create a similar page. I was directed to you, the one who deleted it, before proceeding. When the speedy deletion notice went up i responded to the talk page question with why the page was legit and made changes per their request. What do i need to do to get this page up? Thank you.HostedPBX (talk) 20:35, 13 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by HostedPBX (talk • contribs)
- User talk:HostedPBX#Re:Telesphere page deleted -FASTILY (TALK) 17:10, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Fastily, I saw on my watchlist that you deleted File:Challengers.jpeg because of F5. Just in case you're curious, the article where the image was had already been deleted by Orangemike, so the file page was just sitting there, no longer in any article. Anyway, thanks for the cleanup. Jsayre64 (talk) 00:15, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Normally I wouldn't bother with such a minor promotional thing like this, but I would encourage you to review the contributions of this editor under both of their accounts (the other being Dawntrader (talk · contribs). Their every edit has been to promote their band, including the removal of speedy notices and use of sock accounts and IPs to circumvent warnings. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 00:17, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
- From looking at these two edits: [12], [13], it's quite clear that these two accounts are controlled by the same person. I've left both users a final warning. If they continue to use Wikipedia for advertising/promotion, you can report them to WP:AIV or you can leave me a note and I'll deal with them. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:30, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks! 69.181.249.92 (talk) 00:34, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Please check it. Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:30, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Welcome Back!
First, have a quick look here: User_talk:Fastily/Archive_5#IP_hopping_vandal to remind yourself what I'm talking about.
<short pause while you click the link and read>
While you've been gone, he's been a busy boy... almost busy enough for me to go to the hassle of an SPI report, but not quite. He's somehow managed to get to a new batch of Earthlink addresses, so the old rangeblocks are now less effective.
He's also taken to registering accounts, several of which have already been blasted out of existence. He's got a live one that I just found this morning - he's being less stupid about his edits than before.
Here are the known IPs, including the ones under the rangeblocks
207.69.137.7
207.69.137.10
207.69.137.20
207.69.137.23
207.69.137.24
207.69.137.27
207.69.139.138
207.69.139.142
207.69.139.144
207.69.139.146
207.69.139.147
207.69.139.155
207.69.140.22
209.86.226.21
209.86.226.23
209.86.226.24
209.86.226.25
209.86.226.50
209.86.226.56
209.86.226.61
4.90.0.195
4.90.2.215
4.90.4.254
4.90.6.12
4.90.7.153
4.226.60.186
4.226.111.79
4.226.111.91
4.226.111.198
4.226.228.106
4.226.228.37
4.226.228.163
4.226.228.232
165.247.0.181
165.247.1.65
165.247.0.243
The 165.*.*.* ones were the last he used before taking to registering accounts, so rangeblocking those would probably do the trick for now.
Registered (and blocked) accounts include:
FarmAgentRunning
EventRunning
TheRunningPatriot
DoggieRunning
AntiDoggieRunning
MindRunning
Runningenemy
StarkRunning
and my personal favorite:
Majorclanger_Jr.
His current live account is RoomsWoodlands, which is actually a little less obvious than the others. Note, his frequent use of "Oops!" when making and then reverting pointless page moves (as with other socks), the creation of useless redirects of King of the Hill episodes, like one of the "Running" accounts (the pages were deleted after his block, so I can't see which account made them). And the clincher - opening the account and immediately asking for help... just like all the Running accounts.
Thanks for looking at this. I probably should go ahead with an SPI, but writing it all up in a case format doesn't sound fun at all. Majorclanger (talk) 14:16, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the warm welcome! :) It's absolutely fine if you report sockpuppets here; I honestly don't mind and will be more than happy to help you deal with them. That being said, I've just rangeblocked 165.247.0.0/23 and User:RoomsWoodlands. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 16:57, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you sir! Hopefully the new rangeblock will help, but I'll continue to bring 'em here. It's obvious what's going on with this guy for somebody with a bit of a background, but explaining it all from the floor up is a different matter entirely.
- Hmmm... he managed to get this registered: Special:Contributions/AntiRoomsWoodlands, so it looks like he managed to get around the rangeblock. Majorclanger (talk) 20:57, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
User:JumpParadise
As the blocking admin, you may want to have a look at her/his newest attempt... 69.181.249.92 (talk) 20:43, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- And he's been back again under another sock account and as another IP: 4.226.60.172. That's the tenth one in the 4.226es... if you catch my non-subtle implication... Majorclanger (talk) 03:14, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Edit filter
Perhaps I'm missing something (especially as said edits were removed)... what happened to cause someone to be blocked for deliberately triggering the edit filter? Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:43, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
- Usually something like the following: [14], [15], [16], [17]. Click "Examine" for details. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:43, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
ASEAN-WEN page deletion
Hi, it's great to know people are monitoring for copyright infringement, but the page on the ASEAN Wildlife Enforcement Network (ASEAN-WEN) was added by staff from the Network's secretariat. Is an author exempt from "infringing" their own copyright to share info, or is a rewrite required. They wanted to jump in with a Wikipedia entry themselves to make sure it was detailed and accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.8.243.24 (talk) 14:13, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
- Unless the text of the website is available under the Text of Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License and the GFDL or a less restrictive license, the content cannot be copy and pasted directly from the ASEAN Wildlife Enforcement Network's website. Writing an article from scratch would be ideal, but you can also donate the text of the website to Wikipedia by following the instructions outlined at WP:DCP. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:46, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Could you please undelete this image? We have received OTRS permission for it which I can add as soon as it is restored. VernoWhitney (talk) 17:48, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
- Done -FASTILY (TALK) 03:46, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
- And OTRS tag added. Thanks! VernoWhitney (talk) 03:49, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
ANI
You are mentioned (in a nice way). Keep up the good work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Toddst1_misconduct RIPGC (talk) 04:12, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
IP block
The disruptive IP editor you blocked for vandalism, 138.110.206.100, actually edits from a dynamic IP range covering at least 138.110.206.99-101, and has been using the other IPs to continue disruptive editing... Though I dunno exactly what s/he was blocked for, so I can't say for sure it's the same stuff, but it definitely includes behavior like edit warring and refusing to discuss disputed changes on a Talk page. --WikidSmaht (talk) 06:49, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
- Alright, I'll look into it. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:00, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of Ayurveda Official Photo
We have permission from the author/photographer to use this photo and to put it in the public domain. How is it that I can get this photo accepted? I went to copyright tags and found this tag:
 | This work has been released into the public domain by its author, name. This applies worldwide. In case this is not legally possible: |
I understand the photographer's name, Heather Ainsworth, goes where the name is. What I don't know is where to put this tag so the image will be accepted. Thank you.
- If that's the case, you will need to register your claim with the Wikimedia OTRS permissions department. To do so, please send an e-mail to "permissions-en@wikimedia.org"; be sure to attach a copy of the letter from the original photographer (they will have to have indicated a license for the file to be published under and indicated that it is acceptable to them that the file is on Wikipedia) and the title(s) the file(s) is/are to be uploaded under (or was/were uploaded under). Once you have done that, the email will be archived in the OTRS database and the file will be restored and assigned a OTRS ticket number. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:24, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Your WP:CSD#G11 deletion of Sparx Systems
I noticed you deleted this article under G11. While I agree that it's a poorly written article, you may not be aware that it was kept as the result of an AfD debate. As such, I think G11 is a little rash. There's another CSD request at Sparx_Enterprise_Architect which cascades from this. Would you mind if I undeleted it? If you still think it should be deleted, a second AfD nomination would be the right way to go. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:31, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, it's fine with me - just as long as you're willing to help with the cleanup once it's restored. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 23:33, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
- OK. I'll do the undeletion and put it on AfD. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:23, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, to save you the trouble, it's really alright with me if you don't put it up for AFD... -FASTILY (TALK) 00:29, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- OK. I'll do the undeletion and put it on AfD. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:23, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
24 Hour Church of Elvis
I just noticed today that, last month, you deleted article about the 24 Hour Church of Elvis in Portland, Oregon for being advertising / promotion. While that may have been justified on those grounds, I think this is too bad. I don't recall the article very well, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was poorly written, but I would have protested at the time if I'd noticed. I just became aware of the fact now because I had originally wikilinked it in my article about Portland icon Tom Peterson. Although basically defunct now, the 24 Hour Church of Elvis was a Portland cultural landmark for years, and I believe it deserves a quality, encyclopedic treatment. Although most reliable reporting about it is now decades old and only to be found in newspaper databases, I know it's there, I have access to such materials, and I'd certainly be interested in recreating it the right way. (There is at least one quality source on the first page of Google's results, from AAA's travel magazine[18].) However, as a non-admin, I can't access the old version of the article, which might be helpful to start. If I created a page in my user space, would you be willing to userfy it after the fact, to give me a starting point? Reply on my Talk page when you have a moment. Cheers, WWB (talk) 21:55, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- Certainly, I'll userfy the page for you! Which subpage would you like me to add the deleted text to? -FASTILY (TALK) 23:48, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- Terrific. I've just created a page with some placeholder text here: User:WWB/24_Hour_Church_of_Elvis. Thanks! WWB (talk) 14:55, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
- Just stalking by to drop off some books. Drmies (talk) 03:36, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
- And Done Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:41, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
- Haha, my wife suggested we could renew our vows there (today is our anniversary)--maybe that can be done cheap and not legal as well. Drmies (talk) 13:35, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks to you, both! I grew up in Portland and remember it from back then, but I've since heard from friends who live there still that it's recently re-opened once again. I'll be back there in a few weeks, so I'll have to swing by. Drmies, I'll let you know when it's been replaced. Cheers, WWB (talk) 00:15, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- Haha, my wife suggested we could renew our vows there (today is our anniversary)--maybe that can be done cheap and not legal as well. Drmies (talk) 13:35, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
- And
- Just stalking by to drop off some books. Drmies (talk) 03:36, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
- Terrific. I've just created a page with some placeholder text here: User:WWB/24_Hour_Church_of_Elvis. Thanks! WWB (talk) 14:55, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Julie Anderson
The article was deleted by you, even though it was expanded after the PROD was placed. I expected that a new discussion would be started after adding information and references, but the article was deleted nonetheless without an explanation... Moviefan (talk) 00:10, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- Alright, I can restore it to the mainspace, but I'll have to list it at AFD. Will that work? -FASTILY (TALK) 00:21, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Why the hell did you delete Sunspot Jonz, from Living Legends? He is very notable. Please post it back up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.179.22.61 (talk) 06:08, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
there needs to be a page on methamphetamine (medical) thanx -Bob
^^^^ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.238.94.228 (talk) 14:24, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- Perhaps. But not when the page is copy+pasted from Methamphetamine. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:24, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Rowland Shovel Works
I request, if possible, that the Rowland Shovel Works be undeleted. I noted that it was deleted on 8 August 2010 with a reason of "Expired PROD, concern was: Non-notable and unreferenced" Granted I am unable to reference the facts in the article but I grew up hearing these same stories from my father who is a descendant of the Rowland family who started the Rowland Shovel Works. My niece has in fact tracked down a large part of our history in part by using these Wikipedia articles. I thank you for your consideration in posting this article again. 151.196.189.109 (talk) 20:13, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- If I restore the page, would you be willing to actively assist in bringing it up to standard? -FASTILY (TALK) 20:35, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
restre
Can you please restore the following files for some minutes?
- File:58buicklim.jpg
- File:Airport Interior.jpg
- File:Chelsea-pensioners.jpg
- File:Dayton art institute exterior evening 2005.jpg
- File:Eggs.Mgiangrasso.jpg
- File:Elal.jpg
- File:Go Train 046.jpg
- File:ModheraSunTemple.JPG
- File:Durga temple Aihole.JPG
- File:Isderacom.jpg
- File:Panzer badge.jpg
- File:Wedding.smallgroup.arp.750pix.jpg
- File:MemphisTrolley.jpg
- File:Mun flags frauenkirche.jpg
- File:Florida 2006 2 084.jpg
- File:P1010002.JPG
- File:Piratey.jpg
- File:IMG 3197.jpg
- File:Grotius de jure 1631.jpg
- File:Fauchard-book.jpg
I would like to add the original upload log to the description page over at commons. -- Common Good (talk) 20:23, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- Done. Please let me know once you're finished. Kind Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 20:27, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- Done Thanks. -- Common Good (talk) 21:34, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Speedy Deletion of Titan CMS page
Hello, I create a wikipedia page called Titan CMS which was 'speedily deleted'. I am not clear on why my page was deleted so quickly because I used other existing Wikipedia pages as a guideline. These pages include: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sitecore, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ektron and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kentico Just trying to understand how my page was different than these and any suggestions to make my page acceptable. Thanks. Mickyglaser (talk) 20:34, 9 August 2010 (UTC)mickyglaserMickyglaser (talk) 20:34, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- After a closer look, I've concluded that the page isn't terribly spammy. I'll go ahead and restore the page for you. Sorry for the inconvenience. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:04, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Historicity of Jesus
Immediate outbreak of edit warring, upon removal of protection... Noloop (talk) 21:57, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- Would you consider restoring the article to the state it was in when it was last protected? Some new edits that were introduced today went against the consensus of what we have been discussing for weeks, and it would be a shame to see such edits "protected" for 2 weeks (if we can't get our stuff together, reach a compromise, and move forward before then). Furthermore, I personally think it would be better next time to let the edit warriors get that stuff out of their system (i.e. until they get blocked), as there appears to be some obstructionism going on, and I think blocks would be more in order than page protection, as there is a sizable chunk of us working together on these issues. Maybe we could also impose a 1RR for the article as a creative alternative to protection as well.-Andrew c [talk] 22:40, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- I made a handful of edits today that have been reverted with this change. One example, I am petitioning on the talk page currently to reach a consensus for a new sentence we had been working on for the lead. Without wasting Fastily's talk page space with the details, I just wanted to point out that there are a number of edits I made today, which I thought had been thoroughly discussed on the talk page, that have since been reverted (and which I intended to make edit-protected requests, once it is clear we have consensus for those changes). While in an edit dispute, I clearly acknowledge the "wrong version" is going to be protected, it also seems inappropriate to make new edits, get them reverted, revert them back, then ask for page protection, as a way to sneak those edits by. The page, in this state, was protected for 3 days and it wasn't the end of the world. You can always propose changes on the talk page, see if there is consensus, then ask for page unprotection, or an edit-protected request. We can keep working on this! -Andrew c [talk] 00:58, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 23:35, 9 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
SchuminWeb (Talk) 23:35, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Contents for Dr. Harvey Silverman info
Hi, I recently added a page for Dr. Harvey Silverman (referenced on Dental Spa page and Univ. Alumni page) and it was deleted due to ambiguous or promotional content. Below is pasted information with citations - please advise if this is OK. Also, I'm sorry if this is the wrong way to contact, it said to contact first before reposting. Thank you!
Dr Harvey Silverman
Dr Harvey Silverman is an American cosmetic dentist. After graduating from Washington University School of Dental Medicine in 1978 Dr Silverman quickly turned his attention to finding a way to perfect the concept of dental bonding that was developed by Michael Buonocore in 1955. The concept of dental bonding found great initial use for placing dental sealants in the grooves of children’s molar teeth to reduce the incidence of dental decay. In the 1960’s and 1970’s bonding found limited application for restoring fillings in the anterior dentition. In 1979 “tooth bonding” became mainstream when the visionary Dr. Irwin Smigel of New York City published the book “Dental Health/Dental Beauty” and provided the first national demonstration of tooth bonding on the television series “That’s Incredible”[i].
Early life and career
Born in Brooklyn, New York City 18 November, 1952, Dr. Silverman experienced "old fashioned" dentistry as a child that was performed without local anesthesia (i.e., novocaine) and the notorious unpleasant slow speed belt driven handpiece. This preceded today’s concept of contemporary pain-free dentistry. Years later, after graduating from dental school, Dr. Silverman pursued the establishment of pain free dentistry. Transforming smiles with no shots and no drilling was where technology needed to be refined and developed to create that goal.
1980's and 1990's
By 1983 Dr. Silverman had refined many of the initial tooth bonding technologies and was already a national clinician for Den-Mat Corporation, Santa Maria, California[ii], teaching continuing education seminars to his colleagues. Later that year he was approached by the IPCO Corporation, a national chain of independent dental laboratories, to help refine and pioneer the concept of bonding porcelain to the facial surfaces of teeth[iii]. By early 1984 Dr. Silverman had created a thin porcelain veneer technology with the IPCO dental laboratories that he shared with the dental profession through continuing education courses on how to transform smiles with composite and porcelain veneers[iv]. Dentists now had an alternative to composite bonding or placing crowns on teeth.
During the subsequent years Dr. Silverman felt public awareness needed to be created that cosmetic dentistry could actually be achieved without shots or drilling. There was still ample skepticism on behalf of the public and the dental profession. To overcome these misconceptions Dr.Silverman opened the country's first dental spa in a beauty setting[v] after working with the country's largest salon and spa developer, was a consulting and contributing editor to Dental Management Magazine[vi] to stimulate his colleagues interest in no shot, no drilling cosmetic dentistry, continued lecturing to the dental profession as a national clinician for the Dentsply/Caulk Company, Milford, DE, introduced and pioneered Extreme Dental MakeOvers to the dental profession[vii] and had opened the Institute of Dental Aesthetics[viii] in Cleveland, Ohio to train dentists who wanted personalized one-to-one training in the burgeoning field of cosmetic dentistry. According to dentists interviewed by Dental Management Magazine, these training programs helped dentists think from a patient's perspective, not just a dentist perspective and provided marketing, management and technique simplification training[ix].
The concept of no shot, no drilling pain free cosmetic dentistry had become widely accepted by the dental profession in the late 1980’s. However, cosmetic dentistry entailed more than just bonding and veneers. Many consumers still wanted whiter teeth without the time or expense associated with composite bonding or porcelain veneers. In 1989 Dr. Silverman invented and applied for a patent for one of the country's first OTC (over the counter) tooth whitening systems. In 1993, along with infomercial developer Guthy Renker Corporation and television celebrity Vanna White, Dr. Silverman's Perfect Smile Tooth Whitening System helped create today's OTC tooth whitening category[x] to brighten smiles throughout the globe[xi]. Following this project, Dr. Silverman was instrumental in pioneering and developing numerous advanced tooth whitening systems Including Kim Alexis' Rapid White, Telebrands' WhiteLight and Deborah Shelton's Smile. The tooth whitening category has grown significantly since Dr. Silverman introduced the Perfect Smile System and today millions of smiles continue to become whiter and brightened as a result of a variety of other tooth whitening technologies.
2000 and beyond
The new millennium has brought consumers, advanced technology and the dental profession together with never before heard of opportunities to change self-conscious smiles into self-confident smiles - without shots or drilling. Through the use of bonding, bleaching and no preparation porcelain veneers, the philosophy of the best dentistry is the least invasive dentistry is catching on as more dentists' chose to provide non-invasive veneers that do not require the destruction of healthy enamel to correct smile problems[xiii]. As a result of a lifetime of work dedicated to refining, developing and inventing cosmetic dentistry systems that do not require shots or drilling, Dr. Silverman has been consistently listed as a top clinician in CE for the dental profession for his work in cosmetic dentistry[xiv]. In recent years the Silverman Institute of Cosmetic Dentistry has taken over the initial pioneering work of the Institute of Dental Aesthetics[xv] where dentists can still refine the cosmetic dentistry skills outside of a large lecture hall. As a result of consumer demand for a simpler, easier way to change their smile without braces or porcelain veneers, Dr. Silverman recently invented the LifeLIke Veneer™ system that allows dentists to create natural looking smiles in just one visit - without shots, drilling, or the expense associated with porcelain veneers[xvi]. Dr. Silverman continues to develop new tooth whiteners for OTC and professional use as well as simplified veneer systems that will continue to give consumers access to having a bright, self-confident smile.
References
[i] www.dentistrytoday.com/restorative/1863.html
[ii] “Expanding Your Dental Practice”, 'Journal of Cosmetic Dentistry', pg. 4, June, 1983.
[iii] Personal correspondence
[v] [Dental_spa http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dental_spa]
“Facial and Dental Beauty is Goal at Skin Care Clinic”, pg. 56, 'Dental Management Magazine', August, 1986.
[vi] “Cosmetic Dentistry: Getting Started”, pg. 45, 'Dental Management Magazine', July, 1991.
[vii] “Marketing and Costing Your Cosmetic Dental Services”, pg. 28, 'Dental Management Magazine', October 1989.
[viii] “Institute For Dental Aesthetics Opens”, 'Dental Management Magazine', November, 1988.
[ix] “Cosmetic Dentistry: Putting Patients First”, 'AGD Impact', pg. 9, August, 1992.
[x] “Be Prepared for Patients’ Questions on Tooth Whiteners”, pg. 31, Dental Economic Magazine, February, 1992.
[xi] “The sweet buy and buy”, pg. 22, Broadcast & Cable Magazine, March, 1993.
[xii] www.easysmilesystem.com/pdf/DrLehmanEBlast.pdf
[xiii] “12th Annual Leaders In CE”, 'Dentistry Today', December, 2009
“11th Annual Leaders In CE”, pg. 59, 'Dentistry Today', December, 2008.
“10th Annual Leaders In CE”, pg. 52, 'Dentistry Today', December, 2007.
[xiv] "How to Create a Thriving Cosmetic Practice", pg. 4, Volume 4, 'Best Practices for AGD Members', Fall, 2010.
[xv] www.lehmandentistry.com/index.html
Lmitro2010 (talk) 19:07, 8 August 2010 (UTC) Laurel - new poster lmitro2010
- Not to worry, this method of communication is just fine. To be honest, I feel that the article is still has a promotional tone to it. Perhaps you might like to check out WP:ADS, WP:MOS, and WP:YFA. The citations are all in the right places, although it would be helpful if you would use other sources alongside easysmilesystem.com. I recommend you do another revision. Make the article informative, rather than promotional in nature. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:32, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you - article links are photocopies of old articles not found on the web. They come from several sources including Dentistry Today, Dental Management, Dental Economics, American Salon, and thank you letters from dentists. Is the problem that the articles are located on Dr. Silverman's website? If so, would the text/references be acceptable from a different domain (not connected or linked to Dr. Silverman's site)? Thank you for your patience as this is the first time I've added a person to Wikipedia.
Lmitro2010 (talk) 14:41, 9 August 2010 (UTC) Laurel
- Well, if that's the case, then it's not really a major issue that all the sources are found in one place. Nonetheless, it's still desirable to have citations from multiple outside sources (for further reading, see Wikipedia:Citing sources). If you ask me, I encourage you to get the sources from the original publishers. I know it's a hassle, but statistically, articles with sources from multiple venues are less likely to be deleted as advertising. On a side note, you might like to try out the Wikipedia:Article wizard; it has a wealth of information for new contributors and is an excellent aid in creating new pages. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 20:43, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you, I'll see if any can be found from the original sources. And thank you for the link, I went through the editor practice at the beginning, but didn't do all the rest. Lmitro2010 (talk) 00:00, 10 August 2010 (UTC) Laurel :)
- Sounds like a plan. Feel free to drop me a line if you have any other questions or are in need of assistance. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:57, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- Hi! We found a couple external references that can be accessed by the general public, but the furthest back any of the magazines go in their archives is 1995. We have linked earlier article reprint scans with descriptive citations so it's clear what publications they originally came from. Can this article get a blessing? Thank you so much for your help, Lmitro2010 (talk) 05:14, 11 August 2010 (UTC)Laurel :)
- This article's sources are looking much better. I have created a draft of the article for you to work on in your userspace at User:Lmitro2010/Dr Harvey Silverman. You are free to move the page to the article space when you are ready. However, before you do that, I recommend you request some feedback on your draft article at Wikipedia:Requests for feedback. There are editors there who will be more than willing to help you improve your article and give you some constructive criticism. Good luck! Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 07:05, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- THANK YOU! You're awesome - so helpful. Have a great day! :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmitro2010 (talk • contribs) 12:11, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- This article's sources are looking much better. I have created a draft of the article for you to work on in your userspace at User:Lmitro2010/Dr Harvey Silverman. You are free to move the page to the article space when you are ready. However, before you do that, I recommend you request some feedback on your draft article at Wikipedia:Requests for feedback. There are editors there who will be more than willing to help you improve your article and give you some constructive criticism. Good luck! Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 07:05, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- Hi! We found a couple external references that can be accessed by the general public, but the furthest back any of the magazines go in their archives is 1995. We have linked earlier article reprint scans with descriptive citations so it's clear what publications they originally came from. Can this article get a blessing? Thank you so much for your help, Lmitro2010 (talk) 05:14, 11 August 2010 (UTC)Laurel :)
- Sounds like a plan. Feel free to drop me a line if you have any other questions or are in need of assistance. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:57, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you, I'll see if any can be found from the original sources. And thank you for the link, I went through the editor practice at the beginning, but didn't do all the rest. Lmitro2010 (talk) 00:00, 10 August 2010 (UTC) Laurel :)
- Well, if that's the case, then it's not really a major issue that all the sources are found in one place. Nonetheless, it's still desirable to have citations from multiple outside sources (for further reading, see Wikipedia:Citing sources). If you ask me, I encourage you to get the sources from the original publishers. I know it's a hassle, but statistically, articles with sources from multiple venues are less likely to be deleted as advertising. On a side note, you might like to try out the Wikipedia:Article wizard; it has a wealth of information for new contributors and is an excellent aid in creating new pages. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 20:43, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Could you please explain...
Thanks for your reply.
We are all volunteers here -- and sometimes we are too busy to clearly write our requests so people can understand them, or sometimes we are too busy to understand other people's requests.
I understand that you thought the original fair use rationale was inadequate.
I offered a alternate fair use rationale. I suggested that if a good faith alternate fair use rationale was suggested, this seemed to me to be a valid reason to review whether the image could be restored. As the administrator who deleted the image I thought it was appropriate to ask you to comment on the alternate fair use rationale I drafted. I thought if you found it adequate you could simply restore the image. I thought if you didn't find it adequate, either, you could explain what you thought was missing.
I know some administrators have no interest in giving a second look at their deletion decisions. Some administrators blow off questions, and tell those with concerns to take the article or image to deletion review. But the policies do tell those with questions to give the deleting administrator a chance to address their concerns, prior to taking their concern to deletion review. It seems to me that this is sensible, as a patient deleting administrator may provide answers to the good faith contributor's questions that would stem that deletion review, before it started, saving everyone a lot of time. Geo Swan (talk) 06:28, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, that was a serious error on my part. I only read and responded to the first line of the query, assuming Ed had already answered the rest. In addition to a revised fair-use rationale, I'd like to see a verifiable source, one in which the copyright status of the file in question can be verified. If you can provide those, I'll restore the file for you pronto. Kind Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 07:38, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- I am happy to provide the source. Sherurcij cited it in the caption where he used the image on Abdulla Majid Al Naimi. The caption on the article from the publication Sherurcij downloaded it from credits the image "Courtesy of The Collection of Through the Walls". The body of the articles says: "Organized by photographer Margot Herster, the show is built around photographs of the homes and families of detainees, taken by the lawyers representing them and reproduced by Herster.". Geo Swan (talk) 17:08, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- Kelly Klaasmeyer (2007-05-17). "Guantánamo: Pictures from Home. Questions of Justice". Houston Free Press. Retrieved 2010-08-0.
{{cite news}}: Check date values in:|accessdate=(help) mirror
- Kelly Klaasmeyer (2007-05-17). "Guantánamo: Pictures from Home. Questions of Justice". Houston Free Press. Retrieved 2010-08-0.
- I am happy to provide the source. Sherurcij cited it in the caption where he used the image on Abdulla Majid Al Naimi. The caption on the article from the publication Sherurcij downloaded it from credits the image "Courtesy of The Collection of Through the Walls". The body of the articles says: "Organized by photographer Margot Herster, the show is built around photographs of the homes and families of detainees, taken by the lawyers representing them and reproduced by Herster.". Geo Swan (talk) 17:08, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 00:04, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
My Image was deleted
Hello, Fastily? Why the image that I uploaded under "Khalkha Mongolians" was deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by KherlenBorjigin (talk • contribs) 02:17, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- Because the file is likely non-free and because it is a derivative work without attribution. What is/are the source(s) of the files you used to create File:Khalkha Mongolians.jpg? -FASTILY (TALK) 04:58, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, according to the Mongolian Copyright Law, the pictures on the first row are free to use: Please see this. <<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-Mongolia>> The pictures were taken by anonymous photographers by the request of the Mongolian State officials who appear on the pictures. Also the first, the second, and the fourth persons who appear on the pictures passed away more than 100 years ago. The third picture on the first row was taken in 1928 and I do own the hard copy which was granted by the person's wife and daughter. According to the Copyright Law of Mongolia: <<http://legalinfo.mn/insys/lawmain.php?vlawid=6237>>, under 8.1.7, the Copyright Law does not cover or protect those works that distribute and/or represent the national and/or traditional values, customs, and culture.
Please restore my picture, thank you. Please do inform me if I need to upload the image again under the correct license. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KherlenBorjigin (talk • contribs) 23:28, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- I don't believe that was the answer the question I asked. Please allow me to clarify. I'd like to see a specific and verifiable source(s) for the top three files. The main reason I closed the deletion discussion as delete was because there was no attribution information for the photos you used to create the collage. derivative works must have attribution! If you provide me with the source(s) you used to create the file, I will restore the file, no further questions. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 02:21, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Unfair blocking
I've been trying over the past few days to make the Fashion Blog article one that is relevant, up to date and has more accurate information. Nearly all of my additions were unfairly marked as spam, despite the fact that none of my submissions meet the criteria, and are within all Wikipedia guidelines.
Finally, I gave up on trying to add information and tried to remove inaccurate information, such as blogs that no longer exist, and haven't for years. Frankly, you should look at the users reverting my changes for violating the guidelines of not making edits to prove a point. The Fashion blog article is inaccurate in many places because several things have changed since the years old information included. Everyone is so paranoid about a fashion blog getting a link from the article that it's making the quality poor. I try to improve the quality, and people who I'm sure have not done anywhere near half the research that I have on the subject attack every change, from every angle, even when there is nothing in the guidelines to support the removal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabyth (talk • contribs) 05:13, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'll have a closer look into the situation. I'll get back to you as soon as I have something. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:59, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- I have been looking at this editor's history. They have been accused of vandalism, which I think is not justified, as it is more a question of a content dispute. However, there are several other problems with this editor's editing, including persistent conviction that they know best. What is quite unambiguous is that Gabyth is 74.73.156.96, whom you blocked. I have blocked Gabyth for 31 hours, and explained on their talk page that they should go through the proper appeal process for unblocking, rather than just using another account and getting round the block. I am making no judgement at all as to whether the original block was justified, and I will leave that for you to consider. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:45, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- I was originally prepared to unblock the IP as they seemed to be making edits in good faith. While I can't say I agree with their "block evasion", perhaps there is some more good faith to be assumed. Frankly, I have no real opinion with regards to the block of Gabyth, although I do note that in terms of policy, it was correct. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 19:13, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- I have been looking at this editor's history. They have been accused of vandalism, which I think is not justified, as it is more a question of a content dispute. However, there are several other problems with this editor's editing, including persistent conviction that they know best. What is quite unambiguous is that Gabyth is 74.73.156.96, whom you blocked. I have blocked Gabyth for 31 hours, and explained on their talk page that they should go through the proper appeal process for unblocking, rather than just using another account and getting round the block. I am making no judgement at all as to whether the original block was justified, and I will leave that for you to consider. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:45, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi
I see you have removed the del tag from File:Bookcoverofcarrnovel.jpg are you sure about it Jon Ascton (talk) 12:48, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Nokia E5
I see you just speedy deleted the above article, I did a tiny bit of work on it and don't feel it was a G11 candidate. Could you userfy it for me so I an do some work on it to bring it inline with our other articles on Nokia phones thanks. Mo ainm~Talk 16:38, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- Done at User:Mo ainm/Nokia E5. Sorry for the inconvenience. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:07, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
/* User-reported */ip vandal
I am who reported this user as a vandal after I saw him reverting you here was not listening anybody at the talk page and used this ip address to continue making edits to the fashion blog article. I am pretty sure that he violated our rules and I acted in good faith. Thx. Jrod2 (talk) 19:00, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- I have no doubt you acted in good faith. What I've been discussing with several administrators though, is whether User:Gabyth and his/her sock were newbies and acting in good faith and whether they should be unblocked on that basis. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:14, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of Al-Jamiatul Ahlia Darul Ulum Moinul Islam
This article Al-Jamiatul Ahlia Darul Ulum Moinul Islam is under an AFD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al-Jamiatul Ahlia Darul Ulum Moinul Islam right now, where the consensus is leaning towards keep. After failing to blank the AFD notice, The author barikbinaziz is creating POV fork of the page, and then tagged this one for delete by user request. Since other users have edited the article, the speedy does not apply here. I urge you to reconsider your deletion of the page. Also, refer to the AFD. The user who tagged the article was himself blocked for repeated blanking of AFD tags from the article. Failing which he asked to delete. He is simply going to recreate the article under another title (see my contributions, you'll see his IP has already tried to fork the page). --Ragib (talk) 19:20, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Speedy of VTD-XML
Saw this come up at WP:REFUND. Would you consider reversing that speedy? It doesn't look like blatant advertisement to me, just maybe something that needs some cleanup and a hard look at sourcing/COI. If not, could you leave a note explaining why at the REFUND discussion? Thanks. Protonk (talk) 20:59, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Moved from above. Protonk (talk) 21:24, 10 August 2010 (UTC) Why do you delete vtd-xml entry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.6.50.139 (talk) 20:12, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- I've replied at Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion#VTD-XML. Thanks for letting me know. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 02:23, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Grange Coop Page Deleted. Want to Resubmit
Hi Fastily;
We tried posting our first Wikipedia Page for Grange Coop. It was deleted because of the borderline advertising of the content. We have revised the copy and would like to try again. Maybe you can help me. I will post the new content below. I believe it falls within guidelines of stating fact, rather than selling product.
Please let me know if I can delete the pink section on the Page Creation page and start again.
Thanks ~Kelley Jones
Grange Co-op Wikipedia Entry GRANG1-T300
Grange Co-op Grange Cooperative is an agricultural supply cooperative based in the Rogue Valley of the U.S. state of Oregon. Grange Co-op started in 1934 in Central Point, Oregon, with a group of 99 farmers from the Rogue Valley who invested $10 each to form a fuel-delivering cooperative. They made a $350 down payment on property where the Central Point , Oregon, store is now located, and paid $600 for the first tank of gas. The business was limited to petroleum supplies and the first year's sales were $13,187.
The cooperative now operates seven Oregon retail stores in Medford, Ashland, Central Point, White City, Grants Pass and Klamath Falls with products for the farm, home, garden and pets. Grange Co-op also operates a fertilizer plant and certified organic grain elevator, agronomy center, and two CFN cardlock fueling stations.
Grange Co-op employees 200 staff with a voting membership of approximately 2800, over 11,000 additional dividend patrons, and total annual sales of over $50 million (2009).
As a cooperative, Grange Co-op is owned by its members. Patronage Dividends are profits that are returned back to Grange Co-op members and non-member patron contract holders (Dividend Patrons) in direct proportion to the amount of their Grange Co-op purchases.
History Grange Co-op purchased Ashland Mills in 1943, and in 1960, opened a new retail store in Ashland. The first Grange Co-op in Medford was located on South Pacific Highway as a result of a merger with Jackson County Co-op in the 1960’s. In 1996, Grange Co-op merged with Josephine County Growers Co-op in Grants Pass (started in 1927). In September of 2005, Grange Co-op acquired the American Feed & Farm Supply store in Klamath Falls.
Locations Central Point, 225 S. Front Street, Medford, Oregon, 97502, 541-664-6691 Ashland, 421 A Street, Ashland, Oregon, 97520, 541-482-2143 South Medford, 2531 S. Pacific Hwy, Medford, Oregon, 97501, 541-772-4730 White City, 8205 Crater Lake Hwy, White City, Oregon, 97503, 541-830-0015 Grants Pass, 1710 Schutzwohl Ln., Grants Pass, Oregon, 97526, 541-476-7771 Klamath Falls, 2525 Washburn Way, Klamath Falls, Oregon, 97603, 541-884-7733 Pet Country, 2833 N. Pacific Hwy, Medford, Oregon, 97501, 541-773-7087 Grain Elevator, 28 S. Front Street, Central Point, Oregon, 97502, 541-664-2433 Ag Services, 32 S. Front Street, Central Point, Oregon, 541-664-3993 Main Office, 89 Alder Street, Central Point, Oregon, 541-664-1261
References:
Grange grows in Klamath Falls
http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090507/NEWS07/905070338
Mail Tribune, May 7, 2009
Grange Co-op to give patrons record dividends http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090424/BIZ/904240320 Mail Tribune, April 24, 2009
Central Point History Comes Alive http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100524/NEWS/5240321 Mail Tribune, May 24, 2010
Grange Co-op: Growing with purpose http://archive.mailtribune.com/archive/2000/may/053100b1.htm Mail Tribune, May 31, 2000
Who we are http://www.grangecoop.com/who.shtml Grange Co-op (official website) Retrieved August 10, 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Floydnfriends (talk • contribs) 21:39, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Floydnfriends#Re:Grange Coop Page Deleted. Want to Resubmit -FASTILY (TALK) 02:29, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Unblock request of Power2the1
Hello Fastily. Power2the1 (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, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 22:53, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'm fine with an unblock, provided that the user is willing to contribute constructively. But I'll leave the final decision to you; I trust your judgment. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 02:30, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll go ahead with unblocking then. Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 07:40, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
"Khalkha Mongolians" image was deleted
Hi again, 1) According to the Mongolian Copyright Law, the pictures on the first row are free to use: Please see this. <<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-Mongolia>> Those pictures were taken by anonymous photographers by the request of the Mongolian State officials who appear on the pictures. Also the first, the second, and the fourth persons who appear on the pictures passed away more than 100 years ago. The third picture on the first row was taken in 1928 and I do own the hard copy which was granted by the person's wife and daughter. 2) According to the Copyright Law of Mongolia: <<http://legalinfo.mn/insys/lawmain.php?vlawid=6237>>, under 8.1.7, the Copyright Law does not cover or protect those works that distribute and/or represent the national and/or traditional values, customs, and culture. Please restore my picture, thank you. Please do inform me if I need to upload the image again under the correct license. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KherlenBorjigin (talk • contribs) 23:30, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- Hi KherlenBorjigin. I do not believe that was the answer to the question I asked. So please allow me to clarify. I deleted the file mainly on the basis that you did not supply proper attribution information for your file, which was a derivative work. In other words, I would like a specific, verifiable source for each of the individual photos you used to generate the final collage. If you can provide me with a source for each one of the files, I'll restore the file for you pronto. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:36, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
muchas gracias
Yes, after an extended absence, not of my choosing, I'm finally back! 2 problems at the same time in January... New boss at work who restricted all 'non-necessary/non-work related' internet & computer use (complained that band-width use was too high), even after hours, which is when I did my wiki stuff. & my laptop computer died in the same week. Have now replaced the laptop, & can get back to work here. Ciao - & keep up the good work. Skier Dude (talk 01:52, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
vtd-xml
Hi, Yes, I will what you asked: to actively maintain the article to standards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jzhang2007 (talk • contribs) 02:57, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Telesphere page deleted
Hello Fastily,
I recently left the below message for you and have received no response. I want to re-create a wiki page for Telesphere. Please advise!
Telesphere page deleted Hello Fastily,
You recently deleted the page "Telesphere" and i want to re-create a similar page. I was directed to you, the one who deleted it, before proceeding. When the speedy deletion notice went up i responded to the talk page question with why the page was legit and made changes per their request. What do i need to do to get this page up? Thank you.HostedPBX (talk) 20:35, 13 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by HostedPBX (talk • contribs)
User talk:HostedPBX#Re:Telesphere page deleted -FASTILY (TALK) 17:10, 6 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by HostedPBX (talk • contribs)
- Hi HostedPBX. I believe I've already left you a message at User talk:HostedPBX#Re:Telesphere page deleted. I'm afraid there's not much more I can do at this point. If you rewrite the article, I am more than willing to do a review for you. If you need the deleted text back so you can start work on the article again, let me know and I'll post it to your userspace. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:32, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello Fastily,
Thank you for your help, I apologize for not seeing your previous response. Can you please review my revised page at User:HostedPBX/Telesphere and send me any feedback that you may have or make changes directly? Thank you for your help! --HostedPBX (talk) 20:53, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- I've taken a look and I think it looks better. However, I recommend you remove the sections titled "Awards" and "Solutions". These two sections are very promotional in nature. If this were an actual article and not a draft at the moment, those sections would likely be removed, or the entire article as a whole might be deleted. Otherwise, looking good. Feel free to move the page to the article space once you're ready. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:28, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
deletion of categories
Could you please explain why you deleted Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of people of Rhode Island and Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of people of South Carolina when they had hangon and and wiki admin category templates on them?--Traveler100 (talk) 16:28, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- Of course. I deleted the pages because they were indeed empty categories. Additionally, the reason you supplied for your hangon was rather vague and ambiguous. I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "AWD program". No worries however. If you can give me a more convincing reason to restore the pages, I'll happily do that. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:22, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- Also, the pages weren't actually tagged with {{empty category}} which might've stopped someone adding a tag or deleting it, and probably would've prevented them from being included in Wikipedia:Database reports/Empty categories.. –xenotalk 20:27, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- About 50 new requests are made a week for photographs on Wiki pages. These are generally tagged with {{reqphoto}} without a parameter. Over the years this created a general list of requests with thousands of entries on every subject you could imagine and a number you could not. For this reason I run a Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser over the top category to classify them. The intention is then that there are lists that people interested in specific subjects can then read. Now request for people photographs is over 50000 requests so another way of looking at the requests was needed. One of these is by country (and in case of USA, states). Now the categories would not have been created unless there was an article in it. I monitor here for red links then create if I think needed or edit the article of there is a better existing category. What has happened in the case of mentioned categories is that the articles that were in them now have images and the request has been removed (another bot and a manual tool is monitoring this). New requests will however be created at some point. I see that {{empty category}} and {{Wikipedia category}} needs to be added to all these categories, it has for some but it will take time to do it for all.
- Also, the pages weren't actually tagged with {{empty category}} which might've stopped someone adding a tag or deleting it, and probably would've prevented them from being included in Wikipedia:Database reports/Empty categories.. –xenotalk 20:27, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Please note that request for delete tags are usually on a page for 7 days before the delete takes place not just a few hours as was the case here. People working on this task are on different time zones and are not everyday on-line. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:09, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Rewrite
Is this any better? It is hard to write an article on the subject when their is so little info out their that discusses different publishers(outside of printed writer's guides which I do not posses). If their are still any problems please let me know what I can do to fix it.Wikiposter0123 (talk) 05:05, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- Looks better. I would say go ahead and move it to the article space, but I recommend you get a second opinion on your article first at WP:RFF. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:43, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Herbert1979
I wish I would have had the chance to see what exactly your warning was before the page was deleted. Do you honestly believe that there is a desire for this person to contribute something constructive? Thanks for giving an obvious troll a chance to "contribute" at some later point when nobody is there to watch. --Onorem♠Dil 05:18, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- WP:AIV is for reporting persistent vandals. Herbert1979 has not vandalized in any way whatsoever. I also fail to see how Herbert1979's ANI comment could be seen as trolling, but ok, whatevs. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:45, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- "Simply put the claim here really isn't much of a claim at all. Just an attempt to waste administrator time while vandals sneak past recent changes." - His words, not mine. --Onorem♠Dil 05:50, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
UK Iranian Film Festival deletion
Dear Fastily,
I am currently trying to create a page about the London Iranian Film Festival. I have used neutral, unbiased language in the article but it was still deleted. Firstly it was due to reasons of "notability". I have read the notability FAQ but that didn't really help. Then the page was tagged as unambiguous advertising. Calling it "unambiguous advertising" is puzzling since couldn't one argue that every single page in wikipedia that is about a person, event or corporation could essentially, intentionally or unintentionally, be classed as "unambiguous advertising"? Could you please specify for me clearly how I could create the page so that it could have a stable position in wikipedia?
Thanks for your help and hope to hear from you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simon619 (talk • contribs) 10:06, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- By any chance are you the same person as User:Ukiff? If you are, it's not that you've done anything wrong, it will just help me better respond to your query. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:04, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
yeah I am but I can't talk to you using that account because its blocked. Please could you tell me what to do to restore the London iranian film festival wiki page. cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simon619 (talk • contribs) 11:03, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- You are welcome to revise the article so that it is compliant with WP:ADS, WP:V, WP:CITE, WP:MOS, and WP:GNG. Once you have done that, you are welcome to resubmit the article, although I encourage you to read WP:YFA before doing so. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance, please feel free to drop me a line. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:58, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Work on new entry for Coffee Express
Could you reinstate the Coffee Express page? It was deleted due to commercialization issues. There is a third party to work on it and the article will be more historical, with references. Instead of starting from scratch however, it would be helpful to use the beginnings of that article. Thanks. Coffeetom (talk) 11:51, 11 August 2010 (UTC)Coffeetom
- I'll create a draft for you to work on in your userspace. Will that work? -FASTILY (TALK) 20:17, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Yes, that would be fine. I made an entry in my Userspace (I think that's what I did!) in order to make sure I have an active space. Thanks. Coffeetom (talk) 12:47, 12 August 2010 (UTC)Coffeetom
- I've restored the text to User:Coffeetom/Coffee Express Co. I've hidden the text (it's viewable when you click the "edit this page" button). I recommend keeping it hidden for the time being while you're working on it so it doesn't accidentally get deleted again. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:02, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Got it. Thanks. Coffeetom (talk) 12:36, 13 August 2010 (UTC)Coffeetom
The Family Centers article I wrote was deleted without any comment from you. The automated response claimed it was advertising but I saw nothing in the article to validate those claims. I'd like to know why it was deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RGenuario (talk • contribs) 13:08, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- Basically because spam/advertising is not permitted on Wikipedia. Using Wikipedia to promote an entity is strictly prohibited. If you continue editing in the manner which you just did, you may find yourself blocked from editing. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 20:18, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Your Deletion of InfinityDB
I notice you deleted the article InfinityDB as unambiguous advertising. I strongly disagree about this being "unambiguous." The article could have been written in a more encyclopedic manner, but the subject was clearly as notable as the other Java database engine articles such as FluidDB, Perst, Berkeley DB, etc. The software that is the subject of the article is original and patented, and is asserted by several third parties to be higher performing than its competition. All of the other articles I just mentioned are also written with a slightly promotional tone as well, so that was clearly not sufficient reason for deletion. I hope you will allow the recreation of the page so that it can be written more neutrally. --98.248.204.235 (talk) 04:04, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- Additionally, this software has been discussed in the Wall Street Journal and was used in video editing software by the NFL during the 1980's. It was one of the first entity-attribute-value database systems, and there are sources to verify this.--98.248.204.235 (talk) 04:41, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- By any chance are you the same person as Mars2035 or Tuolumne0? It would help me to better respond to your query if you could answer that question first. Thanks, FASTILY (TALK) 05:41, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- I forgot to login when I posted this message on your talk page. My username is Mars2035. Tuolumne0 is someone else. Sorry about the confusion. I assure you that there is no conflict of interest here; I merely noticed that some software products have slightly promotional articles on wikipedia, while others of equal significance in the industry do not. Wikipedia should either document all relevant software or none at all; it should not allow itself to become an advertising tool for well known software products while speedily deleting those whose names are not immediately recognizable. There is no reason why Berkeley DB, which has been shown to have significant shortcomings in data compression and speed, should be favored in Wikipedia's neutral environment. --Mars2035 (talk) 17:07, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- By any chance are you the same person as Mars2035 or Tuolumne0? It would help me to better respond to your query if you could answer that question first. Thanks, FASTILY (TALK) 05:41, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Re-posting
Hi, I noticed you have deleted the article on Bled eConference. I understand the reason behind it and I had tried to clarify my mistake on the article's Talk Page, however I did not receive any replies on how to correct the mistake before the deletion. I am a newbie on Wiki, although I have opened the first account a year ago. My first username matched the first topic I was working on posting, which I now realize was a wrong choice (I went through a lot of guidelines, but missed the one on usernames). I would like to re-post the article on Bled eConference under my new username as I believe it to be on the same level as other articles on IS related conferences as ICIS, AMCIS and ECIS. Please let me know if this is possible. If you feel there were also other promotional elements in the article (besides the poorly chosen username), please indicate them. I apologize for the trouble. Kind Regards, Mbabnik (talk) 07:18, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- Of course you are welcome to repost the article! Just be sure that your revised version is compliant with WP:ADS, WP:MOS, and WP:GNG. Also, once your article is live, I recommend you request feedback on your article at WP:RFF. There are many editors there who are willing to help you improve your article and give you constructive criticism. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:29, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Question
How did you post the edit stats on an RFA talk page? I am just wondering how to do it. Thanks. ~NSD (✉ • ✐) 15:26, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- User X!'s edit counter on any given RfA candidate. Copy and paste the results into the talk page of the RfA. Be sure to use
<pre>tags when posting edit stats to the talk page. And that's all there is to it. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 04:56, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Conflict of interest?
My page was deleted. I work for the organization. The content is informative and in no way advertising. How can I post this article without it getting deleted? How have other valuation forms done this?
AA53202 (talk) 23:13, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- I am afraid you cannot. Spam/advertising is not permitted on Wikipedia. Using Wikipedia to promote an entity is strictly prohibited. If you continue editing in the manner which you just did, you may find yourself blocked from editing. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:53, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Deletion SS Xantho
Fastily.. re deleting the SS Xantho entry... I am the archaeologist in charge of the expedition, the author of all that appears in published form, none of it is disputed and am using the WA Museum sources at which I am a curator responsible .
Please provide a justification for the Speedy delete.
(Jeoly (talk) 06:01, 13 August 2010 (UTC))
- Your article was taken down not because of it's context, but because of copyright concerns. Is it possible relicense the text on the museum's website to the free license combo, CC-BY-SA 3.0 and the GFDL? If you can do that, then you can resubmit the text to Wikipedia. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 07:11, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Regarding deletion of Avia Solutions Group
Hi. I was about to use the hangon tag suggested, unfortunately, my article was already deleted... I want to argue that this is not an advertising article based on the following reasons:
- Avia Solutions Group was mentioned in other articles (as Avia Solutions Group or as its previous names flyLAL Group or flyLAL Group Services).
- It is mentioned also in the pages of Lithuanian Wikipedia as it's a Lithuanian compnay (hopefully, soon a page for Lithuanian portal is made as well).
- Avia Solutions Group is the continuation of development of Lithuanian aviation sector: Lithuanian Aviation --> Lithuanian Airlines (the only state-owned airline in Lithuania) --> flyLAL - Lithuanian Airlines (privatized; bancrupt) --> Avia Solutions Group (uniting all other companies that were created reorganizing Lithuanian Airlines).
- Introduction of Avia Solutions Group brings structure to currently scattered and stand-alone articles (although long-timers on Wikipedia) of such companies as Avia Asset Management, Small Planet Airlines (even more in Lithuanian portal).
I hope I proved my point that this article is not from thin air but rather helps covering a few holes currently in Wikipedia content. If you still don't appreciate certain parts of the article, please indicate them. But can you please undelete it for now? --MilesToCover (talk) 14:26, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I'll restore the content to a userspace draft for you so you can continue work. How does that sound? -FASTILY (TALK) 20:20, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- Can you restore the item as published? Or are there some specific changes you want me to do to the article? --MilesToCover (talk) 19:20, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- I have restored the page to User:MilesToCover/Avia Solutions Group. If you want my opinion, I recommend removing the sections titled "Business Activities", "Structure" and "Facts". All these sections are highly promotional in nature and are against our guidelines on spam/advertising. Once you have revised the article, feel free to move it to the article space. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:50, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- Can you restore the item as published? Or are there some specific changes you want me to do to the article? --MilesToCover (talk) 19:20, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Geocities vs oocities
Please note that Geocities has been shut down by Yahoo. Some folks (or organization - I don't know) made a full clone of geocities webpages into oocities and is available for reference. You may search for other pages that have links to oocities and get a feel of the change. VasuVR (talk, contribs) 04:31, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- I was not aware that Geocities had been shut down. Thank you for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:43, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- Having said that, I found that not everything was archived! :-( :-( [<redacted> Our pages] have been archived, which also includes content which are referenced in some Wikipedia pages, can be found at oocities. Unfortunately not all are found (as I later found, especially this M. D. Ramanathan link). So, it is a tough task... The updatehelper though is probably a bot that is changing all geocities to oocities. Hope it saves time for you to concentrate on other plans and tasks you may have. VasuVR (talk, contribs) 08:37, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- I find it troubling that the person behind Updatehelper's bot, who speaks English no better than the English on the oocities.com website, is making hundreds of changes despite several people's protests -- and that two admins who have blocked the changes swiftly unblocked them purely on the grounds that geocities is no more. Geocities pages are much more reliably harbored at Archive.org than at oocities.com, a website of unknown origin and only intermittent availability. Here are some other objections to his actions.
- Oocities has copyright issues such that WP:COPYLINK forbids links to it. [19]
- "Geocities links can be redirected quite easily using Checklinks. Tedious as a human job, but likely possible with a well-thought-out bot. Once they've been changed to point to this mirror, Checklinks is no longer an option. It's worth seriously considering whether this action is going to cause even more work down the road. " (quotingUser:Katherine) [20]
- If somebody wants to provide reliable links to vanished geocities pages, it would be very simple to make a bot to change "geocities.com/blablabla" not to "oocities.com/blablaba" but to "web.archive.org/web/*/geocities.com/blablabla". Just for example, there was a not-working link to a geocities that now points to <redacted>.com/fisher4senate/fisher4NJsenate.html a sporadically working oocities page, which says:
- "Sorry, "http://www.<redacted>.com/fisher4senate/fisher4NJsenate.html" is not available yet.
- But the following Archive Link maybe leads you to the site you tryed to visit
- web.archive.org/web/*/geocities.com/fisher4senate/fisher4NJsenate.html"
- I don't know if another ANI should be filed or how to invite wider discussion. I am sure UpdateHelper's changes are well-intentioned but I am much less sure that they benefit Wikipedia in the long run. betsythedevine (talk) 15:48, 13 August 2010 (UTC) (Added: I did file a new ANI to get wider perspective. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Bot_making_hundreds_of_links_to_oocities.com.2C_when_links_to_Archive.org_would_be_better betsythedevine (talk) 16:44, 13 August 2010 (UTC))
importScript('User:Mr.Z-man/rollbackSummary.js'); // allows tweaking of rollback edit summary
- I actually used Splarka's mass rollback script when I mass reverted yesterday. At any rate, thanks for the suggestion. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 19:55, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, they can be used in concert - one to change the edit summary to be more descriptive, and the other to do the mass revert. (I know that it works when using VOA's mass rollback script, not sure about Splarka's). –xenotalk 19:58, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- I actually used Splarka's mass rollback script when I mass reverted yesterday. At any rate, thanks for the suggestion. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 19:55, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Template:Infobox power station
Hi, Fastily. Something went wrong with the merging power stations infoboxes. All infoboxes are broken, e.g. Alpha Ventus Offshore Wind Farm. Beagel (talk) 06:19, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yep! Look at Mohave Power Station. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:35, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- OK, I fixed this by restoring the old version that was deleted. You still need to do the merge I think. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:52, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- Wow, that was really bad, I can't believe I completely gummed up the history merge!! :/ I've also created a redirect at Template:Infobox UK power station. That should solve the problem. Thank you all for letting me know!! Best, FASTILY (TALK) 07:16, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- I still think you need to do the history merge. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:58, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- Wow, that was really bad, I can't believe I completely gummed up the history merge!! :/ I've also created a redirect at Template:Infobox UK power station. That should solve the problem. Thank you all for letting me know!! Best, FASTILY (TALK) 07:16, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- OK, I fixed this by restoring the old version that was deleted. You still need to do the merge I think. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:52, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of old & public domain PD images
Hi, I see you make lots of useful contributions, and thanks for them. I just got this image undeleted, and I wanted to pass along the suggestion that if you see 2D images that were obviously published before 1923, or whose creators have clearly been dead for 70+ years, they are public domain, and it's good to be suspicious of any deletion requests. This applies to old paintings, for example, and in this case to a book published in 1692. Best regards, Wareh (talk) 15:42, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, I thought there was something was funny about that image when I deleted it. Anyway, glad to see it's sorted out now. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:56, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
ANI
I've mentioned you on ANI. Gimmetoo (talk) 11:19, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Apologies
I apologize if I sounded too much like an admin on that RFPP request. v-_-v —Jeremy (v^_^v Carl Johnson) 18:16, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- There's no need to apologize! As far as I'm concerned, you're still an administrator :P Best, FASTILY (TALK) 19:58, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- As far as you're concerned, maybe, but I seem to have pissed that IP off. —Jeremy (v^_^v Carl Johnson) 01:55, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
- And it seems I have, since he's taken his prot request to the article's talk page... —Jeremy (v^_^v Carl Johnson) 17:30, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Kitco Metals page
You deleted the page I started writing about Kitco Metals co. (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kitco_Metals,_Inc.&action=edit&redlink=1) I am in no way affiliated with Kitco Metals. I am interested in researching the company however because I want to know about its financial state. Why did you delete the article without engaging in any discussion? I posted a rationale on the talk page. You should seek consensus before deleting. My comment was that United Airlines China Airlines Cathay Pacific General Electric etc. have webpages. How do YOU get to decide which companies are notable without discussion? Mrdthree (talk) 09:57, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
- The fact an article is about a company or product is not sufficient basis to delete. Read the policy and please have the decency to restore your deletion and address your concerns about possible spam/advertising in the talk page, like every other wikipedia editor. Mrdthree (talk) 10:02, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Mrdthree#Re:Kitco Metals page -FASTILY (TALK) 20:21, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
- If you felt like the page read like an advertisement you should have posted the point on the discussion board. You should not have deleted the article. How can you explain the United Airlines website? or how can you justify not speedily deleting Motley Fool? Its not good form to bypass a discussion and speedily delete something, without answering a request for further consideration. Mrdthree (talk) 22:04, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Mrdthree#Re:Kitco Metals page -FASTILY (TALK) 20:21, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Deleted Images: File:CGIStudio lighting.jpg, File:CGIStudio materials.jpg, File:CGIStudio clouds.jpg
Hi there,
I'm the author of the Renderer_CGI_Studio Wiki page. I work for Blueskystudios, a subsidiary of 20th Century Fox, and I have authorization to use the 3 images, which are copywrighted images as part of a usual press-kit that is available for the public domain. Can you please help me with identifying what I need to do to display these images properly? I was under the assumption that I provided the necessary info to comply with Wiki guidelines for fair use.
Many thanks, Robert Cavaleri rob@blueskystudios.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cavalber (talk • contribs) 15:01, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
- If the photos are part of a PR kit and copyrighted (but you would like to make the public domain), you will need to send an email to "permissions-en@wikimedia.org" detailing the copyright status of the files. In the email, be sure to attach the documents (from the copyright holder of the photos, or from a representative) that release the photos into the public domain and give permission for the files to be used on Wikipedia. Also, be sure to provide the names of the deleted files: "File:CGIStudio lighting.jpg, File:CGIStudio materials.jpg, File:CGIStudio clouds.jpg" so that they may be restored once the email is verified by the Wikimedia permissions department. For further reading, check out WP:PERMISSION and WP:DCP. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:28, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
File:Rust.png
Hi, I have requested this file for speedy deletion for:
- It was deleted yesterday [21] "2010-08-13T02:15:53 Skier Dude (talk | contribs) deleted "File:Rust.png" (F4: Lack of licensing information)"
- It's a fake, obvious manipulated. Compare the face of the man on the left with the rest of the picture (colour, light, angle). This one Feedizzle tries to ridicule this person: Greg Rust. That wasn't his first attempt, also as IP, look at the history of the mentioned article. --Ben Ben (talk) 20:25, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Fashion blog
This user Gabyth who was blocked 31hrs, has reverted you again (he now thinks it's me who was preventing him from removing content :) Check it out Is this a bad faith edit?? I'm only concerned 'bout what YOU think about this content not him.Jrod2 (talk) 01:08, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
- Im still interested to know what your view is on that edit and if it wasnt your intention to revert his :) Jrod2 (talk) 16:30, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- Well, to be honest, this edit looks less and less like vandalism every time I look at it. I think the change "is a mainstream media organization with fashion blogs." could be improved upon, but Gabyth is removing quite the amount of spammy and WP:PEACOCK content. I'm not going to take any action now, but I'll actively monitor Fashion blog for disruption and whatnot. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:37, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of CodeCharge Studio
Howdy. Where did I go wrong in the CodeCharge Studio entry? Just trying to get it listed along with all the other myriad of proprietary and open source web development tools. We have a whole community of users ready to make appropriate updates and changes - just need it to 'stick' long enough for others to do so. Thanks. Datadoit (talk) 20:51, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Datadoit#Re:Deletion of CodeCharge Studio -FASTILY (TALK) 22:37, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Apology
I am sorry for any trouble that I caused, I swear I didn't mean to do it purposly. I enjoy editing here at Wikipedia because I've got a lot to contribute and if I'm blocked then it'll be hard to continue that. I apologize for the violations and frustrations I've put you through and I promise not to ask for help from a professional the next time I plan to do something like uploading a picture. Please accept my apology and I hope you'll remove the block threat.
- Not to worry, just don't do it again; then we won't have a problem. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:30, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
User:Benz65's uploads
You recently deleted several images uploaded by Benz65 that I had nominated for deletion which were clearly copyright violations whose source I found but I suspect the rest of his uploads, which he claims as his own, are also copyvios. If I recall correctly none have any metadata. How should they be handled? ww2censor (talk) 02:33, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- To be honest, I'm rather tempted to nuke the lot of the files under WP:CSD#F9 for good measure. I did some digging on Google, but came up empty. So assuming good faith, I think mass nominating the the files at WP:PUF is warranted. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:33, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Historicity of Jesus
Hi Fastily. I have dropped a response on the talk page [22]. Thought it might be better to drop a note to you.
.--Civilizededucationtalk 05:35, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the note. I'll have a look as soon as I have time. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 20:18, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- After dropping the link, I had gone on to make some changes to my response. Andrew c has also replied to my response and I think we are beginning to make some meaningful progress. So, it might be better if you take a look directly at the talk page instead of through the link. Thanks.
--Civilizededucationtalk 10:11, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- After dropping the link, I had gone on to make some changes to my response. Andrew c has also replied to my response and I think we are beginning to make some meaningful progress. So, it might be better if you take a look directly at the talk page instead of through the link. Thanks.
DB F7 removal from File:Buffy6x22.jpg
Hi Fastily, I was wondering why you removed {{Di-replaceable fair use}} from the file? What is shown in the image "could be adequately covered with text alone" by saying in the article exactly what is in the FUR description: After Xander stops Willow from destroying the world, he comforts her as the dark magic drains from her. Surely it fails NFCC#1?
Additionally, does it not fail NFCC#8 because "its presence [does not] significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would [not] be detrimental to that understanding." All it says in the article is "Willow tearfully breaks down in Xander's arms as the dark magic drains from her and she returns to her usual red-haired appearance. [... blah blah blah] while Xander continues to comfort Willow." A little further down the article it says, "In the DVD commentary for this episode, director James Contner says that while filming the scenes with Willow and Xander on the cliff, the wind churned up dust, which blew into Alyson Hannigan's eyes. Because of the dust, Hannigan removed her black contacts and her eyes were blackened digitally in post-production." But this image shows none of that. There is no dust blowing, and Hannigan has her eyes closed.
The image does not add anything to the article, so it should be deleted. Matthewedwards : Chat 20:42, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- It looks like you're confusing WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#8. WP:NFCC#1 applies only when a non-free file is replaceable by a free file that conveys the same meaning. File:Buffy6x22.jpg does not fail WP:NFCC#1 because it portrays fictional characters in a copyrighted television series. On the other hand, the file may fail WP:NFCC#8, as a file that does not significantly add to the reader's understanding in the context of the article. While I pass no judgment on your interpretation as to whether this file does fail WP:NFCC#8, I encourage you not to tag the file with {{subst:dnfcc|8=yes}} at this time. Because this is the only image in the article and because it is in the infobox, this can be an extremely controversial nomination. If you still believe the file fails WP:NFCC#8, I encourage you to nominate the file at WP:FFD. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:35, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- WP:NFCC#1 states, "Can this non-free content be replaced by a free version that has the same effect?" and "Could the subject be adequately conveyed by text without using the non-free content at all?" If the answer to either is yes, the non-free content probably does not meet this criterion.) since it can, using the words, "After Xander stops Willow from destroying the world, he comforts her as the dark magic drains from her" NFCC 1 does indeed apply, and there is no exception that I can see for characters of a copyrighted show. NFCC 3a says minimal useage. Both the Willow and Xander character arcticles have images of the characters, both articles are linked to from the episode article, so if a reader must know what those characters look like, they can go to those pages. Matthewedwards : Chat 14:16, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'm really not sure how better to put this, so apologies in advance for being blunt. Carefully read the first sentence of WP:NFCC#1 you yourself cite above: "Can this non-free content be replaced by a free version that has the same effect?". If WP:NFCC#1 does indeed apply, then you have just openly declared that a freely licensed version of a copyrighted television program can be easily obtained. If that is indeed the case, do tell me how to find such a free screenshot because currently none exist for any non-free television show. I'm not even going to start to correct your interpretation of WP:NFCC#3a, which outright doesn't apply to this case. Now on the other hand, WP:NFCC#8 may apply, but because this is an infobox image covered in the context of the article, declaring WP:NFCC#8 is barely valid. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 16:22, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- WP:NFCC#1 states, "Can this non-free content be replaced by a free version that has the same effect?" and "Could the subject be adequately conveyed by text without using the non-free content at all?" If the answer to either is yes, the non-free content probably does not meet this criterion.) since it can, using the words, "After Xander stops Willow from destroying the world, he comforts her as the dark magic drains from her" NFCC 1 does indeed apply, and there is no exception that I can see for characters of a copyrighted show. NFCC 3a says minimal useage. Both the Willow and Xander character arcticles have images of the characters, both articles are linked to from the episode article, so if a reader must know what those characters look like, they can go to those pages. Matthewedwards : Chat 14:16, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Article I am Creating
Hi,
I am creating a wikipedia article about the online flight simulation community- Boston Virtual ATC. I have done hours of research and added many reliable sources. The only thing I am afraid of is being punished for advertising (which in fact I am not) due to the mass of informaiton I have put together in my extensive research. I do not want to hurt my so far good reputation on wikipedia and completely depleat my chance of becoming an admintrator. What do you think I should do? This article is a lot of hard work. Thanks Tofutwitch11 (talk) 02:08, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- I think you sound like you're looking for a way to post an article, get some constructive criticism and some help editing. I recommend you create a subpage in your userspace, post the draft article there, and request feedback and editorial help on the draft article at WP:RFF. This way, even if the article is "blatant spam", it will avoid being deleted as such. That being said, I'll leave you with some policy/guideline pages that you may find helpful in drafting your article: WP:ADS, WP:GNG, WP:MOS, WP:YFA, WP:NPOV, WP:V. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:18, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Okay, Thanks. When I get it up can I show it to you for your feedback? Im almost done with it, should be up in a few days. Cheers. tofutwitch11 T. C. 12:01, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- Certainly. I'd be happy to look it over and give you a few pointers. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 16:23, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Image deletion
Hey Fastily, a few weeks ago, i uploaded the following image "File:Qalawun.png", and it was marked on speedy deletion, it seems that most of the images i upload, and which ALL have been taken by myself, are being deleted, due to incorrect license... can you please help me with this, since iv asked several people who deleted my images, and they didnt seem to bother answering my question...
"WHAT IS THE CORRECT LICENSE FOR IMAGES THAT I HAVE TAKES FOR MONUMENTS, OR HISTORICAL SITES, OR NATURAL SITES."
thank you for your time... cheers Arab League User (talk) 08:02, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- Copy and paste a tag from Wikipedia:File_copyright_tags#For_image_creators. It's just that simple :) -FASTILY (TALK) 16:25, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Sentencing Council page
Hi there, I created a page for the Sentencing Council for England and Wales last week as it is newly established and needs to feature as part of the UK government/legal system. It's been deleted due to potential copyright issues, but as I am "within the system" this is not an issue and I have the authorisation of the organisational head. Can this page be restored please? SCcomms (talk) 08:53, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- Please see WP:DCP and Wikipedia:DCP#Granting_us_permission_to_copy_material_already_online. Essentially, due to licensing issues (all text on Wikipedia is licensed under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL licenses), you will have to release the text under a free license for it to be valid on Wikipedia. -FASTILY (TALK) 16:29, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Nice work
|
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
| For your continued and diligent attention to the Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Confirmed board, please accept this as a small token of my appreciation. –xenotalk 18:38, 16 August 2010 (UTC) |
More IPs from our prolific sockpuppeteer
Here for context: User_talk:Fastily/Archive_5#Welcome_Back.21.
These are two that just popped up today, after the blocking of a couple of other user accounts: 4.226.60.100 and 4.90.3.123. Majorclanger (talk) 19:44, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Little Jimmy's Italian Ice
Maybe that should be salted? That's the fourth time it's been created and deleted.—Chowbok ☠ 20:15, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- Although yes, the page was deleted yesterday, it was recreated almost a year ago prior to the last recreation. I don't think there is enough ongoing disruption at the moment to warrant create-protection. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:35, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Please restore this page
You seem to have accidentally deleted an administrative page here--MacRusgail (talk) 22:21, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
TFD Holding cell
It would be great if you could drop a link to templates in WP:TFD/H before you delete them at WP:TFD (or after you delete them). This will allow them to be orphaned to avoid dangling red links to the old deleted template. For example, like this. Thanks for your help closing discussions! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:38, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, I figured there was something more to just deleting and marking discussions closed. I'll keep that in mind for future reference. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:37, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Clerking
What is clerking on the UAA? Is it something I can do as an editor? Joe Gazz84 (user)•(talk)•(contribs) 20:51, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- Clerking is currently a proposed concept, undergoing discussion at WT:UAA. And yes, this is something that you as an editor can participate in. While there is no formal position for "clerking" UAA at the moment, normal editors are encouraged to review reports and make comments at WP:UAA. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:40, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you, is there a template I should add to make a "clerk" note? Joe Gazz84 (user)•(talk)•(contribs) 19:54, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Infobox TransLink (SEQ) train station
The TfD arguments for keeping {{Infobox TransLink (SEQ) train station}} were very weak; I suggest that it should have been re-listed for further discussion, rather than closed as no consensus. Please reconsider. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 01:42, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
- Indeed. But no consensus is no consensus. I agree that further discussion could be helpful, but I believe it's too late to open up the now archived and closed discussion. If you like, you can renominate the file - if anyone gives you a hard time about renominating, send them to me. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 17:01, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Durgapur Xpressway
Hi, I sent permission mail on 3rd aug 2010, Please forward me your mail id, I will send you complete mail chain between me, author and wikipedia. So that its confirm that is not any copyvio or anything else and you can restore the File:Durgapur Xpressway.jpg file.(leave a talkback) KuwarOnline Talk 06:21, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
- When permission is received via OTRS, the file will automatically be restored. But sure, I'll ask an OTRS member to look into it. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:03, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks KuwarOnline Talk 04:01, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Template:Infobox UK power station
Hi, Fastily. Could you please restore the code and documentation of the Template:Infobox UK power station at my user page? There are still some fields which should be added to the Template:Infobox power station and it would be help if I see the original code and documentation for this purpose. Thank you. Beagel (talk) 09:18, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, no need for this. I fixed main fields, still needs fixing some minor fields but it could be done case by case. Beagel (talk) 10:20, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Image Deletion
You deleted an image from the Just Marketing International page - I have asked for assistance previously as this is my image and I tried to show this on numerous occasions.
I found this process to be rather confusing, and would really appreciate some advice so I can upload my image onto the page so it doesn't get deleted.
many thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tbampton (talk • contribs) 12:05, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
- Per Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria #10, all non-free files must bear a license tag, otherwise, they are eligible for deletion within 7 days of being flagged under speedy deletion criterion F4. Since your file is a logo, the correct tag to use would be "{{non-free logo}}". If you still feel you need the file in the article, re-upload the file and copy+paste "{{non-free logo}}" anywhere on the file description page. Be sure to include fair-use rationale as well. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:08, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
geoland2 article
You have recently deleted an article I created on geoland2 and I would like to understand the reason. Following the warning received on the initial entry of the article I tried to rewrite the article and remove anything that might be considered as advertising. Regarding the content and structure I took similar articles as guideline: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MyOcean http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-MOSAIC These are two projects that are part of GMES just like geoland2 and they each have an entry in Wikipedia. geoland2 is also refered to in the GMES article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GMES
Thanks for your advise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by World of Radar (talk • contribs) 12:24, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:World of Radar#Re:geoland2 article -FASTILY (TALK) 17:09, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Hey,
I'm trying to understand why my page was deleted. I don't really understand the copyright infringement since everything written was an autobiography? If you could explain it to me so I can make sure my page does violate any copyrights and such that would be gratly appreciated! Thanks so much for your help and I hope to hear from you soon!
Oh! If I do fix my page to make sure its appropriate, can I get it running again?
Thanks!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robinrotman (talk • contribs) 15:00, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
- I deleted the page not only because it was apparently a copyright violation, but also because it was self-promotional in nature and apparently a hoax article. Right off the bat, the article satisfied 3 speedy deletion criteria, namely G3, G11, and G12. I advise you not to repost the article as, it is likely it will be deleted again. Your contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but I think you would help serve the project better by focusing on another topic to write. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 17:13, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Images with potential copyright issues
Hello, can you review these images and their histories? [23] If my memory is correct, these images previously existed and were deleted for copyright issues and have been re-uploaded by the user. Thanks! Active Banana ( bananaphone 17:42, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
- Those are resposted copyvios alright. I've deleted everything except for File:Chenglei.jpg; the uploader neither asserted a free license nor did he assert self-copyright. If that changes however, I'll delete the file. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 17:48, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you! Active Banana ( bananaphone 18:23, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
User:MichaelJackson231 Rollback
Hey, a user you recently gave rollback rights to, User talk:MichaelJackson231 has been behaving as if he doesn't understand various policies, and has been edit warring with User:Active banana over sourcing tags and the like. Example: [24]. Mind taking a look at his contribs if you have a chance? Falcon8765 (talk) 17:55, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
- Mmm. Shame. I left MichaelJackson231 a note and a 3rr warning. Thanks for letting me know. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 18:01, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
- You're welcome, I thought you'd like to know and someone needed to look regardless. Additionally, discussion about the issue was attempted in on his talk page but was removed. Falcon8765 (talk) 18:04, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Deleted Gregory P. Sheehan
Could you point out what makes this latest draft unambiguous advertising? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phanoflife (talk • contribs) 18:20, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
- Certainly, almost the entire article is unambiguous advertising. You are welcome to resubmit the article, but please ensure that it is compliant with WP:ADS, WP:MOS, WP:COI, WP:GNG, WP:V, WP:NPOV. You may also find WP:YFA and WP:RFF helpful. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:37, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Lesson 3
Feel free to read over my latest additions. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:21, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Apology
I noticed another warning from you and again I apologize for what I did. Please don't block me I will stop.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Josh Rumage (talk • contribs)
- Hi Josh. This was left on your talk page by another editor, Jojhutton. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:38, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Fir Tex
Hi Fastily, I've been checking my watchlist and have just found that FIR TEX has been deleted. It was deleted under G11, which surprised me. I really don't think it was 'unambiguous', I did try to comply with WP:NPOV and also tried to reference it well. While I appreciate there was a primary source problem, I really don't think that the text (or tone) was promotional. Could you please userfy it (with a more detailed explanation of what was wrong with the text.) Thanks,Acather96 (talk) 20:14, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
- I've restored it to the mainspace. I think it's fine if you just improve the article where it is. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:40, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, will do Acather96 (talk) 06:22, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Indefinite logarithm
Various Wikipedia articles such as logarithmic scale point to an indefinite logarithm article, which was deleted, so I could not consult it. Judging by the way in which the indefinite logarithm was used in the other articles, I have the impression that it is a very useful concept (simple but definitely nontrivial), and the deletion appears misguided. What can be done about this? Boute (talk) 02:49, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- The article was deleted via the PROD process after it was flagged for deletion for 7 days by R.e.b.. Since this was a non-controversial deletion, I can restore the page for you, but I would recommend working on the article in your userspace first before moving it back to the articlespace, lest it should be AFD'd. Up to you. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:55, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Again?
I've been questioned offline as to whether I should try for adminship again. You were one of the early opposers last time. What do you think? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:22, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'll support you this time. I did a quick check and found nothing concerning. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:08, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Margaret Ayers
Margaret Ayers needs ALOT of work. Would it be appropriated to delete the material that is for sure wrong(most of the article), or should I place a tag on it? thanks--intelati 04:28, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- I recommend you attempt to salvage the article if possible. Otherwise, nominate the article at WP:AFD or just WP:PROD tag it. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:09, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Response to warning.
I have read your warning on the Cash Peters page. I simply made a request - I'm not sure a warning was in order. However, I won't contribute further, which is a shame because what I wrote was good and true and I thought would be useful. I genuinely saw myself as a valuable contributor.
I did have to make one amendment to that page, though, since someone had gone in and added a defamatory paragraph about Cash Peters selling photographs of his honeymoon to Hello Magazine. That needed deleting.
Thanks. Sorry to have bothered you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Monkeynuts54 (talk • contribs) 05:34, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- I warned you per a request filed at WP:RFPP. I'll pass no judgment at the moment as to whether your edits were appropriate or not, but I recommend you try to work with those other editors rather than argue with them or go against them. Let me know if you have any other questions. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:42, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Fastily. You recently deleted a bulk of my F2 nominations. Out of the whole deletion log that showed up on my watchlist, only this particular file showed red. And cannot be opened (no file showing). Perhaps it was a deletion mistake? Or a tagging mistake by me that led to your accidental push of the wrong button? :) Kind regards. Rehman(+) 12:09, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm not sure what happened there. Anyways, file restored. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:30, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Fastily,
I came across your talk page when I was trying to look up the Aloha Editor, which does not have an entry but a deleted page. To me this seems a bit sad, as I am a university teacher at 4 universities teachting IT-strategy and other similar stuff, and explaining why typo3, drupal, midgard and other os products now build in Aloha replacing the previous editors, and comparable editors like TinyMCE or CK editor do have entries, is difficult. I came accross the editor because the smashingmagazine listed it amongst the top 50 web tools recently.
I cannot see what was (not?) in the Aloha page, but maybe you deleted the page because of missing information or wrong type of text - in this case I would be prepared to help to make it a proper page, no issue. Please check my profile in doubt, I am not writing much, but hopefully rather well ;-).
Thanks for considering. Cheerio, Isabella Othertwice1504 (talk) 13:37, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- I deleted the page due to its highly promotional nature, which, per our policy on advertising/spam is prohibited. I would be more than happy to restore the page for you in your userspace as a draft if you'd be willing to bring it up to standard. How does that sound? Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:35, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, well, that sounds like a good idea, especially then there is time off site so I can make it a proper entry. Great, thanks. I go collect information meanwhile. Regards, Isabella Othertwice1504 (talk) 19:44, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- And Done at User:Othertwice1504/Aloha Editor. Feel free to move the page back to the articlespace when you're ready. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:46, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Grand, thanks. Othertwice1504 (talk) 20:24, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Before I move the page back to articlespace I was wondering if you would mind to have a brief look whether it is good enough already? Mainly took TinyMCE and CKEditor pages for reference. Would appreciate your feedback. Thanks. Othertwice1504 (talk) 00:41, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 18:43, 18 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
--HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:44, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Uploads
Hello, I just wanted you to know that I uploaded a few pictures today and I think I did a good job with the categorization and giving credit to the proper sources. If however my thoughts are wrong I kindly ask of you not to block me but to consider it as a simple mistake should things go astray.
- I had a look. Your uploads are looking better. I see you have added a license tag, but since you have tagged the files as non-free, you will also need to include a fair use rationale for each image (otherwise, your files may be deleted under speedy deletion criterion F6. For an example of what constitutes a good fair use rationale, see File:Rorschach500px.PNG. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:15, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Yummy
Fetchcomms 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}}!
You even cleared out the prod category, too. Wow. —fetch·comms 00:48, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks and...
Thank you for your input, I added the fair-use rationals in the summary I couldn't actually place it within the slot for where the picture appears. Out of curiosity, if they get tagged for deletion is there a way you could possibly save what pictures I've uploaded and submit a newer version since you are more of an expert at this then I am?
- I think you may have misunderstood what I was trying to say. Not to worry, I figured it would be more helpful if I fixed up a file for you and let you use that as an example. See File:Sylvia-sidney-1934.jpg. And, to answer your question, yes, if a file is tagged for deletion, you may remove the deletion tag iff you fix the problem the tag identifies. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 02:21, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
User and usertalk redirect
Perhaps you will fix this redirect whereby User:Jmlnarik01's page and talk page are redirecting to the Rhino Rack article and its talk page. The article looks distinctly like advertising to me so I have tagged it as such. I could cut and paste the talk page contents back to his talk page and undo the redirect to his userpage but the history would not be preserved. TIA. ww2censor (talk) 02:23, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank You!
Thank you so much for getting me going with that, I went back to all the pictures I uploaded and I added those rationales. I really appreciate your help with that! Now I'll know what to do the next time I upload and have to add a Non-fair use rationale. You've been so great and helpful! Thank you and God bless!
- No Problem!! I'm just happy to have been able to help. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 04:22, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
I have not reviewed their unblock request, but have commented upon it. I would like your feedback on the idea of banning Whitmore from interacting with Eaglestorm, as he has been clashing with him since March, over 5 months ago. As their clash included Whitmore committing personal attacks, edit warring on talk pages, countless edit warring on articles in the "Metal Gear" topic, and even sockpuppetry, I think an interaction ban would be beneficial as it would mean less wasted editing and administrative time. Additionally, as they promised in an unblock request back in March; they stated they would avoid the area of conflict (OldID link) and clearly have not done so, thus perhaps formal restrictions would help. Thanks for your time, --Taelus (Talk) 17:56, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- That sounds like a reasonable proposal. I agree much time and effort could be saved if these two weren't constantly going head-to-head. If you like, I'll gladly help you draft a proposal at WP:AN/WP:ANI. Just let me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:39, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- Actually never mind, I extended it to an indef block as their 3rd unblock request was an "I QUIT" followed by personal attacks against involved admins and users. It's clear they aren't compatible with the project with such a mentality, and especially as the grudge with Eaglestorm has spanned several blocks and 5 months now. --Taelus (Talk) 13:48, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- Don't forget his conflict as an anon from December 09 to last March. You guys ought to lock that down too, but it's your call RE rangeblock. I'm thinking about humming the Nananana, hey goodbye song, but we have endured enough crap from that guy, have we? this is a stickup!. Back to your regular editing... --Eaglestorm (talk) 14:16, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- Actually never mind, I extended it to an indef block as their 3rd unblock request was an "I QUIT" followed by personal attacks against involved admins and users. It's clear they aren't compatible with the project with such a mentality, and especially as the grudge with Eaglestorm has spanned several blocks and 5 months now. --Taelus (Talk) 13:48, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
image deletion
Hi Fastily,
I'm wondering why my image was deleted? I uploaded two images to use for the "Mark Pilkington (writer)" article, and each was licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0, as was specified by myself on Wikipedia, as well as the Flickr source page. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/12687061@N05/4905635636/) The second image I uploaded to replace the first was a differently cropped version. The file is MarkPilkington.JPG.
Please can you let me know why you deleted it, and if I can re-upload it?
Thanks, Colonelnut (talk) 23:16, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Colonelnut. Unfortunately, there is a blanket ban on any Creative Commons NC license. Such files are subject to on-sight deletion under speedy deletion criterion F3. Unless you can have the license of the file on flickr changed, the file cannot be reuploaded to Wikipedia. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:07, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Fastily, Thanks very much for that helpful explanation. The license of the image has changed on the flickr page to CC Attribution-ShareAlike, and I reuploaded it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mark_Pilkington.jpg#file I'm not sure if this is the correct place to query this, but I linked the article to this new image, and it doesn't seem to be appearing on the article...? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Pilkington_%28writer%29 Thanks in advance for any advice, Colonelnut (talk) 15:45, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- The license looks better. As for the image not rendering, it looks like you had an issue with capitalization. Not to worry however, I've gone ahead and fixed it. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 16:06, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Fastily!! Very kind of you :)
Colonelnut (talk) 16:21, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Unblock request of 67.169.68.203
Hello Fastily. 67.169.68.203 (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, - Vianello (Talk) 00:02, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily, did you miss this request? This block needs to be undone, and apologized for. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'm getting to that right now. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:22, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- If you are incapable of recognizing and admitting your mistakes, you should consider resigning your admin bit, or at least refrain from blocking. Or, at the very least, consider not blatantly lying while defending your mistakes. --Floquenbeam (talk) 03:01, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- Paha, you are sorely mistaken if you believe I have a problem admitting my mistakes; just have a look around my talk page. For the record, I would have unblocked and profusely apologized a long time ago if I had thought I was mistaken. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 04:12, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- You've apologized for citing vandalism, which I appreciate, but now your block hinges on incivility. The bar for blocking is "persistent gross incivility." I really don't think saying "bots are brainless but you have a brain so use it" a couple times counts! Warnings seem better before blocking for this level of incivility. Please reconsider. ErikHaugen (talk) 18:21, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- Paha, you are sorely mistaken if you believe I have a problem admitting my mistakes; just have a look around my talk page. For the record, I would have unblocked and profusely apologized a long time ago if I had thought I was mistaken. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 04:12, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- If you are incapable of recognizing and admitting your mistakes, you should consider resigning your admin bit, or at least refrain from blocking. Or, at the very least, consider not blatantly lying while defending your mistakes. --Floquenbeam (talk) 03:01, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'm getting to that right now. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:22, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
the mediocre show deleted?
5 years of broadcasting and you don't consider MAXIM magazine a source? but PLENTY of other smaller shows, and short term BS have wiki pages.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mediocre_Show
please explain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmxthug (talk • contribs) 15:16, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- The page was deleted per the WP:PROD process. I'll restore the page for you, provided that you actively work on bringing the article up to standard. Can you commit to that? -FASTILY (TALK) 16:08, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
sure, we'll get several people working on it. what was not up to standard?
Bmxthug (talk) 17:10, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- I have restored the page. The main concerns with the page were that it "[did] not appear to pass WP:WEB, [and had] no reliable sources". -FASTILY (TALK) 23:54, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
The Mediocre Show
Hi,
I was just wondering why you deleted the page for the mediocre show? They have been broadcasting for 5 years now and have over 300 shows recorded.
Web: www.mediocreshow.com
Regards,
Jonas N
- I've replied above at #the mediocre show deleted?. -FASTILY (TALK) 16:08, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Dear administrator,
I wanted to ask you about the article on Lida Clementisová, which has been deleted by you for the reason that "no other notability asserted other than she was the wife of a prominent politician". This claim is questionable and I would like to give you just few examples of persons like Jackie Kennedy, Betty Ford, Elena Ceausescu, Raisa Gorbachova, Sarah Brown or recently Samantha Cameron which "made it" to wikipedia, even though their biggest merits are to have been/to be wives of powerful/great men.
Mrs. Clementisova was an important and relevant historical figure in Czechoslovakia and also a suggestive generic case for many women - wives of politicians (more or less prominent) or forgotten women artists - living in the course of history. Moreover, Lida Clementisova her story, her letters and her activism meant a lot for local culture and society.
I spent a lot of time researching on the subject, looking through archives, books, documents in order to "restore", reconstruct, find out about her life and activities. The article featured references (most of them from printed books, in Slovak or Czech language). Unfortunately no, or very few and poor, records in English are available on her. That is why the article on Wikipedia has been an attempt to fill this void and to motivate eventual editors, historians and archivists to complete, correct, edit and work on the information/text.
The relevance of a person is subjective. Popularity does not necessarily has to be substantial, it is circumstantial and does not legitimate an encyclopedical entry.
I would like to kindly ask you to reconsider your deletion if possible. Thank you.
chitka
- The article was deleted per the PROD process. I'll restore the page for you, provided that you will actively work on bringing the article up to standard. Can you commit? -FASTILY (TALK) 16:09, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
thank you, i will "actively" do my best to improve the article.
thanks a lot!
why so much difficulty?
Hello,
I've noticed you and one of your colleagues keeps deleting the posts made by The Madinah Institute for Leadership & Entrepreneurship. This is a non-profit organization that is attempting to make itself known on your site. Why do you keep deleting its information? Even Harvard has a big page where it shows off to the world on your site. Please assist us in getting the right entry on your site so you don't keep blocking it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.235.73.20 (talk) 17:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- the reason is that Wikipedia is not an advertising firm if we allow one company to advertise, everyone would want to advertise. this is the reason for the rule. thanks--intelati 17:29, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Not a vandal
Hey -FASTILY (TALK) , my goal is not to disrupt or vandalize wikipedia at all... But I think I have the right to say what I think of people trying to destroy pages I created if I don't use profanity, which I didn't... I think those deletionists should live with the consequences of their acts: that people will be angry and will let them know Terveetkadet (talk) 20:37, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Deletion request
Please delete User:MPEGLA/vector.js as a broken redirect and a subpage of a banned user. Thanks! —Train2104 (talk · contribs · count · email) 21:24, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Illinois Senate election, 2010
I have a new request.--Jerzeykydd (talk) 00:14, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Jerzeykydd. What is it you would like to inquire on with regards to Illinois Senate elections, 2010? -FASTILY (TALK) 00:39, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- No, I mean the United States Senate election in Illinois, 2010. I put it on the Wikipedia:Requests for page protection.--Jerzeykydd (talk) 01:03, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- Gotcha. Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:12, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- Gotcha.
- No, I mean the United States Senate election in Illinois, 2010. I put it on the Wikipedia:Requests for page protection.--Jerzeykydd (talk) 01:03, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Question
I am going to retype the Ganley article in my own words, but i don't want it to get deleted again. The user who tagged it for speedy deletion said it was not notable, however Ganley has featured extensively in the media on his campaign for congress and is one of largest Cleveland employers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ak169808 (talk • contribs) 00:34, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- Please, feel free to repost in your own words. Copy+Pates of text from other websites are usually prohibited, due mainly to the way Wikipedia is licensed. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:41, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Protected pages, minor edits, gaming the system, disruptive editing, wikilawyering and pettifoggery
Hi. I edited the "United States Senate Elections in Illinois" page when the Libertarian Candidate, Mike Labno gained ballot access. I put his picture in the "Major Candidate photos section of the page. This edit was undone repeatedly bu another editor based on an apparently unwritten rule that he failed to mention and refused to cite that states that a candidate has to have poll numbers higher than 5% to appear there. I'm not trying to be daft in any way, but the inability to cite an unwritten rule when enforcing it repeatedly over a period of three days seems like wikilawyering.
The fact is that there are four candidates that will appear on the ballot for US senator in Illiois. There are only three listed on the page. You protected a page after what I genuinely belive is an attempt at gaming the system. Not only the wikipedia system, but the American politcal system.
I would appreciate it if you would consider protecting the page in the name of historical accuracy instead of political manipulation.
There are four candidates on the Illinois ballot. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections_in_Illinois,_2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ejmarten (talk • contribs) 02:03, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- First of all, it's semi protected, which means that you are still allowed to edit the page. The 5% is a rule based on due process (hundreds of previous election articles).--Jerzeykydd (talk) 03:12, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Replace the TweetUp Page You Deleted
Please repost the entire TweetUp page you deleted as it did not violate the G11 policy. Every claim was sourced by a reputable news source. At least tell me what you found so offensive. Please do not just delete my comment off your page again. Additionally, how is it in any different than Twitter's page, Seesmic's page, TweetDeck's page or any other company out there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.76.2.200 (talk) 01:34, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- By any chance, are you the same person as User:Jamiebelsky? It would help me better respond to your query if you could identify yourself first. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:46, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Yes I am, sorry for not signing user talk:Jamiebelsky —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.76.2.200 (talk) 23:06, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Taking folks literally
One way to do it. I support your action here. EdJohnston (talk) 02:16, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
I think that 6 and 7 in the support column are the best ones there :P All the best,--White Shadows Nobody said it was easy 03:45, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Jason Chase Article
I see you recently deleted the newspaper article from the Milton Canadian Champion on Jason Chase. The article was written by a friend who works for the local paper and was the one who told me i could add it to my page on wikipedia. I dont see how it is copyright when I have permission to put it up from the author of the story. I would appreaciate it if you revoked the deletion, but if there is nothing you can do it is ok. Seeing as it is a story on Jason Chase i assumed i could put it on his page, him being a part of Maximum Pro Wrestling as one of the wrestlers. Thank you and take this into consideration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.39.214.240 (talk) 03:48, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- I removed the page per licensing issues. Because of the way Wikipedia is licensed/copyrighted (CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL), any text posted to Wikipedia must be licensed under the same license, or a less restrictive license (e.g. Public Domain). If you can get the copyright of your friend's article changed to match Wikipedia's license or release it under a less restrictive license, you are free to repost the text. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:54, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Reviewer Status
Hi Fastily, thanks for granting me reviewer status :) IainUK talk 06:50, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Changes to FNZ page
Hi there
I am trying to make my page about FNZ compliant and my understanding was that i had to source some of the information with some reasonable and credible sources of information.
I have now edited my page and would like to put it live on wikipedia, but would like to check that this is now possible.
Please see page below with sources of information, please can you let me know if this is ok?
FNZ Wikipedia Document
Overview –
FNZ specialise in providing (wrap) Platform technology and business services to the financial, distribution and investment sectors across the world; empowering their customers to build and provide bespoke Platform products and services for their clients. (www.fnz.com/aboutus.html)
FNZ powers wealth management Platforms for financial advisers, direct customers and the workplace in the UK, Australia and New Zealand. (http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=47393172)
Their customers leverage core front and back-office services to create their own customised Platform.
History -
FNZ has evolved from a start-up business in 2002, to a global company that administers over £12 billion of assets on behalf of over 300,000 end-customers in the UK, Australia and New Zealand (as at August 2010).
Originally created as a business unit within the New Zealand branch of investment bank Credit Suisse, FNZ managed to secure a number of large institutional providers of investment platforms in New Zealand, and following a management buy-out of the First NZ Capital Group (formerly Credit Suisse), expanded its operations to the UK. (http://www.highnetworth-online.com/news/fullstory.php/aid/253/FNZ_eyes_burgeoning_UK_platform_market.html) The company is majority owned by its employees and is also backed by H.I.G. Capital, a global private equity firm which has over $8.5 billion of capital under management. (http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/business/Software-group-buyout-secures-.4909735.jp) Today, FNZ now employs over 340 technology and investment operations specialists across Europe and Australasia, primarily in Edinburgh, Sydney and Wellington (as at August 2010).
A Snapshot of FNZ Clients –
FNZ have delivered and power Platform solutions for the following customers across the globe:
• Standard Life • AXA • J.P. Morgan • Friends Provident • AMP • Bank of New Zealand • ING • ANZ Bank • First NZ Capital • NAB
(http://citywire.co.uk/wealth-manager/major-admin-provider-fnz-to-enter-wealth-management-market/a418132) http://www.moneymarketing.co.uk/news/private-equity-buys-standard-and-axas-wrap-provider-fnz/179686.article
Awards related to FNZ -
• FNZ was listed in the ‘Forrester Report’ as one of the ‘Hot Tech’ companies to watch in 2010. • Standard Life’s platform, powered by FNZ, was awarded the FTRC ‘eee’ rating for four years in a row, the only UK Platform to have achieved this. (http://ukgroup.standardlife.com/content/news/new_articles/2008/automated_account_swift.xml) • AXA’s Elevate platform, powered by FNZ, received the FTRC ‘eee’ rating in its first year of launch, as well as winning the ‘best newcomer’ award. (http://www.elevateplatform.co.uk/) • AXA’s Elevate Platform was also awarded the 5-star rating, by Defaqto. (http://www.axa.co.uk/media-centre/media-releases/news-story?id=20100803_0800)
• AXA’s Elevate has been accredited with Excellence in Customer Experience, a benchmark across all industries globally. (http://www.elevateplatform.co.uk)
What is a (Wrap) Platform?
Wrap is a combination of a web-based technology Platform and an investment service provided to advisers and investors to support a new model for advice and distribution. It delivers the following key elements: • Aggregation of all investments and products (tax wrappers such as pensions) into a single customer view of their portfolio. The single customer view provides real-time consolidated asset allocation, valuation, performance reporting and analysis; • An online financial planning process that includes fact-find, risk questionnaire, lifetime asset / liability modelling, asset allocation and financial plan generation. The ability to provide regular reviews to the investor against this plan so they can track how they are progressing over time towards the achievement of their financial goals; • Single point online access to purchase, sell and rebalance a wide range of investment products. Behind the scenes the platform provider interacts with fund managers, banks, product providers and stockbrokers to trade, settle and administer the assets as custodian (bare trustee); • CRM capability for the financial adviser to manage all of their customers and their portfolios • Business management tools for the financial adviser to manage their business. Wrap Platforms often facilitate a transition from packaged products to open architecture and from bundled to unbundled pricing, both of which are technology intensive and facilitated via wrap platforms.
Alasdairmunro (talk) 15:38, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- I hate to tell you this, but your article is still quite promotional in nature. On top of that, you will need to cite your sources with inline citations. I recommend you take a look at WP:YFA and WP:WIZ for instructions on how to write an article that will meet Wikipedia's standards. If those two links won't work for you, feel free to let me know and we can explore other options. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:57, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
You protected the above-named article this morning, claiming "excessive vandalism". I can't find a single instance of vandalism in the recent edit history. I'd appreciate if you could explain your action and try to assume good faith in future. Thanks. – Hysteria18 (Talk • Contributions) 16:15, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- It's vandalism because they gave no reason to revert my edits.--Jerzeykydd (talk) 18:11, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- So I guess this is vandalism too? (It's not, don't worry.) Whereabouts in the relevant policy is editing without giving a reason specified as a type of vandalism? (The answer is "nowhere".) – Hysteria18 (Talk • Contributions) 18:37, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- What is going on here? As an editor who I've worked with in the past, I trusted Jerzeykydd's word. If the edits made by IPs really are not vandalism, I need to know now so I can unprotect the page. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:50, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- Can you not use your own judgement? The question is whether adding a fourth candidate to the infobox constitutes "a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia." In my view it clearly doesn't, and the page should be unprotected. – Hysteria18 (Talk • Contributions) 18:57, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- Sometimes it is vandalism, I've seen it happen before. Anyhow,
Unprotected. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:00, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. – Hysteria18 (Talk • Contributions) 19:05, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- Sometimes it is vandalism, I've seen it happen before. Anyhow,
- Can you not use your own judgement? The question is whether adding a fourth candidate to the infobox constitutes "a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia." In my view it clearly doesn't, and the page should be unprotected. – Hysteria18 (Talk • Contributions) 18:57, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- What is going on here? As an editor who I've worked with in the past, I trusted Jerzeykydd's word. If the edits made by IPs really are not vandalism, I need to know now so I can unprotect the page. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:50, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
iPhone 3GS colors?
Why'd you delete my iPhone 3GS Colors.jpg image? I'm new to uploading images and all, but I really don't get why it was deleted. I'm using it under fair use.
Justinxtreme (talk) 20:46, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- You uploaded a non-free file when freely licensed files that illustrate the same subject are available. Per WP:NFCC#1, non-free files replaceable by freely licensed media files are subject to deletion within two days of being flagged. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:02, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Ystradgynlais 10 Newport 9
Why did you delete ths page?
It was the biggest day in Ystradgynlais RFC's History?
Did I do something wrong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shakeygynlais (talk • contribs) 21:58, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- It wasn't clear what you were trying to convey, to the point where it appeared to be nonsense. You are welcome of course, to resubmit the page, but ensure that it is comprehensible content, not a random mass of text. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 02:04, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
PROD deletion of Wen Qiang
Hi. Just to let you know, the article was not a BLP. The subject was excecuted. The article on the person was likely created for said reason, and also for the corruption charges and the fact that this was the excecution of a high-ranking official. ~AH1(TCU) 01:06, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- Hi AstroHurricane001. Would you be interested in bringing the article up to standard if I restore it? Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:41, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Stanley Burrell
In case you were wondering about this, see Wikipedia talk:Twinkle#CSD#F9; this is not the first time it's caused confusion for me. :) Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:57, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- Come on man, I expect you of all people to know F9 better than that, especially after what we've been through! :P Best, FASTILY (TALK) 01:59, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
I know, but when you look at something right there in front of you in print, and you've seen it several times through the interface, it will still be confusing. :( Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:17, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
kingqueen
would like to resubmit proper artist page, with reference material that shows significance and notability. simple google search does bring up notability but will include in article for administrators.
Andrewcurryla (talk) 02:09, 21 August 2010 (UTC)andrewcurryla
- Go for it. Just be sure your addition is complaint with WP:ADS, WP:MOS, WP:V, WP:NPOV, WP:GNG. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:51, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Reverting Question
Hello, I noticed you do some anti-vandalism work around here, so I thought you'd be a good person to ask.
When I'm reverting vandalism, on occasions I come across several vandalistic edits that were made by a single user. Everytime I undo or use popups to revert an edit I see, it doesn't revert all the edits. For example, look at the recent history of Jonas L.A.. IP 24.154.60.137 vandalized the article by deleting its contents, so I reverted it. After that, the IP vandalized it again twice in a row, but my revert only reverted the previous edit and not the other, so I had to manually copy a clean version of the article and paste it in another edit and save it to ensure everything was back to normal. Hope this isn't too confusing.
Basically, I'm asking if there's a way to get around this so I don't have to manually clean up and article as it's time consuming. Thanks.
— Xcalizorz (talk) 06:10, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) What I do (without resorting to huggle, twinkle or popups) is to go the history, get a diff of all the suspect edits and revert the batch. Usually with an edit summary of "undo" or something to let others know I'm reverting. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 06:20, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- Hmm... but how exactly would you do this? I tried playing around with the history page in the sandbox but came up with a message saying, "The edit could not be undone due to conflicting intermediate edits; if you wish to undo the change, it must be done manually." Obviously, I'm doing something wrong. Maybe you could list some steps?
- About huggle and twinkle, I've never tried either of the two, but can they revert multiple edits? Also, if there's other alternatives to reverting such edits, do tell, do tell. — Xcalizorz (talk) 06:43, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yes there is a way to get around vandalism by mutiple IPs. Administrators can protect a page that is under heavy fire by vandals. That being said, I've semi-protected Jonas L.A.. For future reference, you can request protection of a page by going to WP:RFPP. Remember that page protection is only used as a last-ditch resort, so only request page protection if you can't keep up with reverting vandalism. Hope that helps to clarify things. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:55, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- I suppose that's another way, but I was actually asking how to revert multiple edits in a row done by a single user when the situation isn't "last ditch resort." Hope that makes sense. — Xcalizorz (talk) 01:14, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- twinkle has a function called "restore this version"; This function can be used when viewing diffs. You can use this function to restore the last clean version of an article. You can enable twinkle by going to Preferences -> Gadgets -> Editing Gadgets -> Twinkle. Hope that helps. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:20, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- I suppose that's another way, but I was actually asking how to revert multiple edits in a row done by a single user when the situation isn't "last ditch resort." Hope that makes sense. — Xcalizorz (talk) 01:14, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yes there is a way to get around vandalism by mutiple IPs. Administrators can protect a page that is under heavy fire by vandals. That being said, I've semi-protected Jonas L.A.. For future reference, you can request protection of a page by going to WP:RFPP. Remember that page protection is only used as a last-ditch resort, so only request page protection if you can't keep up with reverting vandalism. Hope that helps to clarify things. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:55, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Logo
Hi there,
I am not sure why my article was deleted. I have few questions as I am just starting to add/revise content about Jordan.
1- I would like to upload the logo for Union Bank in Jordan. Is there any specific requirement so that I am not in violation of copyright infringement or can I just add the logo taken from the Bank's web site? 2- I am in copyright infringement if I add content about the bank directly from the Bank's web site?
Thanks for your help,
Salim Sawalha Head of Branches Union Bank —Preceding unsigned comment added by SalimNayef (talk • contribs) 13:13, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- Your article was deleted because it was promotional in nature. Per speedy deletion criterion G11, advertisements/spam is strictly prohibited on Wikipedia and subject to on-sight deletion. While it may not intent to use Wikipedia for advertising, rest assured that you are always free to resubmit a revised revision. Some helpful links: WP:ADS, WP:MOS, WP:YFA, WP:WIZ, WP:RFF, WP:V, WP:NPOV. As for how to upload a file, please see WP:UPLOAD. Carefully read and follow the instructions on the page and you should be fine. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:00, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
deleted page?
hi, i see you deleted my biography page? i was wondering why? there was nothing blatant or bad about it? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ferber
please let me know! thanks, john —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.144.215.142 (talk) 23:23, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- I deleted the page because it was promotional in nature. Per speedy deletion criterion G11, advertising/spam is strictly prohibited on Wikipedia and subject to on-sight deletion. While it may not have been your intent to advertise, please bear in mind that you are free to resubmit a revised copy of the article. Just be sure that it is compliant with WP:ADS, WP:MOS, WP:NPOV, WP:V, WP:COI, WP:GNG. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:02, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Whoa
Great minds think alike! [25] Jmlk17 23:56, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, I'm sorry about that. Didn't mean to admin-conflict you. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:57, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
What is wrong with my page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Visuwil (talk • contribs) 00:50, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Deleted "File:RayLawrenceAndHisOrchestra.jpg"
Hi! I received notification this file was going to be deleted because of a concern about evidence of permission. Per Wikipedia guidelines I downloaded the appropriate form letter and gave it to the copyright owner (who is my Dad). He agreed with the license. He doesn't have email so I sent an email with the form agreeing to Wikipedia terms with his address and phone contact info to 'permissions-en@wikimedia.org' on August 14 at 12:40 PDT. There was no acknowledgement of the email or a tag generated. Did I miss something in the process to prevent this photo from being deleted? Thanks.
Lulayellowlab (talk) 04:11, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- Give OTRS a few more days to process your email. They're often backlogged and very busy. If you don't hear back in a few days, let me know and I'll have an OTRS member look into it. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:41, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi! A few more days have passed and I haven't heard anything from OTRS. Can you please check into this? Thanks! Lulayellowlab (talk) 22:55, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
You deleted as nonsense, but it does not appear to be so. (It does, of course need sources, but that's not a speedy criterion). See [26] for background. DGG ( talk ) 04:33, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Article for you to look over
Hi,
A few days ago I asked you about looking over an article I am creating before I release it to the public. It is up on a talk page now, which you can view here. Please leave feedback in the "feedback" section of the article. Thanks! tofutwitch11 T. C. 13:36, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Why did you remove those two pictures? They were both used with permission from the author. Please un-delete them. If you had an issue with the license, you should have came to me. tofutwitch11 T. C. 17:46, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I had to (it showed up at CAT:SD). When you uploaded the files, you specified a CC non-commercial license. There is a blanket ban on all CC non-commercial licenses on Wikipedia, and such files are subject to on-sight deletion per speedy deletion criterion F3. Talk to the author and see if the license can be changed. If not, then the files are not suitable for Wikipedia. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 17:52, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
I fixed it. I put them up as a "screenshot" from a Computer game (which is what they are). Please look over the rest of the article and leave your feedback. tofutwitch11 T. C. 17:55, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for doing that. I've finished my review and left comments at User talk:Tofutwitch11/Boston Virtual ATC. Your article is looking good. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:01, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Alright. But now I am having trouble re-uploading those pictures. Whenever I upload them and put them into the article, they don't show for some reason. Just take a look. Any fix to this? If not, can you "undelete" them.Tofutwitch11 (talk) 18:05, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'm getting the same thing. Might be server lag, or part of the image-thumbnail-rendering bug (T26834) that's being discussed at bugzilla right now. I recommend waiting awhile. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:10, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Penelope Jean Article
Hello Fastily,
I have noticed that you have deleted my recent article "Penelope Jean". Please note that I am a new Wiki author and am still learning how to write properly. A permission letters for use of content, and use of images under free domain have been sent to permissions-en@wikimedia.org and permissions-commons@wikimedia.org by the creator and copyright-holder (of both) today.
I would very much appreciate if you could repost this page and add (or I could add) "hangon" until both emails will be replied to and approved.
Sincerely, Success10.
- Once the email containing permissions is received and verified by the Wikimedia OTRS permissions team, the page will be automatically restored and assigned ticket number. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:13, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Restore access to Nimbuzz page
Hey, Andi from Nimbuzz here. I see you have deleted our wiki page and now the access is blocked. Can you please restore access to it and undelete the page? Also can you give me an advice on what needs to be done about it so we can avoid this kind of issues in the future. I appreciate your time. Andi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.56.49.28 (talk) 19:39, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Apparent deletion of IFOPA article
I am a newbie. I have been composing my article for the last several days, and today I saw a notice that my article might be eligible for speedy deletion. When I "returned" (within minutes) from reading the criteria, I could no longer find my article and saw the notice that it has been deleted. How do I find it to request it not be deleted (i.e., "hang on"). My article is modeled after, and similar to, Wikipedia articles for the American Diabetes Association and the American Red Cross (and other similar charities)so I am unclear why my page should be deleted. Please advise. Thanks.
Malcolm Munro. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malcolm C Munro (talk • contribs) 19:52, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- I deleted the page because it was highly promotional in nature. Although it may not have been your intent, your article read like an advertisement, which is strictly prohibited on Wikipedia; advertising/spam is subject to on-sight deletion per speedy deletion criterion G11. You are free to try again and post a revised draft, but make sure that it is compliant with WP:ADS before posting. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:58, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Where do I access the page to revise it? I'll try to revise it. As I mentioned, as it is very similar in content to many other charity organization Wikipedia articles, I will try to see why my article differs in regard to "reading like an advertisement". Articles about charities will inevitably have that flavor. I am also startled that the deletion occurred within minutes of the notice appearing and before I had time to ask "hang on". Again, how do I access it? Thanks.
Malcolm Munro. Malcolm C Munro (talk) 20:17, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'll restore the page at User:Malcolm C Munro/IFOPA, but hide the text (viewable by clicking "edit this page") to avoid attracting any unnecessary attention. I think it's best you keep it hidden until you're finished revising. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:19, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Many thanks. I'll try. For the record however, my article is NOT about promoting any "product or service" but is rather about a US-registered charity that supports research into finding a cure for the nasty disease known as fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva (see the Wikipedia article on the condition, and it's reference to the charity about which I wrote). My article is in fact highly similar in content to Wiki articles about the American Diabetes Association (my actual model for my article), American Red Cross, and any number of other charities that have Wikipedia pages. I'm genuinely confused as to how this article could in any way be regarded as promoting a product, unless the Latin name for the disease sounded like the latest pharmaceutical product.
Malcolm C Munro (talk) 21:48, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Any chance of semi-protecting marriage? It was indefinitely semi-protected, before you fully protected it. I'm sure we will have the same, usual problems if it is left unprotected, at the very least can you do Pending Changes, or whatever that is called. CTJF83 chat 19:54, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- Semi-protected -FASTILY (TALK) 19:55, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
my rollback request
What is REAL VANDALISM and where do you find it because i am all over wikipedia and i don't see that much vandalism but when i do i revert it and i use twinkle so what you said did not make sense. Inka 888 (talk) 20:22, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- Check out Special:RecentChanges. You'll find plenty of vandalism there. For instructions on how to use Recent Changes, see m:Help:Recent changes.Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:13, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
And how is the vandalism that i fight not REAL VANDALISM? Inka 888 (talk) 22:01, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- I never said it wasn't. However, I would like to see more anti-vandalism work before granting the rollback right to you. A grand total of 4 reverts in the past month and a half demonstrates that you do not have a need for rollback. Frankly, the undo function will work just fine. If you want rollback, make about 50 reverts and then make another request at WP:PERM/R. If you don't do the work, how can you expect a reward? -FASTILY (TALK) 22:10, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
I also have no idea how to find vandalism in recent changes. Inka 888 (talk) 22:07, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
AIV templates.
Hey just curious, does a bot remove reports marked by the template after a certain period of time? They weren't around back when I was active, heh. Cheers, · Andonic Contact 20:36, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- In-actionable reports are usually removed manually after 30 min. or so after the last time stamp. We don't have a bot for that yet, although it would be nice :P -FASTILY (TALK) 21:16, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Fox News Channel Controversies
Perhaps you could full protect the page. Daily Kos editors with accounts are performed a cordinated effort to promote a point of view on this page. It is in full edit war right now, and I just removed an addition with a Daily Kos link. Arzel (talk) 20:47, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- Done -FASTILY (TALK) 21:17, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- Is it possible for you to add the following two reliable sources which I was trying to add?
- "Rupert Murdoch's Republicanism". The Guardian. Guardian Media Group. August 19, 2010. Retrieved August 22, 2010.
- "News Corp. Gives Republicans $1 Million". New York Times. August 17, 2010. Retrieved August 22, 2010.
- Sorry if this would make you involved and thus is an unacceptable request. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:22, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- A bit unorthodox perhaps but, page temporarily unprotected. I'll re-protect once you're finished. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:28, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- Done Thanks, they are now in the article. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:31, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- A bit unorthodox perhaps but, page temporarily unprotected. I'll re-protect once you're finished. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:28, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry if this would make you involved and thus is an unacceptable request. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:22, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
You may want to consider locking the main article, Fox News Channel, for a short period as well. Arzel (talk) 22:54, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Could you please undelete this article? We have received OTRS permission for it which I can add as soon as it is restored. VernoWhitney (talk) 20:52, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- Done -FASTILY (TALK) 21:12, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks! I've added the permission tag it needed. VernoWhitney (talk) 21:44, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
User has been incorrectly or insufficiently warned
Hi Fastily,
regarding your contribution to my report about user Faezdel:
- First warning
- second warning
- now third warning (after your contrib)
I think that should be enough or what do you mean with "sufficiently", --Keysanger 21:35, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Reverting_vandalism#Warnings. The standard number of warnings we give before blocking for vandalism on Wikipedia is four. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:12, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
OK. Thank you --Keysanger 22:25, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Template:İZBAN Color
Can you un-delete this template? On its face, the template didn't look like anything, but now that it's gone it appears to have some functionality in articles like this Alsancak-Menderes_Commuter_Line. Also, someone (possibly a Turkish speaking admin) should try to communicate with User:Central_Data_Bank -- they're creating at least a few templates that have the same no facial content / function issue. Sorry to make problems. Aelfthrytha (talk) 00:17, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Marc Morgan
Why did you say our page is just for promotion or advertising? Marc is a politician running in a very competitive race this fall, and we need to have information on here for when people search for him when trying to decide who to vote for. If we need to change some things that's fine, but this article doesn't deserve to be taken down. Thanks. 68.55.127.70 (talk) 03:50, 23 August 2010 (UTC)Nick
Just FYI, I reverted your most recent edit. Your message was shortened and tweaked by myself and another admin (you did press save, you;re not going mad!). Feel free to revert if you want (it doesn't bother me), but it's probably best to keep it noticeable without being distracting. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 05:16, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thank goodness! For a moment there I was actually concerned :P Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 06:59, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
The Booth At The End
I understand that the PROD on the article of The Booth At The End expired, but I was wondering if there was any way to retrieve it, as I would like to keep a copy, and re-sumbit it once it has been completed with resources. I spent a lot of time on my own to complete it, and I would at least like to have a copy of it on my Hard Disk, I just love that show. Most of the information was collected by watch the videos online, how can I cite that? Videos Tradereddy (talk) 17:43, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- I've restored a copy of the article to your userspace. You can work on it there (if you like), and move the page back to the article space when you're ready. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:23, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi FAstily - this is related to LMaize article on banking BPO services. Question: should I make further modification to the company references that sell these services to bring greater legitimacy? Secondly if you check links to analyst references this is a major growing market in business services which is very underserved in Wikipedia; it was actually people working in client companies that were trying to reference wikipedia for detail and could not find any facts on this business segment. Thoughts?: —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.94.10.226 (talk) 18:58, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
OR
How is your experience on original research and synthesis issues? If you have good experience I might ask you to get involved in a situation concerning some articles by a user. TIA ww2censor (talk) 20:16, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- While I don't claim to be an expert on either of those subjects, I think I should be of assistance to some extent, that is, if you trust my judgment of course! What is it you're interested in having me look at? -FASTILY (TALK) 20:53, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of Nota Bene word processor article
Hello
I wrote the article about Nota Bene, which you deleted on August 18 as "unambiguous advertising or promotion".
I wrote it as a user of Nota Bene, but I certainly didn't intend it as advertising or promotion. I am not an employee of Nota Bene, just a long-time user.
I'm aware that Wikipedia articles should not be a form of advertising or promotion. In writing the NB article, I used as models Wikipedia articles on Microsoft Word, Wordstar, and, in particular, Word Perfect. I also used material that I and other members of the Nota Bene users' list have written over the years about using the program; and materials about the history of Nota Bene which I gathered from current users and from archives of the user list dating back to the mid 1980s.
I am very sorry that the article seems to you to read like a promotion. The criterion you used, G11, says that "Pages that are exclusively promotional... would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic." I would be very grateful indeed if you could let me know how I could rewrite the article so as not to seem promotional. I'm sure you aren't referring to the historical section. Is it because I sound too enthusiastic about the capacities of the program?
I'm not asking you to do a rewrite! I'm just hoping for a hint about what I've done wrong. I was so sure I had worked within the Wikipedia standards; and even now, comparing the NB article with the Word Perfect article, I'm a bit perplexed about why the former has to go, while the latter is OK.
I do think that Wikipedia should have a Nota Bene article in some form, alongside its other word processor articles, especially since NB is one of the very few non-Microsoft word processors left.
Hoping to hear from you,
Best wishes
Mary Mary Lord Bernard (talk) 20:39, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- I can restore the page as a draft to your userspace where you can work on it without risking deletion. How does that sound? -FASTILY (TALK) 21:20, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
RE: Deletion of "File:WWJ-TV CBSDETROIT Advertise.jpg"
Hi,
This logo is owned by CBS inc. I have been given permission from our local management to update our logo on Wikipedia. Can you please help me upload this image, give it the proper license and post it on the WWJ-TV article? Is it that I need to include the tag? I'm pretty sure I didn't include that. {{Non-free logo}}
Thank you!
(Deletion log); 21:38 . . Fastily (talk | contribs) deleted "File:WWJ-TV CBSDETROIT Advertise.jpg" (F3: Media file with improper license)
JorgeMSU (talk) 20:58, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- When you uploaded the file, you licensed the file under a CC non-commercial license. There is currently a blanket ban on all CC non-commercial licenses, and files uploaded as such as subject to on-sight deletion under speedy deletion criterion F3. Because this is a CBS logo, you can upload the file under a non-free license (e.g. {{Non-free logo}}), like you indicated above. That being said, feel free to do so at your convenience. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:25, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi there Fastily, just writing about your recent deletion of the above image. Although there was a {{Di-no permission}} tag on the file, I had tagged it with {{OTRS pending}} as I had forwarded an email from Click Records (the copyright holder) to OTRS as requested. I did not understand at the time that I could have removed the {{Di-no permission}} tag and just left the {{OTRS pending}} tag on there while waiting for OTRS to confirm receipt of the email. So could you please un-delete the image and leave the {{OTRS pending}} tag on there until OTRS confirm they have seen the forwarded email that was requested? Sorry for the mistake. Cheers IainUK talk 21:20, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- The same applies to File:Andrew Stone.jpg IainUK talk 21:20, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- Per standard procedure, files bearing {{OTRS pending}} are regularly cleared out if permission is not verified via OTRS. Not to worry however, once an OTRS member verifies the email you sent, the files will be automatically restored and assigned an OTRS ticket number. OTRS can be busy and backlogged so give them a few more days to process your request. If nothing happens in the next few days, drop me a line and I'll go ask an OTRS member to look at your request. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:29, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Chantrashop.com
hi,
ive seen that you have deleted my thread, i wasnt trying to sell stuff just advertising my website. but please could you paste here what i put in that thread so i could copy into a notepad.
thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashley Read (talk • contribs) 22:02, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Images
Want to try searching for 'unsourced' images now : http://toolserver.org/~erwin85/shortpages.php?lang=en&family=wikipedia&namespaces=6&filter=none&offset=3000&limit=500
As well as continuing with the NFR hunting :)
At this rate enwiki should be clean by 2012 :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:05, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of The Twisted Sisterhood-The Book Page
I'm not sure I understand the reasoning for your deletion of the page. The entry is encyclopedic and of interest to academia and the general reading public. I have deleted advance reviews and certain descriptive content as they may arguably be considered "advertising," but there is indeed encyclopedic signifiance to the entry and the references and sources are obviously valid and reputable. Please reconsider. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kellyvalen (talk • contribs) 04:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Kellyvalen#Re:Deletion of The Twisted Sisterhood-The Book Page -FASTILY (TALK) 04:19, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Barnstar
|
The Anti-Spam Barnstar | |
 :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 04:27, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
|
Hey there, Just curious - I had tagged the image for deletion that was supposed to go forward today (Yesterday). You removed my tag saying the image passed all criteria and than you re-tagged it for failing the criteria. This move has me somewhat confused plus, aside from that, it appears that upholder has just been blocked from editing so chances are they are not going to provide any sort of new rational. As far as your removal of my tag saying it met the criteria and it was not replaceable - the reason(s) I tagged the image is 1: The uploader stated right in the FUR that Replaceable? : Yes, if there are more free images of Selena and 2: the same user has uploaded images under a free license that he claims his grandmother and mother have taken - if the OTRS's were indeed submitted and can be confirmed that would, indeed, make the non-free image replaceable. So is there really any need to *not* delete that image today (Now yesterday - August 21) as opposed to your re-tagging it for deletion? Soundvisions1 (talk) 04:29, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I'm afraid either way your upload is not suitable for Wikipedia. I did not notice that you had indicated "Yes" in the replaceable field, so the file should have been deleted yesterday per failure of WP:NFCC#1. However, the file also does not meet the criteria outlined at WP:NFCC#8, as the image does not particularly enhance a reader's understanding of the article, when there are already many images of "Selena" already in the article. Now this is not to say that your contributions to Wikipedia are not appreciated - they are; but this particular upload is just not suitable for Wikipedia's needs. Hope that helps to clarify things. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 17:47, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- I think you misunderstood - this is not my image. I have zero to do with it. I found the image due to its "replaceable - yes" tag so tagged it for CSD. But having said all of this now yet another editor has removed your CSD tag with the reason of lets keep one image. Soundvisions1 (talk) 13:39, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- I see. It looks like Secret modified Selena, moving File:Selena09.jpg to the main infobox, where it is now relevant to a reader's understanding of the article. He seems to have, in turn, remove the other images of Selena from the article, on the grounds that they fail Wikipedia non-free content criteria #8 and 3a. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:29, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yes and no. Yes that the other images were removed, but not due to any sort of FUR. They were supposedly images that were taken by the uploaders grandmother and/or mother and OTRS's were supposedly submitted on them. A search of the OTRS system showed there was nothing on file so were tagged as needing one or they would be deleted. At least as of Sunday the images had nothing to do with Fair use - the were still tagged di-nopermission. As for the File:Selena09.jpg image now in the info box I am checking into that because somewhere along the line it was decided that non-free images are not supposed to be used in info boxes outside of things such as album/singles or logos in certain articles. I know there have been several deletions of images for that reason and numerous articles with no image for the info box because a non-free one can not be found. Soundvisions1 (talk) 23:16, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- I see what you mean. Yes, you're right - copyrighted images of living persons are generally prohibited in their respective articles because a freely licensed media file of a living person can be created. However, when a person is deceased, a freely licensed photo may be hard, or impossible to obtain. Therefore, it is acceptable to use copyrighted photos of deceased persons in their respective articles. A freely licensed file is ideal in a article on a deceased person, but when you cannot obtain a freely licensed photo through reasonable means, a non-free version will suffice. For more information - WP:NFCC#1. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:14, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yes and no. Yes that the other images were removed, but not due to any sort of FUR. They were supposedly images that were taken by the uploaders grandmother and/or mother and OTRS's were supposedly submitted on them. A search of the OTRS system showed there was nothing on file so were tagged as needing one or they would be deleted. At least as of Sunday the images had nothing to do with Fair use - the were still tagged di-nopermission. As for the File:Selena09.jpg image now in the info box I am checking into that because somewhere along the line it was decided that non-free images are not supposed to be used in info boxes outside of things such as album/singles or logos in certain articles. I know there have been several deletions of images for that reason and numerous articles with no image for the info box because a non-free one can not be found. Soundvisions1 (talk) 23:16, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- I see. It looks like Secret modified Selena, moving File:Selena09.jpg to the main infobox, where it is now relevant to a reader's understanding of the article. He seems to have, in turn, remove the other images of Selena from the article, on the grounds that they fail Wikipedia non-free content criteria #8 and 3a. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:29, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- I think you misunderstood - this is not my image. I have zero to do with it. I found the image due to its "replaceable - yes" tag so tagged it for CSD. But having said all of this now yet another editor has removed your CSD tag with the reason of lets keep one image. Soundvisions1 (talk) 13:39, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
← I know that NFCC 1 is the most often used criteria but I believe what I am thinking of was something to do with NFCC 9 - Restrictions on location, but I can't seem to find it now. I found a discussion from 2008: Non free images in Infoboxes - ironically about the same article, not sure if it/was the same photo. Also from 2008: Interesting image debate on Freddie Mercury site!. Either way though, unless the OTRS does show up on the deleted images we don't have any free images. Soundvisions1 (talk) 19:56, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Rollback + edit warring
If a user has a history of edit warring and abuse of the rollback tool, and is blocked for 3RR, what would the consequences of removal be? I'm thinking most people would consider it just, but it would probably be undone unless it was posted on ANI. Am I right? Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:10, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- Rollback is usually removed as soon the user in question violates 3RR (regardless of whether the rollback tool was used during the edit war or not). Although of course, if the user in question is an established user, there can sometimes be a backlash on ANI. All this really depends and should looked at through a case by case analysis. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Frankly I'm scared to tell you who the user I'm thinking of is. I could have sworn I saw an issue with the same user before at one point. I'm scared because I don't want a backlash at my own future RfA (as we both know, people can discent over silly political things). Also, I really hope I'm not a bother, but it's over three days on the training. Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:46, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- Ah well, if the user you're thinking of is becoming a problem, feel free to email me what you're thinking. I might be able to help, if need be. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:06, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
deleted "Kieran Leonard"
I'm new to this so please bear with me, I'm trying to work my way through five different pages of Wiki instructions on what to do if I don't agree with something that has been deleted. It's the log below I'm concerned about
00:13, 8 February 2010 Fastily (talk | contribs) deleted "Kieran Leonard" (Expired PROD, concern was: Can find no evidence that this singer, or his band, pass WP:MUSIC.)
I'm more than happy to update the article but I don't quite understand the rules under which the article was deleted in the first place. Would be very grateful, if you could help me. thanks!
Michellemisfit (talk) 10:21, 24 August 2010 (UTC) Michelle Misfit
- The article was deleted per the PROD process, which means I can restore it for you if you like. However, I strongly recommend opting to have a copy restored to your userspace, where you can work on it (and later move it to the article space when you're finished) without running the risk of having the article deleted. Let me know what you'd like. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:58, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Deleted Josh Morris Article
I would appreciate it if you undid the deleted article please. He has played in professional first team matches in pre-season on several occasions and is expected to play a part this season. He has got history that is worth noting with the club and i would appreciate it if it was left. He has already been given a 1st team short number by manager Sam Allardyce.RoverTheBendInSussex (talk) 11:28, 24 August 2010 (GMT)
- Er...I haven't deleted "Josh Morris". -FASTILY (TALK) 19:05, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Durgapur Xpressway
Hi Fastily, I can re-send email where it clearly mentioned that he has no problem in releasing this image is under free licence. Actually that guys is so happy that , he written blog on that see http://avikhaldar.wordpress.com/2010/08/03/my-photo-in-wikipedia/ , also u can see the comment on source file http://www.flickr.com/photos/12953451@N02/4769253766/. (please leave talkback) KuwarOnline Talk 10:47, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- Send an email to Wikimedia OTRS team at "permissions-en@wikimedia.org". Be sure to include the title you uploaded the file to Wikipedia under and the document(s) from the copyright holder granting permission to use the file on Wikipedia. Lastly, be sure that the copyright holder has specified a license for the file to be used under. Once you've sent the email, let me know and I'll go speak with an OTRS member. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:09, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- Done, Thanks KuwarOnline Talk 05:14, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Image undeletion needed
This was removed from its article by a disruptive editor who replaced it with an outdated logo he'd uploaded. I would like it restored so the article can have the proper image again. --Sable232 (talk) 14:21, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- Done. Remove the {{Di-orphaned fair use}} tag once you've linked the file to the article. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank semi-spam
Thanks for your support in my RfA, which was closed as successful. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 15:17, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Chris "Daddy" Dave
Hi Fastily,
The biography that i wrote for Chris Dave was deleted. It said that there was copyright infringement from his myspace page. I also wrote the bio that is on his myspace page. Are you saying i cannot use the same language because it is on another online site?
Please let me know, Thanks Erin Erinstabile222 (talk) 17:33, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- Long story short, yes. All and any text posted to Wikipedia is licensed under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL. Since there was no evidence suggesting that the myspace page is copyrighted under the same license or a less restrictive license (e.g. Public Domain), the page was deleted as a copyright violation. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:16, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Message for Fastly
When I edited Wikipedia yesterday at this IP, I didn’t use an account. Yesterday, I edited Soldier (1998 hindi film) & Blind Side (2009 film). Was that vandalism? On the talk page, there was a message about vandalism. If you’re saying that I vandalized Soldier & Blind Side, then how did I? I saw the hindi movie Soldier before. Vijay fought Virender, Pratap, & Virender’s brother. Vijay didn’t fight Jaswant. Vijay got killed by DK, who was actually Jaswant. Nobody knew that DK’s secret Identity is Jaswant. I saw The Blind Side before. At the beginning of the movie, Michael & a lady were talking to each other. Next, it goes to a flashback. In Wikipedia, isn’t the Blind Side plot summary supposed to be same as the movie? (198.189.228.4 (talk) 19:57, 24 August 2010 (UTC)).
- [27]? -FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:42, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Nereid
Is Fastilysock a bot, or will you engage me in conversation? I asked for discussion without the canned warnings, so please, do me that small favor. Is it really disruptive to redirect an article with a PROD on it? I have seen this done many times, and I understand that it is often considered an acceptable alternative. 24.148.0.83 (talk) 03:08, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- With all due respect, you have made no attempt engage me in conversation, so I simply assumed you were an up-to-no-good vandal. At any rate, I'll be more than happy to answer your question. You can redirect articles (regardless of the PROD), but there usually needs to be consensus for such action. Since you've made your intentions clear, and without passing judgment on the article, if you still believe that the article is of such poor quality that it needs to be redirected, feel free to do so, I'll not revert you. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 03:17, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, I didn't mean to come off so testy. It's not so much the quality of the article that is poor, just the availability of sources. I often redirect stubs like that which are about to be deleted, because they can always be restored if sources are found, or merged somewhere down the line. That's kind of hard to do for non-admins once an article gets deleted, so I like to keep my options open. 24.148.0.83 (talk) 03:28, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- No worries, I don't have any reason to believe what you're doing is wrong or inappropriate, nor is there anything wrong with your approach. It's just that on vandal patrol, redirecting an entire article often appears to be vandalism. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:08, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, I didn't mean to come off so testy. It's not so much the quality of the article that is poor, just the availability of sources. I often redirect stubs like that which are about to be deleted, because they can always be restored if sources are found, or merged somewhere down the line. That's kind of hard to do for non-admins once an article gets deleted, so I like to keep my options open. 24.148.0.83 (talk) 03:28, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Admin
i want to know something about a site if you know about it i searched a site www.wikipedia.vv.cc and it is same as this one is this a new site of wikipedia or other site and if it is related to wikipedia then why not start writing article there?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jitinkumar (talk • contribs) 04:42, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- I think you may have come across one of the many mirrors of Wikipedia, which are essentially bit-for-bit copies of Wikipedia, only hosted on a third-party website. The official site of the english Wikipedia may be found here, at [28]. Hope that helps to clarify things. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:11, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
I see that you've removed some of the links to reviews that were recently added and I'm curious as to why. They seem odd to me too, but I can't put my finger on the reason why they seem out of place to me. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 04:53, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- Indeed. I think they may be spam links. I guess I'll remove them again. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:14, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- Works for me. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 06:00, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of user talk pages
Hi there Fastily, you recently deleted the user talk page of Hotpinkgothic (talk · contribs) under U1. Please be aware that user talk pages are not illegible for deletion under this criteria, as it states at WP:CSD. Just thought I'd drop a not notifying you that I've restored the revisions deletion. Regards. — ξxplicit 07:40, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'm aware of that; I typically don't delete user talk pages. The only time I'll even consider deleting a user talk page by request is when the user talk page belongs to a registered user who, in good faith wishes to leave the project and has very little to no talk page history. Although this is IAR and not part of policy, I believe it's only morally right to allow editors who want to leave vanish. -FASTILYsock(TALK) 09:00, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Eden Springs Europe
Hi, I start to write an article for my English presentation, and you deleted them very fast how can I reactivate it ? why is deleted for "promotion" ?
I want to add other text but it’s all deleted.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PetitD (talk • contribs) 07:42, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of Nota Bene word processor article
Fastily
>>I can restore the page as a draft to your userspace where you can work on it without risking deletion. How does that sound?<<
It sounds fine -- but I would still be very, very glad if you'd give me an example of what made it unacceptable. I've compared it again with the Word Perfect article, and the two still seem to me to be very similar in tone and content. It's hard to know what to edit, without at least a hint!
Thanks
Mary Mary Lord Bernard (talk) 12:01, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- Done at User:Mary Lord Bernard/Nota Bene (word processor). Check out WP:PEACOCK and WP:ADS. If you ask me, I would recommend the whole article be revised. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:15, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Delet: Kieran Leonard
Sorry, cant quite work out how to comment directly to your answer but it would be great if you could restore the Kieran Leonard page, so I can work on the article and then put it back up. Thanks!! Michellemisfit (talk) 15:54, 25 August 2010 (UTC) Michelle
(talk page stalker) on the right hand edge of each section divider is an "edit" link. If you click on that you can respond in the same section to keep your conversation together. Active Banana ( bananaphone 16:01, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Edit warring
...on Historicity of Jesus. Pretty much an immediate outbreak once protection expired. Noloop (talk) 19:46, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- Please do not edit protect the page just because Noloop is asking for it. He does this all the time when people revert his edits, and unfortunately he tends to get the pages protected. The page has been unprotected for three days, and editors from multiple POVs are trying to work together on the talk page. Please at least consult others on the talk page before protecting. Thanks.Griswaldo (talk) 19:52, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- Some of the Aug. 25 edits include: Andrew deleting some text, and my revert of the deletion. Griswaldo's revert of my revert. PeaceLoveHarmony's revert of Griswaldo. ReaverFlash deletion of text, and SlimVirgin's revert. ReaverFlash's revert of the revert. My revert of ReaverFlash. ReaverFlash's revert of my revert of his revert. SlimVirgin's revert of ReaverFlash. Griswaldo's revert of PeaceLoveHarmony. It hardly has anything to do with me in particular. Griswaldo is, um, "distorting." Noloop (talk) 20:22, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
my rollback request
I have done more than one anti vandalism revert since my last request. You are not looking at all my contribs with twinkle. Inka 888 21:18, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- As requested, I had an in depth look at your contributions. This is what I came up with. While you do have a number of reverts in your contributions, please note that self reverts (e.g. [29], [30], [31], [32]), are not the same as reverting vandalism! Also, I recommend you re-read WP:V and figure out what constitutes vandalism. While looking through your contributions, I noticed you reverted several Good Faith edits as vandalism: [33], [34]. This is an absolute no-no. Furthermore, I recommend you read up on edit-warring and the three revert rule. From my point of view, the history of List_of_Adult_Swim_programs appears to be an edit war with Grapesoda22. Frankly, I don't care who was right in the dispute; edit warring is disruptive and is grounds for blocking. It is highly inappropriate to use any automated tool, particularly rollback for edit waring. Consider yourself warned. I'm also a bit puzzled as to why you warned an already indef blocked user, A3RO, several times: [35], [36]. Of all the reverts you made between August 22 and today, August 25, I have found two valid reverts: [37], [38]. I've told you all too many times before, make 50 or so good reverts before coming back and requesting the tool. It takes about 30min of focused effort at RecentChanges; it's not that hard. Rollback is earned through experience, not through intermittent badgering and refusal to get the point. Please don't keep badgering me or another administrator until you have at least 50 reverts. In fact, once you've reached 50 reverts, leave me a note and I'll add the right to your account. But honestly, if you can't even make the minimal effort it takes to get rollback, you clearly don't deserve the tool. I hope I've made myself clear. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:29, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
My user page
Thank you for reverting the vandalism! --Tryptofish (talk) 21:22, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
RFA
Is it appropriate to respond to opposes in one's RFA? Couldn't find any information on whether it was acceptable or not. Also, I totally used your sig to make mine. :) Falcon8765 (TALK) 22:08, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- You are fully entitled to respond to opposes. However, just don't do it excessively (i.e. don't respond to every oppose), because some people may see it and view you as a person who is unable to take criticism, which could potentially result in more opposes. I see your RfA isn't looking all to great at the moment, but I encourage you to hang in there just a little longer to see if things change. Best of luck to you. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 23:33, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Page Move problem
I extensively revised an article, my initial version for which was deleted. I "moved" the revised page - it all seemed to go successfully and my move appeared in the move log. Though the newly named page (International FOP Association) appears in the mainspace, the article itself doesn't - though the Edit page is available with the full article. What do I need to do to have the article displayed in the mainspace? Thanks. Malcolm C Munro (talk) 23:22, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Criticism of Islam Sidebar "Delete" but still here.
Hello. I just noticed the result of the criticism of Islam sidebar discussion was Delete. Can you explain why this has not been deleted? Shouldn't it have been deleted not just edited and replaced complete with the same talk page?Template:Criticism of Islam sidebar, the deletion discussion Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2010_August_3#Template:Muslims_and_controversies. Thanks. --Hfarmer (talk) 23:30, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- Template:Criticism of Islam sidebar was not nominated at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2010_August_3#Template:Muslims_and_controversies. I see it is an alternate version of the deleted templates, but there is no policy that mandates the deletion of all alternate versions of a template if the main version of the template was deleted. I recommend starting a new deletion discussion for Template:Criticism of Islam sidebar and it's alternates at WP:TFD. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:44, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Deleted Ashley Bell Page?!
WHY WOULD YOU DELETE MY DAUGHTERS PAGE? Just as she is becoming a star, she has NO wikipedia page. There was A LOT of information on her page. What if people want to look her up? You should be ashamed of yourself.
Mrs. A Bell —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.132.65 (talk) 23:38, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Declined speedy deletion of Talk:OzonAction on Methyl Bromide
Hi Fastily, I was hoping you could explain why this page should not be deleted? This is a talk page which was recreated after both the article and its talk page were speedily deleted. As such it is eligible for deletion under G8 as a talk page with no corresponding article page. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 23:58, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- I see you've deleted it now; I'm guessing the fact that it had a warning for a user on it led you to believe it was actually a user talk page. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 00:00, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for correcting my careless error; I wasn't paying enough attention. —Mikemoral♪♫ 03:40, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Deleted Page
Hi Fastily, I noticed today that my page, Michael Murray (entrepreneur), has been deleted due to "Unnotable person, no significant claim of notably, no proper references". I referenced as much as I could and I find that owning a company and having a heavy role in philanthropy as well as donating more than $270,000 to the National Childrens Medical Center would be a reason for notability. Please let me know of any chances I should make so I will not get deleted again. Thanks! Gini —Preceding unsigned comment added by GiniChen (talk • contribs) 16:31, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- The article was deleted per the WP:PROD process. Yes, you are certainly free to submit a revised version if you like. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:18, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you! I will post it shortly. Would you please look over and let me know if it is OK. User:GiniChen 14:36, 26 August 2010
Files for deletion
I'm trying to understand why File:Brodeurbook.jpg was deleted while File:Bleedingpinstripes.jpg was not. The articles that they appear in give a nearly identical level of treatment to the books they're covering (not super in depth critical commentary, but commentary nonetheless). I expected these to go together (either both keep, or both delete). The fact that they went differently surprises me. If anything, I would have expected the reverse since File:Brodeurbook.jpg was used in a featured article while File:Bleedingpinstripes.jpg was not. I'm new this files for deletion process, and frankly can't believe how it can supercede successful FA image reviews (where WP:FAR would be the appropriate place to bring issues up). I'm crossposting this comment on User talk:Explicit so we can all compare notes. --SkotyWATC 06:08, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Why you delete my first article, about NAREX company ?
Really I dont understand why you consider, that my contributed page is some advertise and especially I dont understand why you remove this page so fast (you remove it 24.8. and today (26.8.) I am not able to edit this or make some defence.
Inspiration, why I add my article was, that same pages exists on Wikipedia or other power tools brands (see this for example): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makita
I like to add this brand, because I use their tools. I am not Narex owner, employee, dealer, seller or something like this. Just user.
I am really upset with such censuring manner. Okay, you sign this article as advertise, but you complete delete this immediately. I am not going to make effort in case that someone simply delete it without real reason. This is waste work.
If you like to show your "power", that you are the King, you can also delete my registration. Now it is the same to me.
Patrik
- User_talk:Patriat#Re:Why_you_delete_my_first_article.2C_about_NAREX_company_.3F -FASTILY (TALK) 18:55, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
If you are going to delete something
At least have the courtesy to let the person know, or remove the code from the article.
Maybe even a friendly warning first?
Backburnercomics (talk) 16:18, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
- You were warned here, that if you did not add a media license tag to your file, it would be eligible for speedy deletion under criterion F4 within 7 days of being flagged. You are of course, free to upload the file again, but just be sure to include a license tag this time around. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:00, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Canadian Civil Liberties Association logo deletion
Hello Fastily,
I am one of the legal counsel at the Canadian Civil Liberties Association and have been trying to load our organization's logo onto Wikipedia. I did so last night but saw this morning that you had deleted it. I was wondering what your reason for doing so was?
Please feel free to email or call me relation to this inquiry.
Anthony Navaneelan Acting Program Director / Directeur intérimaire du programme Fundamental Freedoms Program / Programme des libertés fondamentales
Canadian Civil Liberties Association / Association canadienne des libertés civiles 360 Bloor Street West, Suite 506 / 360, rue Bloor Ouest, Bureau 506 Toronto, Ontario M5S 1X1 tel.: 416 363 0321 ext. 226 email: anavaneelan@ccla.org web: www.ccla.org twitter: @cancivlib —Preceding unsigned comment added by Navaneelan (talk • contribs) 13:07, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
- File:Canadian Civil Liberties Association Logo.jpg was deleted because the uploader indicated that use of the file was restricted use to Wikipedia only. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, since explicit permission to use it was given, this is in fact not the case. [39] [40]. You're free to reupload the file, but I recommend doing so under a non-free license (e.g. {{non-free logo}}). Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:08, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Volunteer Center
Do not delete the Volunteer Center again, please. This is encyclopedic information and certainly not advertising. The Volunteer Center doesn't make any money and has been a long time almost 50 year institution in the community. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Williamawelch (talk • contribs) 19:48, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
- Regardless of whether you are for profit or non-profit, please understand that Wikipedia is not to be used for promotion, as a directory, or as a phone book. Pages that meet such criteria are subject to speedy deletion under speedy deletion criterion G11. -FASTILY (TALK) 08:24, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
deleted content
I hope this finds you well. I recently posted an article that was deleted, would be so kind as to tell me where I went wrong? --Presshsm (talk) 20:35, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
- User_talk:Presshsm#Re:deleted_content -FASTILY (TALK) 08:25, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Broken redirects
http://toolserver.org/~schutz/output/brokenredirects.html
This is where I get all the broken redirects from. Please delete all of these, there are a ton of them here! —Train2104 (talk · contribs · count · email) 00:21, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
User:Yet Another Redirect Cleanup Bot/SkippedRedirects Here a version that will last for 24 hours and is refreshed at midnight UTC. —Train2104 (talk · contribs · count · email) 00:24, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'll take care of them. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 08:25, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
self referential
Hi there,
the Getty Images page references their own website 3 times. Is this allowable?
JWVuignier (talk) 15:41, 27 August 2010 (UTC)Jamie
^ "Getty Images Acquires the Michael Ochs Archives".
- ^ Getty Images Press Release 25 February 2008
^ A message to Getty Images contributors (GettyImages.com)
(talk page stalker) WP:SELFPUB It can be used to support non-controversial claims about themselves. Active Banana ( bananaphone 15:54, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Rollback Request
Hi Fastilly. I understand why I didn't get granted the rollback tool but I have one question. You said I should make 50 or so reverts on the recent changes page. I was wondering if I could make those 50 reverts on the Special:OldReviewedPages. Would that still count to my 50 reverts? Thanks. Nations United (talk) 20:22, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- You certainly may, but I still encourage you to use Recent Changes, as it's easier to identify and revert vandalism there. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:27, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- Alright. Thanks again. Nations United (talk) 21:26, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, actually I have another question. What are the + and - and sometimes 0 points beside each recent change and is there a benefit to one versus another? Nations United (talk) 21:37, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- The numbers indicate the number of bytes removed (in red) or added (in green), by an edit to a given page. 0 simply means the net total of bytes removed or added was 0. Statistically, the larger the gain/loss of bytes, the more likely a given diff is vandalism. Hope that helps to answer your question. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:00, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, actually I have another question. What are the + and - and sometimes 0 points beside each recent change and is there a benefit to one versus another? Nations United (talk) 21:37, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- Alright. Thanks again. Nations United (talk) 21:26, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Deleted page
Hi there - I was contacted by my one of my former coworkers at the firm Brains on Fire because they were attempting to create an informational page about their newly released book called Brains on Fire (a la this page about another marketing book: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Made_to_Stick), but it was deleted. When I logged in to see if I could make the page in a less advertisement-seeming way, I saw that you were listed as one of the deleting editors. Is there anything I can do in creating this page to make sure that it remains online? Any input you can give would be appreciated. Thank you!
Goffball13 (talk) 22:10, 27 August 2010 (UTC)goffball13
- I deleted the article because it was promotional in nature. Per WP:ADS, advertising and spam is subject to speedy deletion under speedy deletion criterion G11. You can let your co-workers know that they are free to resubmit a revised copy of the article, but that it needs to be compliant with WP:ADS, WP:MOS, WP:V, WP:PEACOCK, WP:NPOV, WP:GNG. Otherwise, they will run the risk of having the article deleted again. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:07, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
declined speedy
The other day you rightfully, I think, declined my speedy based on G11 of Revation LinkLive. I tagged it because it was essentially a list of features and revisions, but upon contemplating "fundamental rewrite," I realize it wouldn't have to be fundamentally rewritten; so I agree I blew that one. I'm trying to get a good calibration here wrt what constitutes "Unambiguous advertising" for the purposes of g11, so I would like to hear your thoughts on Heavenly Clean. Thank you, ErikHaugen (talk) 22:42, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Confirmed User Permission
Hi Fastily,
Regarding my request for the confirmed permission, I do not have many specific pages in mind yet. One example is Red_Mountain_(Colorado). I have a photo that better captures the distinct red color due to the iron deposits.
I'd like to scan through a list of other pages, too, and see where I can provide photos that better showcase the subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bgrohman (talk • contribs) 02:04, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi
 |
Fastily has been made a member of the Order of the Mop, Kind regards and happy editing, |
|
Fridae'sDoom has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can 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.
To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!
Thanks for all your hard work and enjoy the cookies! To our newest admins, good luck with all the requests enjoy your shiny buttons and do us proud!
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Fridae'sDoom at 11:53, 26 August 2010 (UTC).
- I'm honored. Thank you very much :) -FASTILY (TALK) 18:56, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
- You're welcome, keep up the good work :) Ғяіᴅaз'§Đøøм | Tea and biscuits? 20:51, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
please semi-protect Delta Airlines
The page Delta Airlines is constantly being messed up by "IP Users" wanting to add Focus Cities which, Delta Airlines does not operate. Nearly daily we have to revert an edit of an IP User, or new member, adding Focus Cities! Please, Please, Semi-Protect the page! Thanks Tofutwitch11 (talk) 01:41, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- I left a warning for 65.190.203.171 (talk · contribs). If they continue to vandalize, report them to WP:AIV. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:11, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Understood, but is it not just him, which is why I did not leave a warning. (I think for other people I May have). It's mostly the IP Users, which a semi protect will spot. If this happens again, even by other users, I will let you know, and can you please semi protect it?Tofutwitch11 (talk) 12:14, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Fastily. You recently rejected a report to WP:AN3 about this user. They were in fact in violation of the 1RR imposed on the article. By now it doesn't really matter, since they have crossed the 3RR line as well, so I sent them off for 24 hours. Should the 1RR violation have been reported somewhere else? Favonian (talk) 07:57, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- The page Armenian Genocide is under a 1RR. I had titled this section 1RR vio but then someone removed it[41]. The IP that removed it should be checked as well.--Anothroskon (talk) 08:50, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- Hmm, from looking at the IP's edit history I would say that it's most likely Fastily's own. Favonian (talk) 10:14, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
76.202.56.0/22
The block on this range recently expired, and the user responsible is up to his old tricks.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 17:52, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Request for Rollback
Hi Fastily. I know its been only a day since you declined my rollback request but since then I've been working really hard to get those 50 reverts. I've counted 38 so far but it looks like only about 20 show up on my contributions. It looks like people revert vandalism edits before me so when ever I revert it, it doesn't show up on my contributions. I know I haven't reached the 50 revert mark but I've been working very hard, for hours at times, for the past two days. Is it possible if I could get permission to use the rollback tool now? Nations United (talk) 18:17, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
(talk page stalker): If you click to revert an edit and someone has already reverted it it will reject the revert. so no one could have made a revert before you and you still have done it as well. Joe Gazz84user•talk•contribs•Editor Review 21:27, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker): I counted 32 reverts. I hope that total helps! Joe Gazz84user•talk•contribs•Editor Review 21:34, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- Well, apparently not. I reverted many edits and I checked the history of those articles and it doesn't show my revert, but instead someone else's revert. Nations United (talk) 21:35, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. Nations United (talk) 21:37, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- I've been working pretty hard though. As I stated above I've spent hours fighting vandalism. Is there any way I would still be granted the rollback tool now? Nations United (talk) 21:54, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- I can't use Twinkle so that isn't really an option. I still would like to know if I can get permission to use the rollback tool now for the reasons I have stated above. I would like to get an answer from Fastily this time if that's not too much trouble. Thanks. Nations United (talk) 23:48, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. Nations United (talk) 08:02, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
AWARDS
|
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
| Thanks for you hard work!Tofutwitch11 (talk) 22:48, 29 August 2010 (UTC) |
This article was deleted but it did not violate any copyright rules. The page that got pulled up saying I violated a copyright has no content on it. None whatsoever. Also, I work with the company for which I was posting the content. I used content from their site and can prove that I have permission. Not to mention that I cited sources. But the site that was detected as being infringed upon was not. Can you please look at this again. I would like to see what the issue was and if necessary provide you with the proper permission from the company. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oasislive (talk • contribs) 21:40, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- The article was deleted due to the way Wikipedia is licensed. Any text you post to Wikipedia is automatically licensed under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL. Unless your company's website text is licensed under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL, or a less restrictive license (e.g. Public domain), the text cannot remain on Wikipedia, as it would be a copyright violation. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:46, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- Could you userfy the non-copyrighted content for Oasislive so they can recreate it clean? VernoWhitney (talk) 16:40, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- Done at User:Oasislive/West Ridge Academy Sports. Fix it up quickly now. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 05:40, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you. VernoWhitney (talk) 13:30, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Could you userfy the non-copyrighted content for Oasislive so they can recreate it clean? VernoWhitney (talk) 16:40, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
amGod page deleted...
hello fastily,
the "amGod" page (music band) was deleted by you, because i used an external link to "you tube". i want to recover the side again without this link. what shall i do??? will you recover it for me or should i do this? thanxxx a lot! all the best... dominik —Preceding unsigned comment added by Van-reich (talk • contribs) 11:49, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
- User_talk:Van-reich#Re:amGod page deleted... -FASTILY (TALK) 00:22, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I spoke to one admin already about this photo. Is there still a problem? -Vorik111 (talk) 23:13, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'm afraid there is. Because the photo is non-free/copyrighted, for it to remain on Wikipedia, a fair-use rationale must be included on the file's description page. For an example of what constitutes good fair use rationale, please see this. Let me know if you have any questions or are in need of assistance. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:26, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Image deletion
Hi, I tagged an image for CSD i.e. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Indore_Software_Co..jpg, but you declined stating it "not patent nonsense". The image being stated as building for a software company in Indore, is mistakenly uploaded, I am aware of all localities in Indore. There is no such building in Indore, which belongs to software company. The user has simply uploaded an image of building & represented it as popular building. Though image is free in nature & can be kept, but it should be avoided using in any article with False claims of "software companies in Indore". What can be done on this? Please suggest. ( Abu Torsam 23:34, 29 August 2010 (UTC))
- While that may be the case, please understand that speedy deletion criterion G1 applies to patent nonsense only. Presently, the file is tagged with a no license deletion tag, meaning, it will be deleted in a few days per routine cleanup/housekeeping. If the file is really bothering you and becoming a hindrance to your editing, I can delete the file early, but I don't see how it makes a difference at the moment. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:30, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
File:SoundersUSOpenCup.jpg
Regarding [42], can you help me understand how you concluded that the result of the discussion was to delete the image? There were two people in favor of keeping the image in at least one of the two articles it was included in. Both articles it was included in had been through FA review within the past year (and the image survived in both cases). The image was of a historic event. Unfortunately, the deletion discussion was long and strayed quite a bit on a number of irrelevant topics such as whether it was "iconic" or not, it turns out that iconicness (if that's a word) is not a requirement for non-free content. I thought I made a pretty clear case about how this photo improves the reader's understanding of this article. How was it concluded that the result of the discussion was delete? Please tell me that more was done that simply counting votes on this. --SkotyWATC 00:33, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but when I closed the discussion, I distinctly counted three editors (with valid rationale) in favor of deleting and only one, you, in favor of retaining the file. By sheer numbers, consensus is in favor to delete. After reading over the discussion and making a non-partisan judgment, I came to the conclusion to delete the page, because consensus favors that action and because of the reasoning behind the !votes to delete. Of course, you are free to contest my decision by going to WP:DRV, but you'll probably get the same response. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 04:42, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- The other voter in favor of keeping it used the bolded word "Comment" instead of "Keep" so that's probably why you missed it. You would have had to read the comment to understand that. This is disappointing. Honestly, I'm not sure hate myself enough to try to trudge through WP:DRV. Considering that you chose not to delete an image two days ago with a similar vote tally, I was surprised by your actions with this image. I think a mistake has been made in deleting this and two featured articles have been damaged by the decision but I have run out of energy to try to fix it. If you're unwilling to do anything about this, I'll probably consider the matter closed. --SkotyWATC 05:12, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Cain Velasquez
Please change his nationality back to American--N2492004 (talk) 00:46, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- To fill you in, this is an editor who has been steadily deleting sourced content in favour of his own, incorrect detail. Please disregard this request. Thanks. Paralympiakos (talk) 00:54, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
He can figure it out for himself--N2492004 (talk) 00:59, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Nations United
Given this (see the content of the messages he deleted), not sure if he's quite ready for rollback to be honest. Daniel (talk) 00:53, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Mm. Didn't see that. To be honest, I don't feel it's proper to revoke the right so soon after granting it, especially since the user has made a big effort to identify and remove vandalism. At any rate, I'll keep an eye on the user; if something funny/unusual comes up, I'll revoke the right. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:45, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
IfD closure comment
Hi I have re-tagged File:Jim In Miami w-Hat.jpg with a {{dfu}} as, at this point, it seems to be the alternative to taking it to a deletion review. In my past experience DR is accepted more where an actual deletion has taken place, rather than "no-consensus". However if you feel it would be better feel free to remove the {{dfu}} tag and and let me know. Soundvisions1 (talk) 01:47, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Fastily! Soundvisions1 has been aggressively trying to delete this image (possibly to make a point to me) and has used a myriad of excuses on why it shouldn't be here. After the FFD was closed, he has again (rather quickly) nominated it for speedy deletion, this time with a "customized" template[43]. Any advice you could give would be greatly appreciated. Cheers :> Doc9871 (talk) 01:50, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Note - I didn't see the above post from Soundvisions1, as your page wasn't on my watchlist. I'd delete the new section and post this under his, but it's your talk page. Cheers :> Doc9871 (talk) 01:53, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- To clear up a misconception here - all you need to do is read the first discussion we had on my talk page and come to your own conclusions of how we got here and if I am aggressively trying to delete this image. Soundvisions1 (talk) 02:03, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Your third different attempt to delete this? Yup. I guess moving on and focusing on other images is my fault, though[44]... Doc9871 (talk) 02:15, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Doc9871, Soundvisions1 is entitled to re-tag the file with {{dfu}} should he desire; policy-wise, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. Whether the nomination was made in good/bad faith however, is a totally different matter. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:03, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you! So now the image will be deleted after 6 September? Where do I address this particular deletion nomination? I added the template that the {{dfu}} states is needed in order for it to be removed, and I see no place to discuss this deletion on the template. Thanks, Fastily :> Doc9871 (talk) 05:17, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- You can use {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed}} to contest the deletion (use it like a {{hangon}} tag by placing it under the deletion tag at File:Jim In Miami w-Hat.jpg). All discussion regarding the deletion nomination belongs on the file's talk page. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:27, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Done: and thank you again - very much! I've already started researching to expand the article's section on "the Miami Incident" to better reflect its historical significance. I think this is the best path for now, but it will take a little time to write it properly. Cheers :> Doc9871 (talk) 05:57, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you! So now the image will be deleted after 6 September? Where do I address this particular deletion nomination? I added the template that the {{dfu}} states is needed in order for it to be removed, and I see no place to discuss this deletion on the template. Thanks, Fastily :> Doc9871 (talk) 05:17, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Doc9871, Soundvisions1 is entitled to re-tag the file with {{dfu}} should he desire; policy-wise, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. Whether the nomination was made in good/bad faith however, is a totally different matter. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:03, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Your third different attempt to delete this? Yup. I guess moving on and focusing on other images is my fault, though[44]... Doc9871 (talk) 02:15, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- To clear up a misconception here - all you need to do is read the first discussion we had on my talk page and come to your own conclusions of how we got here and if I am aggressively trying to delete this image. Soundvisions1 (talk) 02:03, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello again - just a question on this image now. The image was tagged for deletion in 2006 when it was upped suggesting a Fair use tag be place on it so it was by the uploader, however it also conflicted with the the CCL and it appears it never had any FUR placed on it (nor was one requested since 2006). As it was licensed as non-commercial my {{db-noncom}} was correct.(Media licensed as "for non-commercial use only" (including non-commercial Creative Commons licenses), "no derivative use", "for Wikipedia use only" or "used with permission" may be deleted, unless they comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content.) But to be sure the admin who came to that page understood, you may not have read it, I added a note that stated: NOTE: The image is under a NCL and it can not be used here even if a FUR is added as the subject is still alive and a free image can be obtained. - this went along *with* the {{db-noncom}} tag you removed that ended with unless they comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. So my question is why bother to re-tag with a {{di-no fair use rationale}} when it already fails criteria 1? Soundvisions1 (talk) 02:44, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Soundvisions1. To answer your questions: media files licensed under a NC license can be uploaded to Wikipedia under a non-free license. It would be inappropriate on my part to delete the file under WP:CSD#F3 when it clearly does not meet the criterion for deletion. Since the file was non-free and missing fair use rationale, I tagged it as such. While yes, the file likely will eventually be deleted (per set routine and non-controversial cleanup), I can see no pressing reasons to delete the file out of process right now. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:53, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
British VS American Spelling
Hi Fastily. I asked this question to another user but he isn't responding so I thought I'd just ask you. Do you use American or British spelling when editing articles about other countries? Nations United (talk) 05:03, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- I typically use American English, being American myself! However, there is absolutely nothing wrong with using a different national variety of English. For reference: WP:ENGVAR and WP:MOSS. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 05:06, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Alright, Thanks. Nations United (talk) 05:08, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Oh, I just happened to see my name on your talk page and I just want to clarify, are we allowed to delete comments on our own talk page? The reason I deleted that comment was because it seemed a little harsh, as I didn't even know that I did anything wrong. I was also very apologetic on his talk page as you can see here: talk So I deleted the comments because I didn't want other users to get the wrong idea that I purposely did something to cause trouble. Is there something wrong or frowned upon about what I did? Nations United (talk) 05:21, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) See WP:BLANKING. You can delete most things on your own talk page if you want to... Doc9871 (talk) 05:24, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Doc9871 is correct. You can delete most things off your talk page; of course, sometimes, it can be looked down upon. This however, does not mean I have passed any judgment on that action; the same rules apply to everyone else as they do to you. Basically, all this means that is if you misuse rollback (I'm not assuming you will), I'll have to revoke it. Hope this helps to clarify. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:31, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- I understand. Thanks. Nations United (talk) 05:34, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Doc9871 is correct. You can delete most things off your talk page; of course, sometimes, it can be looked down upon. This however, does not mean I have passed any judgment on that action; the same rules apply to everyone else as they do to you. Basically, all this means that is if you misuse rollback (I'm not assuming you will), I'll have to revoke it. Hope this helps to clarify. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:31, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Gordon William Duff
This page (or Gordon Duff) has been deleted. I don't remember it. Please would you copy it to my user pages. Many thanks. Kittybrewster ☎ 08:02, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Gordon Duff was deleted by Kinu as a copyright violation; you may want to ask them about restoring the page. Gordon William Duff was deleted by me as a broken redirect. I'll gladly restore the latter for you, but I'm not sure how a broken redirect would be helpful. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:33, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Deleted Nomacorc, LLC
Hi Fastily,
I see that you deleted the Nomacorc, LLC page immediately after I added two facts with direct references to The Wall Street Journal. You cited that the page was "advertising" or "promotion." Can I ask how two facts that have been added straight from the Wall Street Journal flagged the entire article for deletion?
Best regards, Capagody (talk) 15:19, 30 August 2010 (UTC)Capagody
- User_talk:Capagody#Re:Deleted_Nomacorc.2C_LLC -FASTILY (TALK) 19:35, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you!
I hope to be a more productive member now! :) ΤΕΡΡΑΣΙΔΙΩΣ(Ταλκ) 17:59, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, you blocked this user a couple of days ago for a period of two weeks.
As outlined here, this person uses a number of IP socks. He appears to be bypassing his block using this IP User:70.82.96.170.
Cheers,
Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 19:33, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Warned user. If the IP starts editing again, I'll block. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:37, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Deleted Article
Hi Fastily,
I recently add an article about Intlock Ltd. I'm writing to ask why this article was deleted. There are many articles about companies, organizations, and businesses. I have added references of sites from which the information was used.
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesblane1980 (talk • contribs) 20:33, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- User_talk:Jamesblane1980#Re:Deleted_Article -FASTILY (TALK) 21:03, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
More time as i spent a long time
Hello, I made a Page about Plug Studios that you just Deleted, I didt get time to say why it should not be deleted, I cant get it back anymore to say why, but I cant make it again as it took 1 day and a half, I would just like to say please give a bit more time for me to add the hangon tag. :(
I cant tell you why I think it shouldt be deleted but I spent a long time making that and not even 8 mins to add the hangon tag.
Next time give more time as i spent a long long time to make a page without 8mins to add the tag, so i spent over a day making a page with no time to add the Hangon tag.
Please reply, Alec Mason (talk) 21:23, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- (
- User_talk:Alec_Mason#Re:More_time_as_i_spent_a_long_time -FASTILY (TALK) 21:27, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Re Re More time as i spent alot of time
Ok Thankyou —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alec Mason (talk • contribs) 21:28, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Two deleted images
Hi, I have an appropriate OTRS ticket (#2010081510004265) for the following two files which were recently deleted by yourself for no evidence of permission. Would you be prepared to undelete on the basis that I can now add the OTRS confirmation?
- File:Starman-1-White-Logo-Print.jpg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- File:AndrewStone.jpg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Thanks, Fæ (talk) 22:15, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Done -FASTILY (TALK) 02:31, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, there may have been a slight confusion, the OTRS ticket was not actually approved at the time when you added the tag to these images. I was asking for undeletion so that I could verify that the claims of the email were correct. In practice there appears to be no issue and I shall close the ticket. Thanks, Fæ (talk) 10:19, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Road_to_F.A._Cup
I restored and blanked Road_to_F.A._Cup because a request on WP:REFUND indicated that an OTRS ticket has been entered. This hasn't been confirmed yet and hopefully will be done so quickly. I figured this would be relatively uncontroversial, so I didn't ask you first. Protonk (talk) 22:57, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Lovari (Entertainer) - Please restore
I am the creator of Lovari (Entertainer), which I renamed from my original authorship of Lovari (Person). Please restore it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DoingDreams (talk • contribs) 23:21, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Hey! What happened to this template? I had a couple of templates tagged with it, and now it's gone. It's ironic that I would check before I would tag templates as being deprecated and orphaned - but it was obviously not orphaned itself before it was deleted. Secondarywaltz (talk) 23:36, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Look at what is linked to Template:Deprecated date, to see what was also linked there. Secondarywaltz (talk) 23:50, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Bsherr requested the deletion as non-controversial housekeeping and WP:CSD#T2. Do you want the page restored? -FASTILY (TALK) 02:36, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yes. This template is for tagging templates for deletion as a non-controversial housekeeping task, and when it is not being used can appear to be orphaned. Seems ironic. Secondarywaltz (talk) 03:15, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- Done -FASTILY (TALK) 05:34, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- You also need to restore Template:Deprecated/doc. Secondarywaltz (talk) 13:30, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yes. This template is for tagging templates for deletion as a non-controversial housekeeping task, and when it is not being used can appear to be orphaned. Seems ironic. Secondarywaltz (talk) 03:15, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- Bsherr requested the deletion as non-controversial housekeeping and WP:CSD#T2. Do you want the page restored? -FASTILY (TALK) 02:36, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Re: Nomacorc LLC
Hey Fastily,
Thanks for letting me know, however I didn't create the page, I simply added two edits to it. Is there a way to reinstate the page without my edits?
Please advise. Capagody (talk) 02:01, 31 August 2010 (UTC)Capagody
- Without your edits? Yes, there is, but the revision of the page before your edits is still somewhat promotional in nature. That version is marginally passable, so I'll restore it if you like. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:38, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, Fastily. I would greatly appreciate it if you would restore the page without my edits. Once it is reinstated, do you suggest that I edit some of the content of the original page to make it less promotional in nature? Thanks againCapagody (talk) 22:03, 2 September 2010 (UTC)Capagody
Fastily, will you restore the original article without my edits as you mentioned above? Thanks, Capagody (talk) 21:10, 9 September 2010 (UTC)Capagody
Wrong tag?
Hi Fastily. Thanks for responding so fast. I'm not so sure that I used the wrong tag for File:StrangeTales-127.jpg. True, it's an orphan now, but that's only because I removed it from the article where it was being used. I just finished writing my rationale for its deletion on the image talk page, but it basically comes down to it not being the actual cover of the issue that it claims to be. Rather it's a derivative work created by a hobbyist. So, the fair use rationale, which was written as though it were any other comic book cover and thus most likely fair use, doesn't really apply here. I couldn't find a speedy deletion tag that neatly matched this situation, however. Db-f7 seemed closest. It will probably get deleted either way, but it would hardly be fair of me to orphan the image and then declare it an orphan. ;-) Cheers, GentlemanGhost (talk) 02:37, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, I see what you mean. For future reference, use the tag {{db-hoax}} for hoax/fan-made files/articles. WP:CSD#F7 applies to a completely different thing; I assumed that you meant to place an orphaned tag on the article but accidentally placed the "wrong tag" on the file. At any rate, file deleted under WP:CSD#G3. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 02:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks! I'll use that tag in the future (although hopefully I won't see this too often). --GentlemanGhost (talk)
Second look?
Hi Fastily, can you take a look at the deleted history of The Brides of Sodom (film)? Just before you deleted it, the editor rewrote the plot to eliminate some/all of the copyvio material. I'm not saying the article's still worthy of inclusion, but it may be worth restoring for the time being. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:09, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- I had another look, and, to be honest, I'm fine with either way. I'll support whatever action you decide to take. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 04:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Duplicate Images
Which template SHOULD be used for reporting duplicate images. These are almost the same as the flag used in United States --Tyw7 (☎ Contact me! • Contributions) Changing the world one edit at a time! 03:12, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- Duplicate (i.e. bit for bit copies) files can be deleted under speedy deletion criterion F1. You can request the deletion of duplicate files with {{db-f1}}. Variations (but similar versions) of a file are not eligible for deletion under WP:CSD#F1. Hope that helps to answer your question. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:43, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
AAC Request
I took your advice and reported usernames to the Admins for review. The majority of them I submitted were legitimate (meaning the username was bad) and I would like to know if I can have access to the AAC. I have also read the documentation of the AAC so I know what to do. I have submitted a email to the list for re-approval and I did not get a reply within 3 weeks. So, I am coming to you, someone I know will answer. I believe I have done my best to prepare and get ready for this. Joe Gazz84user•talk•contribs•Editor Review 21:21, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- I think you may have misunderstood me. My apologies for being unclear the first time. If you're interested in the account creator right, you'll need to have reached the 6 accounts created limit per day. To learn how and why you'd want to create an account for others, see WP:ACCGUIDE. To get started, request access to the account creator interface by going here. Feel free to let me know if you have any questions or are in need of assistance. Regards, FASTILYsock(TALK) 05:56, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
- I did that and requested access in June. I was denied and told to report usernames and get involved with the documentation and now I would like to see if I can be approved for the tool now. I thought you were an admin that could approve this. Joe Gazz84user•talk•contribs•Editor Review 00:12, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Try it again. If they deny you, let me know and I'll speak with them. Yes, as an administrator, I can grant you the right, however, I can only do so once you have reached the 6 accounts created per day maximum, which, believe me, is very easy once you have access to the account creator interface. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:17, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily, small point of order: Once someone has had a request to join ACC declined they already have an account on the project, just it is not active. Sending someone to re-register would give them error messages about already having an account and if they worked around that they are now socking at account creation. I think you could guess how well that would go over.
- As to the request to join the project, in addition to here, there are messages on FunPika's talk page [45], my talk page [46]. As to my own reason for not responding, i told Joe to take a few months to get some more experience. He was back asking me in exactly one month. 15 minutes after asking me about ACC he asked you about clerking at UAA.[47] A little more than a week later he asked FunPika about ACC. Neither FunPika nor myself replied. I can only speculate on why FunPika didn't reply. Joe also emailed the ACC mailing list [48] twice [49]. It was noticed by another ACC admin [50] who noted the request on my talk page. I replied that i had other things to do and was sure i had told Joe to take more time and suggested a different admin review it now.[51] Having looked at the mailing list archive i now see that noone actually replied to Joe. Oops. I am asking around to see what other project members think. delirious & lost ☯ ~hugs~ 12:52, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- Try it again. If they deny you, let me know and I'll speak with them. Yes, as an administrator, I can grant you the right, however, I can only do so once you have reached the 6 accounts created per day maximum, which, believe me, is very easy once you have access to the account creator interface. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:17, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- I did that and requested access in June. I was denied and told to report usernames and get involved with the documentation and now I would like to see if I can be approved for the tool now. I thought you were an admin that could approve this. Joe Gazz84user•talk•contribs•Editor Review 00:12, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
50reverts
How do i know if i have 50 reverts, is there a way to check that. Inka 888 04:49, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
- There has to be a better way:
$ curl -s "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Inka+888" | grep Reverted | wc -l 31
- Looks like just over 30. ErikHaugen (talk) 05:05, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, but I don't think there is any way to easily tell the amount of reverts alone. I would manually check them. L Kensington (talk • contribs) 05:28, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
I think i might of done that now. Inka 888 01:49, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
do you know my current number of reverts, it's fine if you don't you don't have to check for me. Inka 888 03:13, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
I think it is at least 50 now. --Inka 888 22:01, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Page deletion
Hi, the page Neon Knights (band) has been deleted. I was unaware that a topic (in this case band) had to be of a certain status... Can you please clarify. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.38.60.142 (talk) 00:20, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- It was deleted per the WP:PROD process, as an uncontested prod flagged for more than 7 days. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:31, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
I did not receive any notification about this. Therefore I was unable to know that it was PROD. Can this page be re instated? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.38.60.142 (talk) 03:08, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Of course, but first, by any chance, are you the same person as User:Vansheboy? If not, do you have an account? -FASTILY (TALK) 04:35, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Sorry yes, I am vansheboy. Didn't realise i wasn't logged in. If you could reinstate the page, that would be great! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vansheboy (talk • contribs) 06:48, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- I can certainly restore the page for you, but I would recommend having it restored to your userspace first so that you can go about improving it (and avoiding needless re-deletion for the same reason) before moving it back to the mainspace. How does that sound? -FASTILY (TALK) 19:30, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Yes that is fine you can restore it to my userspace 1st. What amendments need to be made to avoid re deletion? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.38.60.142 (talk) 23:37, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
why was my page silsila (album) deleted?? ther was no talk concerning it... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smartspy (talk • contribs) 12:32, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Cray CX1000 Article Deletion
Why did you delete my Cray CX1000 article? It was by no means intended to be advertising or promotion. My article only documented the Cray CX1000; it did not in any way advertise for Cray. Other articles written by other editors regarding Cray products have not been deleted. If you deleted my article in error, please restore it immediately. If not, please explain exactly how my article constitues advertising, when other editor's articles regarding Cray products do not. In the meantime, I am keeping a copy of the deleted page within my own namespace at User:Rocketshiporion/Cray CX1000, where I hope it will not be deleted. Thank you. Rocketshiporion 06:03, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- I had a look at the rest of the cray articles, and they are not nearly as technically specific as Cray CX1000. If your intent was not to advertise, then accept my apologies, but I cannot restore the page when it does read like an advertisement. For reference: WP:ADS, WP:MOS, WP:SOAP. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:30, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
If you're going to deline speedies, please don't leave files with clearly incorrect licensing. The uploader does not own the rights to the flag of the United States, so they don't have the right to release it. J Milburn (talk) 09:06, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
/* Nygard International */
Recreated is the recreation fine or simply a copy of the deleted one? - Nygård_International - Off2riorob (talk) 12:23, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- They are indeed very similar. The new version is simply a stripped and toned down version of the original. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 20:22, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
File deletion
Hello, I've noticed you deleted a number of good Cape May file pages, saying they were corrupt. They were not, I simply added a category to them. Please restore. ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 15:30, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- I did not delete the files as corrupt, but rather as a file description page for a file on Commons. Files on Commons should be organized and categorized on that wiki, not on Wikipedia. Hope that helps to answer your question. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:35, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Children's Health Fund page deletion
HI, I was wondering why the former Children's Health Fund page was deleted. I'd like to create a historical entry for the organization but don't want to post anything inappropriate.
--Caitlinmcfeely (talk) 18:16, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, alright. I see you have a draft copy of the article at User:Caitlinmcfeely/Children's Health Fund. If you need any assistance or have any questions, please let me know and I'll see what I can do. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:00, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi! Regarding wireless expense management
Hi Fastily,
Sorry to bother you, but I was wondering if you could move back wireless expense management after some edits.
This is a unique process and segment of industry, very different from the broad term "telecom expense management". Unlike telecom expense management, wireless expense management is directly associated with data, global usage, etc. This means that completely different processes and technology are used to provide different insight into wireless billings with numerous carriers, rate plans, and roaming issues.
I can remove the name of the company and the link (even if the U.S. patent office agrees that they invented the process) if you'd like, but the patent is 100% objective, legitimate, and relevant. If you read the abstract of patent at the US Patent and Trademark's website, you can see what I mean.
Thank you for your time and consideration. I hope we can come to a mutual agreement on this matter.
Regards, Kevin —Preceding unsigned comment added by Penneykh (talk • contribs) 20:14, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:Penneykh#Re:Hi! Regarding wireless expense management -FASTILY (TALK) 21:02, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
I realised you tagged the photos uploaded to Iamamiwhoami as "does not significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would not be detrimental to that understanding." How can I change this? Iamamiwhoami's videos are VERY cryptic and I really think these images are necessary to gain an understanding to her videos. It is not enough merely to describe, they must have some illustration of sorts. Help me out here? Thank you for your time. Borderings (talk) 01:24, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Regarding Iamamiwhoami's images
I realised you tagged the photos uploaded to Iamamiwhoami as "does not significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would not be detrimental to that understanding." How can I change this? Iamamiwhoami's videos are VERY cryptic and I really think these images are necessary to gain an understanding to her videos. It is not enough merely to describe, they must have some illustration of sorts. Help me out here? Thank you for your time. Borderings (talk) 01:26, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- The tags were originally placed on the file by Fixer23. Basically what this means is that the files to do not enhance a reader's understanding to the point where their exclusion would be detrimental to the integrity of the article. Long story short, there is not enough context (in terms on notability) in the article on these photos to warrant their inclusion. You can add more text to the article in an attempt to resolve this issue, but just fyi - editors are discouraged from using music video screenshots in articles. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:01, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Block of ValenShepard
Regarding User_talk:ValenShephard#Blocked, there is a long dialog on the talk page between this editor, SandyGeorgia, and several other editors that demonstrates a lot of growth and understanding. I will soon be posting something on his talk page that should address some more misunderstandings. How do you feel about unblocking or reducing his block?--Chaser (talk) 02:17, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- It's fine with me. I trust your judgment on this matter; feel free to reduce/extend the block as necessary. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 04:06, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Help with a new article
Hello. I had previously created an article about a company but it had been deleted for "advertising". So I created another edit and hopefully this doesn't contain any advertising. I just wanted to post what I had and wanted some feedback on how to make it better. Thanks in advance.
Xeltek Corporation
Xeltek (officially known as Exp Computer DBA Xeltek) is a manufacturer of universal programmer devices. The company’s headquarters is located in the heart of the Silicon Valley (Sunnyvale, CA) while the main manufacturing takes place in Nanjing, China with a smaller branch in Seoul, Korea to support with R&D projects.
The company was founded in Korea under the name Zues in 1985. In 1991, the company moved to the Silicon Valley with the new title: Xeltek. Xeltek carries its programmer devices by the registered brand name SuperPro®, established in 1994.
Achievements
Xeltek was the first programmer manufacturer to develop the term “Stand-Alone” programming to the universal programmer industry. Stand-alone programming is an application which allows users to compile supported IC devices on a PC-independent platform through the aid of an LCD screen mounted on the programmer. Xeltek has been offering this functionality since August of 2000
Current Products
Xeltek is a supplier of programming solutions for memories, microcontrollers and programmable logic devices such as EPROM, Paged EPROM, Parallel and Serial EEPROM, FPGA Configuration PROM, FLASH memory (NOR & NAND), BPROM, NVRAM, SPLD, CPLD, EPLD, Firmware HUB, Microcontroller, MCU, Standard Logic, etc…
History
In 2009, Xeltek got into the ISP Programming market. In 2010, Xeltek had developed over 1000 socket adapters to support solutions for most of the packing types for IC devices. Xeltek has been running R&D projects for developing automated device programming systems since 2006 with the contribution of engineers in Korea and China. Xeltek has already introduced a new automated handler to the Far East Market and is scheduled to be released to the U.S. market and the rest of the world by the end of 2010.
This is just an outline so far. If this was okay I was wondering if I could also receive help on some sources I found to help make this article notable. (Basically want to know if the sources I found would make this article credible)
Sources: http://www.microchip.com/stellent/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_PAGE&nodeId=1926&type=-1&label=X
http://digikey.com/Suppliers/us/Xeltek.page?lang=en&cshift_ck=2082148734cs509548344&WT.srch=1
http://www.umeantech.com/xeltek.php
http://focus.ti.com/general/docs/thirdparty/companydetailaction.tsp?supplierId=1065
http://www.thedebugstore.com/acatalog/Xeltek.html
http://secure-alliance.renesas.com/eu/searchPartner.partner?action=profile&userid=2550
http://www.cpedia.com/wiki?q=Xeltek&guess_ambig=programmer+Xeltek —Preceding unsigned comment added by Junjoon (talk • contribs) 19:11, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you, Junjoon (talk) 19:14, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
- Looks better. I would recommend removing the sections titled "Current Products" and "Achievements". Both of those sections are highly promotional in nature, and, as you probably already know, Wikipedia is not to be used for advertising. I'd also recommend you have a look at WP:PEACOCK. Otherwise, looking pretty good. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 08:22, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you again but I have made another edited version of this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Junjoon/Xeltek_inc.#External_links%7C Tried very hard to remove all promotional or peacock terms. Waiting to hear back thank you very much Junjoon (talk) 20:18, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry to have to say this, but the old version was far less promotional in nature. I recommend going back to the original version and working from there. The article I see right now would probably not survive for even 5 minutes in the mainspace. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Sad to hear that. I'll just have to try again. Thank you for your time Junjoon (talk) 21:37, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Fastily, here once again to bother you. Could I get this draft reviewed another time? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Junjoon/Xeltek_inc. Thanks for your time Junjoon (talk) 23:35, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- Much better. I think it's just about ready to be moved to the articlespace. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:21, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Could you take a look at this article you deleted yesterday - I would agree that its not been changed much from the userfied version. Maybe Afd? Skier Dude (talk 05:23, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- Hmm. Clearly recreated. Yeah, Afd. Shall I do the honors? -FASTILY (TALK) 05:40, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Who pictures
Hello. I'd like to know how you came to the conclusion that the result of this discussion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_August_11#File:Thewho60s.jpg was delete. Looks like quite the opposite, to me. 71.183.238.217 (talk) 06:48, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Image Deletion and licensing tags
Unfortunately, I saw that the image I had uploaded has been deleted. I thought I had the tags set up correctly for the image, but since it is deleted, and it was the first image I have uploaded, I'm not certain exactly what I did that was incorrect. I would like to get the image restored since I am working with the local Boy Scout Council on having that patch produced once again. I have copied the text viewed when trying to edit the image information.
"A page with this title has previously been deleted.
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.
* 00:03, 23 August 2010 Fastily (talk | contribs) deleted "File:Silver Moccasin Patch.png" (F4: Lack of licensing information)
"
Paradur (talk) 16:24, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- I deleted the file because it was missing a license tag. Per Wikipedia non-free content criterion #10b, media files must bear a license tag. Media files that do not bear a license tag are subject to deletion under speedy deletion criterion F4 within 7 days of being flagged. Feel free to reupload the file, but be sure to include a license tag. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:14, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Inquiry regarding deleted page
Dear Fastily,
I work with Dr. David F. Gordon, Head of Research at Eurasia Group, and I'm writing to respectfully ask why his page was deleted from Wikipedia? David held very senior positions in the US government prior to coming to Eurasia Group, including Director of Policy Planning at the State Department and Deputy Chairman of the National Intelligence Council. During his government career, he was central to many foreign policy decisions, and led strategic policy dialogues with over 20 countries. In addition, Dr. Gordon is a published author, and frequently appears in the broadcast and print media commentating on international political issues. Some recent examples:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2009/08/podcast_can_china_save_america.html http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232/?video=1484213845&play=1 http://content.usatoday.com/topics/article/People/Politicians,+Government+Officials,+Strategists/World+Leaders/Hu+Jintao/03KO0BAcQy9dR/1
I do not understand what was offensive or insignificant about his page that would require active deletion.
Could you please explain?
Alex Lloyd Eurasia Group El salar (talk) 18:45, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- The article was deleted via the WP:PROD process. While I can restore it for you, I would recommend having a copy restored to your userspace, where you can work on it (and later move it back to the articlespace when you're ready) and avoid needless re-deletion. How does that sound? -FASTILY (TALK) 19:16, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response, and I would very much appreciate if you could restore the article. Could you also give me some insight into why the article was deleted in the first place, so that I may make relevant adjustments? El salar (talk) 19:24, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- Done at User:El salar/David F. Gordon. Some links you may find helpful: WP:ADS, WP:MOS, WP:NPOV, WP:COI, WP:V, WP:CITE, WP:YFA, WP:RFF, WP:POV. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:29, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
What To Do Next Time Around...
Hi Fastily,
I noticed that my article was deleted. Can you tell me what I need to do to ensure that any other articles that I write don't get deleted. What was wrong with this article so that I may better write future articles.
Thank you in advance for taking your time to assist me.
Warm Regards, Adina Hernandez —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adinahernandez (talk • contribs) 18:47, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- User_talk:Adinahernandez#re:What_To_Do_Next_Time_Around... -FASTILY (TALK) 19:17, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Thank You
Fastily,
Thank you for answering my question. Would you know where I can submit the deleted article for review? I wanted to see if I could get a more clear direction on how I should revise article "Allomap". If I have to just make minor changes here or there or if I need to re-write the whole article.
Thanks again. I appreciate all the help you've provided me.
Warm Regards, Adina Hernandez —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adinahernandez (talk • contribs) 19:29, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- You can submit the article for review at WP:RFF. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:31, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Yervand Kochar article has been deleted.
Hi, article about Yervand Kochar has been deleted. Can I know why? Yervand Kochar is a notable person and a great name in Armenian and world art. A creator of "Painting in Space" who's biography is for sure worth being included in wikipedia as an encyclopedic article. Could you help with advice on how to keep the article away from deletion? Thanks a lot. George
- User_talk:G.harrison30#Re:Yervand_Kochar_article_has_been_deleted. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:43, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Weird!
Hey Fastily!
I notice that you rejected a call to block IP 216.79.193.55 at WP:AIV.
I was about to post that there wasn't sufficient recent activity to warrant a block before you replied refusing it anyway. But could I ask you to look at the IP talk page? It's just very strange, they've been given 4 warnings all today but I can only see the IP editing once today? One of the articles he was supposedly warned about was History of classical music traditions and that hasn't been edited since 24 August according to it's history!
The warnings from the editor reporting it to WP:AIV all happened within about a minute of each other. I'm just wondering if the IP is being warned for edits that happened weeks or months ago? If they are it seems a little harsh given that their contributions before today were in May (I think). Just thought I'd mention it for it to be looked into as the IP is now on it's final warning when that may be incorrect --5 albert square (talk) 23:00, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- I know. People do that quite often actually. When that happens I simply decline the request. It's sad how little good faith is displayed sometimes. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:22, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- Ah so it is the individual user. OK, thought it was Wikipedia being glitchy again! --5 albert square (talk) 23:53, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Why did you decline the salting of Aryan Shahabian? The most recent creation was not by the User who was doing it in the past. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 01:14, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- I did not notice that User:Sasan sasani had also created the page. Please accept my apologies. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:21, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Template:Untagged
I've reverted your edits to Template:Untagged. There's a reason why the template uses the category "images with no copyright tag" rather than "images with unknown copyright status": User:ImageTaggingBot applies it when the bot knows that the image does not contain a copyright tag, but where the copyright status may have been supplied in some other way, such as a plain-text statement or by subst'ing a copyright tag. --Carnildo (talk) 01:28, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Fair use image tags
Thanks for your contribution at File:GraceHopper.jpg - since you work more in this area, could you clarify something for me? I added the CSD (F7) tag on the grounds that the tag was "obviously" incorrect, in the sense that it was absurd to claim that no free use image could now be used due to the subject's death, given that the subject's article already contained a free use image. But re-reading F7 I'm not sure whether it was that "obviously" incorrect (WP:CSD seems to suggest that it would work for a tag of the wrong type e.g. "fair use logo" used for a mascot; here the tag used was of the correct kind for the type of photo but its justification was flawed) so you were correct to change it.
You replaced it with {tl|di-replaceable fair use disputed}} which I considered doing; I thought it better not to, since that tag is for cases where the photo "illustrates a subject for which a free image might reasonably be found" - and in this case a free image already has been found. I've always thought of the "replaceable fair use" image as the "don't be lazy, find or make a free one yourself" tag. Is there a designated tag for "this fair use image has already been replaced by a free use image", or is "replaceable fair use" deemed to include that case? It looks a wee bit odd for the tag to suggest that, hypothetically, a free use image could be found, when one already has! But I can't think of a better tag at the moment. TheGrappler (talk) 02:37, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, I used {{subst:rfu}}, same thing though. For the record, non-free media files are only eligible for immediate speedy deletion under WP:CSD#F7 iff:
- The file has been tagged with {{Di-disputed fair use rationale}} or one of it's variants (e.g. {{subst:dnfcc}}, {{subst:rfu}}) for more than 2 days
- The fair use rationale and/or license tag claims the file as an entity that the photo does not represent. For instance, a photo of a man claimed as non-free logo (with {{non-free logo}}) when this is obviously not the case may subject to on-sight deletion under WP:CSD#F7.
- Hope that helps to answer your question. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:14, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Some advice
Hi
You seem to have your finger on the pulse when it comes to images. What would you do about this bizarre situation?
User has uploaded files to en which are just distorted copies of good files on Commons - for example:
- File:Napoleon III, Emperor of the French.png is distorted copy of File:Franz Xaver Winterhalter Napoleon III.jpg
- File:Napoleon I, Emperor of the French.png is distorted copy of File:Jacques-Louis David 017.jpg
- File:Louis Napoleon, Prince Imperial.png is distorted copy of File:Napoléon Eugène Bonaparte, sitting.jpg
etc... (if you doubt they are distorted just pick something circular to look at like the clock in the second, or the badge in the third)
He then proceeds to edit war to insert them into Emperor of the French and other articles. I've never seen behaviour quite this odd, and wondered if you had any thoughts? Begoon•talk 05:06, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- That ought to solve it. :-) Thanks for the prompt action. Begoon•talk 05:56, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy has done a pretty good job already - the articles look ok as far as I can tell. I did come across a few others which I tagged F8 Begoon•talk 08:10, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Port number associated redirects
Greetings Fastily. I noticed that you recently deleted a number of redirects including a few that I happened to encounter while entering common phrases in search of port number related articles. I see that these redirects used to point to Port number (Internet socket) that you had recently renamed to simply Port number. I believe that many of the redirects are useful common phrases and it would be beneficial to restore them and update their target. (Personally, I had searched for well known port, TCP port and internet port while probing.) Would you have any objections to my restoring them? -- Tom N (tcncv) talk/contrib 05:42, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Holy Roman Emperor
I see that you are trying to fix this page but it seems like a real mess right now. Would you mind if I revert it to this previous revision? The tables look better if they are together than seperate on each monarch and none of the images are distorted. I also fixed the Emperor of Austria you seem to have Charles I and Francis I fixed up.--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 06:06, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- If that version is cleaner, by all means, go for it. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 06:10, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Epiphan Systems article
Hi Fastily,
You deleted the Epiphan Systems article due to lack of notability, and cited that Ottawa Business Journal reference was 404'd. The reason for this was a change in Ottawa Business Journal's website structure. Here is a link to the article: http://www.obj.ca/Other/Special-Reports/2009-04-22/article-303830/FASTEST-GROWING-COMPANIES%3A-%235---Epiphan-Systems-Inc./
Furthermore, Epiphan Systems' technology is notable in the field of telemedicine and is used by NASA, as shown on NASA's official website: http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oce/appel/ask/issues/39/39i_invention.html
Thus, I ask you to review the deletion of the Epiphan Systems article and reinstate it, which will allow me to correct the references and text.
Eurovictor (talk) 11:06, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- The article was deleted via the WP:PROD process. While I can restore it for you, I would recommend having a copy restored to your userspace, where you can work on it (and later move it back to the articlespace when you're ready) and avoid needless re-deletion. How does that sound? -FASTILY (TALK) 19:12, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi Fastily,
That would be great! Would you be able to restore a copy to my userspace? I will move it to articlespace when it is corrected.
Thanks, Eurovictor (talk) 11:04, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Done at User:Eurovictor/Epiphan Systems. -FASTILY (TALK) 16:21, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Can I use this file on my user page if I follow
"TrainWeb allows it to be used for any purpose, as long as the text "www.trainweb.com" is printed near the photo or in a photo credits area."
DASHBot Removed it. thanks--intelati 19:07, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, that should be alright. As long as it's not the trainweb logo, you're in the clear. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:18, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- Thats what I thought. What Should I do if it delete's it again?intelati 19:19, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Alright Dashbot removed the picture again. :( What should I (or you) do?--intelati 19:57, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- I put some bot repellant on the page, so the bot should stay away until I can get an opinion from WP:MCQ. Tim1357 talk 21:13, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
source information?
I'm confused as to why you put a tag on a file that has copyright info (copyright tag). How can i get source information about a picture that belongs to me. Inka 888 02:31, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
yes Inka 888 21:17, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Mkay. I've amended the file's description page accordingly. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:37, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
thanks, in the future when i upload pictures that I took should i specify that it is self made? Inka 888 00:14, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
Reply
To Fastily, I uploaded those images in good faith and was NOT aware they were distorted. As on my computer which uses a 1280 by 1024 pixel resolution monitor they DO NOT show up distorted!!! And for record my contributions to this website were honest and not acts of vandalism!!! (i.e. cleaned up Holy Roman Emperor article in good faith only to then have someone remove it all!!!). Mackay 86 (talk) 06:19, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- You've got to be kidding me. So just because the normal photos were rendering distorted on your distorted screen, you decided to distort the normal photos so that they showed up correctly on your screen? No. My final warning still stands. -FASTILY (TALK) 06:22, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
No i'm NOT kidding and those photos were NOT rendering distorted on my distorted screen, as my screen was NOT distorted and nether were the photos!!! Mackay 86 (talk) 13:02, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- I've commented on this before, on your talk page (which you deleted without reply), so I'll comment here. You took perfectly good pictures from Commons, which had no need to be altered, you altered the aspect ratio to make them proportionally wider, and made them much lower resolution and quality. Then you uploaded them here, then replaced the good photos in articles with your reduced quality, incorrectly proportioned versions. Then, when other editors explained why this was wrong, you edit warred to keep replacing the altered versions. If you can't see why that is wrong in so many ways, then it's hard to know what to say to you. Did you think everyone was just telling you they were wrong for fun? Can you at least tell us why you thought it was a good idea to reduce the quality (resolution/no of pixels) and make them proportionally wider with respect to the height? Did you think the Commons versions were too high quality, and that you were the only one who could see they should be wider? I'm asking because I'm genuinely interested in what you thought you were doing to improve the situation. Begoon•talk 15:28, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Page deletion - Mark Burgess(Illustrator)
Please explain the deletion of this page. Information on it was correctly referenced (to The Guardian newspaper).
- 07:08, 25 August 2010 Fastily (talk | contribs) deleted "Mark Burgess (illustrator)" (Expired PROD, concern was: unsourced BLP)
Marcus civis (talk) 12:01, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- The page was deleted per the WP:PROD process. I can restore the page if you like, although I recommend working on it in draft form in your userspace before moving it to the articlespace. -FASTILY (TALK) 16:23, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. The reason I asked is that the proposed deletion tag had been removed yet the page was still deleted. This seems perverse (and against the guidelines you reference). I'm not going to develop the page myself because I'm the subject but I think I can be forgiven for having an interest in its existence. Marcus civis (talk) 07:35, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
Delete Bedat & Co page
Dear Fastily,
Following my contribution yesterday, I have just seen that you deleted the Bedat & Co text. To prepare this text, I have taken as an example the description of other brands like Piaget, Baume et Mercier, Chopard... to respect the rules of Wikipedia. I have worked a lot to write the most factual text I can after Eeekster's message.
As you have deleted my text could you be so kind to help me on this matter? Could you please explain to me what's wrong and how I can change the text to be in accordance with the Wikipedia concept? I have put this text here under for your information.
Thank you for your help.
Best regards, Sophie CF Link: Bedat & Co
Bedat & Co – Wikipedia text
Bedat & Co is a Swiss watch brand specialized in feminine luxury timepieces. The company was created in 1996 by Simone Bédat and her son Christian Bédat.
History After more than 50 years of experience in the watch industry, Simone Bédat created her own brand with her son in 1996. They have collaborated with the Swiss Italian designer Dino Modolo for the creation of their first collection of classic timepieces. It was presented in 1997 during Baselworld. In parallel, they have developed the AOSC concept (“Appelation d’Origine Suisse Certifiée”) guarantying the Swiss origin of the parts and the production. In 2000, Gucci Group acquired 85% of Bedat & Co with Simone Bédat serving as the chairwoman while her son Christian remaining as chief executive officer and a shareholder. Some new collections were launched in 2003, 2004 and 2008. In 2006, Simone and Christian Bédat departed from the company making the Gucci Group the sole owner of Bedat & Co. Following their departure, the Bedat & Co’s company worked with new designers. In 2008, the Swiss watch brand launched its very first stand alone boutique in Kuala Lumpur, the opening of which was officiated by the Queen of Malaysia, Seri Paduka Baginda Permaisuri Agong Tanhu Nu Zahirah. In 2009, Malaysia based company, Luxury Concepts watches and jewellery announced their acquisition of Bedat & Co. In spite of this, the brand remains a 100% Swiss company with global distribution. In 2010, Bedat & Co returned to the roots and worked again with the designer Dino Modolo for the last collection.
Collections Bedat & Co comprises 5 collections. Each one wears a number: 1, 2, 3, 7 and 8. These numbers are easy to memorize and to pronounce all around the world. Each number corresponds to a form of shape: - No1: Square-shaped cases curved at 3 o’clock and 9 o’clock - No2: Oval-shaped cases - No3: “Tonneau”-shaped cases - No7: Rectangular-shaped cases curved at 3 o’clock and 9 o’clock - No8: “Round in a cushion” shaped cases
The core value of Bedat & Co is the design of classic feminine models, mainly in stainless steel and often set with diamonds. They are inspired by Art Deco spirit & lines.
Bedat & Co worldwide
Bedat & Co watches are sold on four continents:
- Americas: USA, Canada, Central and South America
- Europe
- Africa: South and Western Africa
- Asia: China, Japan, Malaysia, Hong Kong…
Events
Hong Kong Landmark Exhibition (Visual)
http://www.luxury-insider.com/Current_Affairs/post/2009/10/27/Landmark-Moment-for-Bedat-Co-Hong-Kong.aspx
Baselworld 2010 (Visual) http://www.elitetraveler.com/news_detail.html?nid=2544&n=bedat-makes-comeback-basel
A Journey Through Time II & III (Visual) http://www.ytlcommunity.com/starhillgallery/shownews.asp?newsid=42749 http://www.ytlcommunity.com.my/starhillgallery/shownews.asp?newsid=50871
LuxuryChannel Coverage (Visual) http://www.theluxurychannel.tv/TheArtofTime.aspx http://www.theluxurychannel.tv/TheNewMalaysia.aspx
Awards In 2007, Bedat & Co’s ad campaign by Peter Lindberg was awarded “the Swiss Price of watchmaking advertising campaign. In 2009, Bedat & Co’s Collection No.3 Ref.384 model received the “Favourite Ladies’ Watch Award” during its outing in Malaysia’s annual luxury watch retail festival – ‘A Journey Through Time’.
References 1. http://www.lussori.com/bedat-watches.html 2. http://www.allbusiness.com/retail-trade/apparel-accessory-stores-womens-specialty/4222163-1.html 3. http://www.jckonline.com/article/293318-Gucci_Sells_Bedat_Co_to_LuxuryConcepts.php 4. http://www.luxury-insider.com/Current_Affairs/post/2009/10/27/Landmark-Moment-for-Bedat-Co-Hong-Kong.aspx 5. http://www.vialuxe.com/News/Bedat-and-Co-Watches-Bedat---Co-Sold-By-Gucci-Group-To-Luxury-Concepts/4457,29567 6. http://www.europastar.com/europastar/headlines/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1004029943 7. http://www.ytlcommunity.com.my/starhillgallery/shownews.asp?newsid=50871 8. http://www.worldtempus.com/en/news/top-news/detail/article/1267605428-bedat-co-new-distributor-for-north-america/ 9. http://www.hauteliving.com/blog/partnering-for-luxury-timepieces/ 10. http://www.nationaljewelernetwork.com/njn/content_display/watches/brand-profiles/e3i3d331a733bc9b8240d83e1baa59c080d 11. http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=103099&page=19 12. http://www.ytlcommunity.com/commnews/shownews.asp?newsid=50452
External link
www.bedat.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by SophieCF (talk • contribs) 14:10, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Looks better. I would recommend removing the sections titled "Collections", "Events", and "Awards". These sections are highly promotional in nature, and, as you probably already know, Wikipedia is not to be used for advertising. I'd also recommend you have a look at WP:PEACOCK, WP:ADS, WP:MOS. Otherwise, looking pretty good. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 16:27, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
hello, I don' t understand the reason for your warning. you haven't explained any reasons. However I wanted to say that there are users who delete reliable sources as chartattack, allmusic and soulofmetal without explaining to users about what their sources are based on writing the article. Watch the debate and you intervene. thanks ;)
hello, I don't understand the reason for your warning. you haven't explained any reasons. However I wanted to say that there are users who delete reliable sources as chartattack, allmusic and soulofmetal without explaining to users about what their sources are based on writing the article. see the debate and you intervene. thanks ;)
Dear Fastily,
Thanks for your explanation. I have made the recommended changes and put the new text on line. Just one thing that I don't understand: could you explain to me why the other brands have sections as: collections, watches, events.... I can give you a lot of examples? The content depends on the brand?
Thank you in advance for your response.
Best regards,
SophieCF —Preceding unsigned comment added by SophieCF (talk • contribs) 08:46, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
Erm... you may have just ruined a few CSS tweaks for some people. Although it seems like most are using File:Wiki.png instead, so hopefully no big deal. But is there any way you can replace them with this copy (or another similar one)? I haven't got AWB set up on this computer. —fetch·comms 21:25, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Just replaced them all with [52]. I think that's everything. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:05, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Could you please undelete this article? We have received OTRS permission for it which I can add as soon as it is restored. VernoWhitney (talk) 22:24, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Done -FASTILY (TALK) 23:05, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks! For future reference, I'm here often enough that I don't need talkbacks. VernoWhitney (talk) 01:11, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
Page Deletion - Ark Recordings
Hi there, I noticed that the page for Ark Recordings, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ark_recordings, was deleted on the 8th August. What was the reason for this deletion? Smaudio (talk) 22:44, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- It was deleted per housekeeping/maintenance as a broken redirect. The page was not an article. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:07, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Treyce page
Per your earlier request from today (above) here are some links/references:
TESTIMONIALS about the JUVENILE / HFT program --- http://www.writtenescape.com/Just%20a%20Few%20Email%20Testimonials%20from%20around%20the%20world.pdf ARTICLE about the JUVENILE / HFT program --- http://www.youthtoday.org/publication/article.cfm?article_id=511 ANOTHER JUVENILE / HFT ARTICLE (scroll to page 5) --- http://www.addictionrecov.org/paradigm/issues/paradigmF05.pdf ANOTHER JUVENILE / HFT ARTICLE -- http://graphology.net/content/Texas_Government_to_Fund_Handwriting_Formation_Therapy_Program_for_Juvenile_Recidivists.html BOARD of DIRECTORS NAHDE.ORG --- http://www.nahde.org/NAHDE%20Board%20of%20Directors.pdf MY CASEWORK - NEWS SEGMENT from MISSING BABY GABRIEL --- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xlyB6-1NTo BOOKS / MUSIC CD's --- http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=treyce+d%27gabriel&x=16&y=15 REFERENCES --- http://private-investigator-detective.com/directory/membersListingDetail12.htm RADIO SHOW --- http://www.blogtalkradio.com/handwriting. KNOW GANGS --- http://www.knowgangs.com/seminars/vegas07/speakers.php MURDER CASE --- http://community-2.webtv.net/Ydyer/RICKYLENNDYERSPAGE/ HONORARY PRESIDENT of CHAI --- http://www.chaiuniversal.org/Honorary.htm INVESTIGATOR (scroll midway) --- http://www.westcoastinvestigativeservices.com/About-Us.html
Thank you for your help !
}}
- Er, sorry, but I'm not sure why you're contacting me. Could you please clarify? Thanks, FASTILY (TALK) 23:09, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Fastily, you ARE fast!
|
The Admin's Barnstar | |
| For being "Fastily" at deleting CSDed pages —I-20the highway 00:17, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
|
Harveys the Original Seatbeltbag
I had previously published an article with this title about a month ago. I am new to Wikipedia and just trying to get this article published. I understand that it was deleted for unambiguous advertising. That wasn't my intention. I have redone the article and would like to get your opinion. Would that be possible? My goal is to just have an entry for Harveys in Wikipedia that gives essentially the definition, the history, and the features of the product (And I am not connected to the company in any way). Thank you for your time and consideration.
Fashionqueen24 (talk) 06:02, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
- User_talk:Fashionqueen24#Re:Harveys_the_Original_Seatbeltbag -FASTILY (TALK) 06:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
50 reverts
I have made 50 reverts why are you not even responding to my talk comments. And also i would of made more but twinkle would not work. There is a lot of vandalism lately. Inka 888 00:36, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- I had a look at your recent contributions and talk page posts, and well, apologies for being blunt, but, I'm seeing an extraordinary level of gross incompetence on your part. I have no doubt that your intentions are for the best of the project, but you really need to slow down and take it easy. Wikipedia is not a race or a video game. Some of your recent activity has been less than satisfactory, and in retrospect, I feel like this may have been a little early. A quick glance at your talk page indicates that you are overusing the {{helpme}} template regarding trivial things that can easily be found through a simple search, using the reviewer right without being fully aware of what it even does, and attempting to coyly get past Carnildo - [53], [54]. Furthermore, all this only happened within <72 hours. I'm sorry to have to tell you all this, but I don't feel like you're ready for Rollback; it is a powerful tool, capable of causing a significant amount of damage if misued. Please, if you want rollback, have a look at WP:V - read it carefully. I want to see reverts of vandalism, not good faith edits or mistakes. If locating vandalism is a problem, utilize Special:RecentChanges; I've told you this all to many times in the past. Tell you what, I'll even teach you how to use it now. Take this sample entry in RC:
- (diff | hist) . . Hotel Yorba; 01:08 . . (+32) . . :70.27.69.194 (talk) (Grammar fixes.)
- diff = link to the differences made by the editor to the page in question.
- hist = link to the history of the page in question.
- +32 = number of bytes added/removed - statistically, the larger the absolute value of the number is, the more likely it is to be vandalism.
- 1:08 = timestamp (i.e. the time the edit was made at today)
- Inka, I just want you to know that if you believe I am being unfair, or that you think you deserve the right, please let me know; I will refer your case to the community. However, please bear in mind that your recent activity is no deal breaker and that I am willing to give you rollback if you can improve the quality of your editing and vandalism reverts. I hope we can come to an understanding on this. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 01:19, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- i was not trying to coyly get past carnildo, i was telling him what happened i had no idea how the copyright got removed. And what makes you think i don't know how to use my reviewer rights. I read the page before i filled out the request for reviewer and i fully met the criteria i edit everyday and i make more edits than a lot of people, i read all the stuff i was supposed to before i requested as well. I no idea what bwilkins is talking about me having no experience and being a "newcomer". And when i use {{helpme}} templates a lot of the time i have already read the information that is in the article and i would like a personal tip from someone that has been on here a lot longer than me. I will work on getting more reverts of vandalism. Inka 888 02:23, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Inka, Fastily is right. You haven't given the rest of us here reason to believe you're ready to use more powerful tools responsibly. I, too, am sorry to be so blunt but you are a newcomer here. You still have a lot to learn, and you seem more interested in having cool tools than you are in learning how this place works. Just to cite a couple of small examples, take a look at wp:indent. And you're not yet familiar with the convention that a thread should stay on the page where it starts; e.g. if a user asks you a question on your talk page it's on your own talk page where most users will want you to reply. The idea is that it's harder to follow a "conversation" after the fact when it's spread out across two or more talk pages. ( You do know how to use the wp:watchlist facility, right? ) Anyway, I second Fastily's video game comment. It's not about racking up "points" here by getting cool tools. This place, at its best, is about working carefully and deliberately to produce the highest-quality result each of us is capable of offering. My advice would be that you refrain from requesting any new permissions for at least three months - and I'd be happier with six - while you learn more about how things work here. Best, – OhioStandard (talk) 03:17, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, Wikipedia:Tutorial_(Talk_pages) suggests doing the opposite of what you say, silly as it seems to you and me. That's why we have {{talkback}}/etc. ErikHaugen (talk) 04:39, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- I've replied on your talk page. – OhioStandard (talk) 10:10, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Ha! I looked. :) ErikHaugen (talk) 14:35, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Just kidding, Erik. ;-) Someone should rewrite that section, though, at least to explain how to use one's watchlist in connecton with ongoing conversations and to identify that as the norm. Maybe I'll do that at some point. Thanks, though, for pointing it out. Best, – OhioStandard (talk) 10:17, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- ( comment moved by OhioStandard from his talk page ) I agree i don't know a lot of the things that experienced editors know. I do know basic things like using my watchlist i use my watchlist a lot. I will try to learn more policies but i also don't like to be looked at like a newcomer i have made about 650 edits and have been here about a month and a half. Inka 888 21:25, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- First, I asked you above to familiarize yourself with talk page norms, like (a) keeping a discussion all in one place, (b) formatting your replies according to wp:indent. You didn't do that, so I'll ask you once again: please keep your talk page comments on the page where the discussion starts. You've sprawled this discussion across three different sections on Fastily's talk page and across multiple talk pages of other users. That kind of editing practice makes it almost impossible for other editors to follow a complete discussion. I repeat: please keep a discussion on the page where it starts. And please read and understand wp:indent instead of, for example, setting your comments off with "== ==" as you did in this discussion, which creates a new section, or with "----" which draws a horizontal line across the page as you've done elsewhere. You need to learn how to use and contribute to discussion pages using the same basic rules we all do if you want to be given more respect here.
- Second, I'm sorry you don't like being referred to as a "newcomer", but a user's edit count doesn't mean much when he's using automated tools capable of making ten or more edits per minute. I'd be much more favorably impressed if you'd made fewer edits and had spent more time actually reading and understanding the pages multiple editors have directed you to.
- I really shouldn't need to tell you this at this point, but I think I do: If you want to reply to this post, do not do so on my talk page. Put your response on this page, right after this one. Do not set it off with "== ==" or "----" or any other non-standard sequence, and don't create a new section for it either. Don't place your comment at the left margin. Instead, begin it with six colon symbols in a row ( :::::: ) which is one more than the five I've used to indent this section. That will cause your reply to be indented one level beyond mine, which will make it immediately clear to me and to subsequent readers that you're replying this post and not to something else. Btw, I've reformatted this entire thread to make it follow the wp:indentation rule more closely. It would be a good idea to spend a few minutes to make sure you understand why it's formatted the way it is, and probably to understand when and why to use the "outdenting" notation discussed in wp:indent as well.
- Finally, it probably seems like there are a lot of rules to learn here, and I suppose there are. But it's not that anyone is trying to shut you down or penalize you, and no one here wants to talk down to you, either, myself included. Think of this like needing to learn traffic rules. It's nothing personal at all, it's just that people get annoyed when someone blows through intersections without slowing down and drives on the sidewalk, and then refuses to read the driver's manual when asked to, that's all. Hang in there, try to develop enough patience to read and understand the instruction pages others direct you to, and if you've given that a serious try for more than five minutes and it's still not very clear to you what a page is saying then search the help desk archives and "FAQ" archives. If you don't find the answer you need there, or on other help or tutorial pages, then post a new question to the help desk. ( Both the help archives search and the ability to post a new helpdesk question can be accessed here. ) Doing it this way is a better plan than using the "helpme" template, which is pretty much intended for absolute beginners, by the way. Best, – OhioStandard (talk) 07:03, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
The vast majority of my edits are not with automated tools. And i put the message on your talk page because a lot of users would not be watching fastilys talk page so i was actually trying to make it easier for you. Inka 888 13:29, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
And also i get what you are saying up there i think this conversation is going on way too long. Inka 888 13:29, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
- Sigh. You either didn't read and understand wp:indent – even after I asked you to do so for a second time – or possibly you chose to ignore it. And you didn't even read my very explicit instructions above about how to format your response. I've been trying to help you here but, I'm sorry, I'm giving up now. Good luck, – OhioStandard (talk) 21:17, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted "File:RayLawrenceAndHisOrchestra.jpg"
Hi! I received notification this file was going to be deleted because of a concern about evidence of permission. Per Wikipedia guidelines I downloaded the appropriate form letter and gave it to the copyright owner (who is my Dad). He agreed with the license. He doesn't have email so I sent an email with the form agreeing to Wikipedia terms with his address and phone contact info to 'permissions-en@wikimedia.org' on August 14 at 12:40 PDT. There was no acknowledgement of the email or a tag generated. Did I miss something in the process to prevent this photo from being deleted? Thanks.Lulayellowlab (talk) 04:11, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- Give OTRS a few more days to process your email. They're often backlogged and very busy. If you don't hear back in a few days, let me know and I'll have an OTRS member look into it. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:41, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi! I'm reviving this conversation out of your archive. An additional week and a half has passed and I haven't heard anything from OTRS. At your convenience, can you please check into this? Thanks! Lulayellowlab (talk) 18:57, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your efforts! It looks good. Lulayellowlab (talk) 04:57, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
Sadiyah Hotakey was deleted, twice.
Hi, I'm trying to set up a page about myself, and both of the summaries of my life were true. It was not an attack on anyone... especially on myself. I feel insulted that you think my life is a mockery. I am merely sharing my unique experiences with other people who may look me up. I would appreciate if you do not delete my future biographies please. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadiyahh (talk • contribs) 06:35, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
- Please see WP:AB. Let me know if you have any questions. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
Re: Delete + move
You seem to have misunderstood my request. I wanted User:Hazard-SJ to be deleted, and User:Hazard-SJ/New userpage to be moved to replace it. Not my (formerly) current userpage to be moved to User:Hazard-SJ/New userpage. Could you please undo the misinterpreted action and fix the problem? Thank you. Hazard-SJ Talk 17:21, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
- I seem to have fixed the main problem. Thanks anyway. I fixed my user page, and will request the subpage for deletion. Hazard-SJ Talk 17:29, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
- Perhaps. But I did exactly as you requested. This was the text on the deletion tag: "This page may meet Wikipedia’s criteria for speedy deletion because it is holding up a page move or page history merge that is non-controversial or consensual, for instance reversing a redirect, or removing a disambiguation page that only points to a single article. The page to be moved to this name is User:Hazard-SJ/New userpage. (link to perform this move) Reason for move: Redesigned userpage; user request in own userspace. Asserted to be non-controversial maintenance. See CSD G6." -FASTILY (TALK) 17:45, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
109.152.194.46
Good call - I wasn't too sure on what to do - some questioned my initial block, so I said I wouldn't death with him/her the second time. Read WP:AN if your interested - I raised the issue there. Thanks, Connormah (talk) 22:04, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi Connor, I did respond, but was met with an edit conflict. I think AIV in teh short term was totally justified. He/she wasn't going to stop until blocked. AN is fine for bringing up in the long term, but we've done the best to prevent further damage. Paralympiakos (talk) 22:07, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
WOS2014
I believe you deleted my file, WestOrangeCoveWikipediaLogo.jpg, inappropriately. I wonder if you even read my justification on the TALK page??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by WOS2014 (talk • contribs) 03:08, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- Simply drawing an image of a copyrighted logo does not make you the copyright holder. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:14, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
EXCUSE ME?
Drawing an image?
I did not "draw" it or even create it! I retreived part of the image (that part being the Mustang) froma source deeming it legally in public domain. if you would like, I can list the source. West Orange-Cove DOES NOT own any copyrights to that MUSTANG logo. The WORDS (those words being "WEST ORANGE-COVE" and "Creating the Future...") are NOT copyrighted by any means. They technically (sp) are nto related to the West Orange-Cove Consolidated Independent School District, considering they do NOT include CISD, Consolidated Independent School District, ISD, School District, or anything similar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WOS2014 (talk • contribs) 03:22, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
How may I go about requesting it be put back up to somebody other than YOU?WOS2014 (talk) 03:31, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- Lol, go anywhere you want, I really couldn't care less. You'll get the same response. FYI - copyright (the school in this case) is created the moment an author produces a creative work. In the unlikely event you can prove that the file is freely licensed, I'll gladly restore the file. Otherwise, you'll just have to tag it as non-free if you upload it again. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:39, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
Did I ask you if you cared or not? No. Go anywhere I want? Not really an exemplary response. The school district involved did NOT have the image created, or produced. It was in public domain at the time, and still is. WOS2014 (talk) 03:43, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
If you have a complaint against my comments, etc., please report it here;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/User_talk:Fastily —Preceding unsigned comment added by WOS2014 (talk • contribs) 03:52, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
"Much Ado About Anne" article
Fastily -
Hi! I am interested in writing an article about the book "Much Ado About Anne" by Heather Vogel Frederick. I have a copy of the book, and I think that I would be able to write an article similar to the one about the first book in the series. Would that be OK? Can you give me some advice?
Thanks!
Karinamo (talk) 03:13, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- I say go for it. Here are some links/references you may find useful: WP:YFA, WP:WIZ, WP:MOS, WP:ADS, WP:V, WP:CITE, WP:NPOV, WP:POV, WP:GNG, WP:RFF. Let me know if you have any other questions or if you are need of assistance. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:15, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
Dark Twisted Fantasys protection
You protected Dark Twisted Fantasy for only three days when it is high target for vandalism and has been protected like over five times already. Why? Red Flag on the Right Side 06:37, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- I protected for only three days because the heaviest bout of vandalism occurred within the last few days. Typically, short term protection is sufficient to deter vandals while avoiding impedance upon the patience of good faith editors. However, after reviewing the history of the article, I can see merit in protecting the page for a longer period than three days. So let me ask you, if you were a sysop, reasonably, how long would you protect the page? -FASTILY (TALK) 06:42, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- If I was not into editing the article i would say a month, but since I am and i see the daily vandalism and have to revert most of it i would say 3 months that would leave it closer or past its release date so it wouldnt be that high profile anymore. Red Flag on the Right Side 06:51, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. IMO, three months seems a bit excessive, but I'll definitely settle for one. Hope that will work for you. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 06:54, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- If I was not into editing the article i would say a month, but since I am and i see the daily vandalism and have to revert most of it i would say 3 months that would leave it closer or past its release date so it wouldnt be that high profile anymore. Red Flag on the Right Side 06:51, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
FYI, I'm undoing the speedy and reopening this discussion because the category 1) had an ongoing AfD discussion here--the {{db-repost}} template is so big that I presume you didn't even see it, and 2) the category had survived an AfD discussion previsouly, here, so it is technically not even eligible for speedy deletion except in case of copyright. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 06:57, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
50 reverts of VANDALISM
I believe that if you do a count of my reverts of VANDALISM you will find that i have made 50 reverts just looking at the ones of VANDALISM. Thanks, Inka 888 02:04, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
I would also like to be able to use huggle. Inka 888 02:26, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
- "Rollback user right – may be requested here" This is unfortuently one of the requirements of Huggle. If you didn't already know that. :/ --intelati 02:31, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
I did know that. Inka 888 02:37, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
- yeah, I just installed WP:HG today. It's cool, but nothing really BIG to look forward to. --intelati 02:39, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
- @ Inka 888. -sigh- I cannot stress enough that Wikipedia is not a race or a game. Rollback does not, and will not give you special status, nor is it a trophy of some sort. It is an editing tool, meant to make our lives as editors easier. I've looked through your edits since yesterday, and I see <10 actual reverts of vandalism. While it's clear you've improved since yesterday, but to be honest, I still don't think that's really enough. What is apparent to me though, is your desire to learn the rules of the project, fit in, and become a productive contributor - that I have no doubt about. I'm going to sit on this for a day. Continue reverting vandalism and if I like what I see, I'll consider giving you the right. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:14, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) To have rollback, to me, you need to demonstrate you know what and what isn't vandalism for longer than a few edits. The fact that it's being rushed concerns me, particularly for an account that is barely over a month old (was there a previous account?). Why is it so critical to get ASAP? If you're reverting vandalism just to get a prize, I'd be worried many poor or improper edits could result. Just get busy helping articles get better for the sake of Wikipedia being a better place and become a good, reliable editor, then no one will have any reason to question your desires to have additional rights. There's a lot to learn and misusing the various tools can cause quite a bit of damage and unnecessary strife. --JonRidinger (talk) 03:51, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
- @ Inka 888. -sigh- I cannot stress enough that Wikipedia is not a race or a game. Rollback does not, and will not give you special status, nor is it a trophy of some sort. It is an editing tool, meant to make our lives as editors easier. I've looked through your edits since yesterday, and I see <10 actual reverts of vandalism. While it's clear you've improved since yesterday, but to be honest, I still don't think that's really enough. What is apparent to me though, is your desire to learn the rules of the project, fit in, and become a productive contributor - that I have no doubt about. I'm going to sit on this for a day. Continue reverting vandalism and if I like what I see, I'll consider giving you the right. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:14, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, i was never racing and i don't want rollback as a trophy i want as an editing tool. I'm also pretty sure that my total number of reverts is around 50 of vandalism. I made a lot of contribs for my first month and a half about over 700. I learn more about wikipedia every day. again thanks Inka 888 03:27, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
- ...and I, for one, was shocked to even see reviewer status given. Rollback is (based on the learning curve so far) months away, IMHO. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
- Twinkle is a bit slow for major amounts of vandalism. Before i made my account edited from my ip just figure out what wikipedia was like before i made my account. I do not use my ip anymore, just for the the reference. Inka 888 00:03, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- above comment in response to User:JonRidinger. Inka 888 04:09, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- Inka, you need to focus more on editing first. Like Fastily said, there isn't a competition going here to get the most tools and statuses. If it were, we would have been beat loooong ago by Jimbo...but again, it isn't. We are here to edit articles and create an encyclopedia. I recommend you work on that first before going for Twinkle, Huggle, Rollbackers and all this other stuff. Work with the admins and myself. We can help lead you to something to work on. Get some edits under your belt, show you can handle the tools available, then come back and request Rollbackers. Remember, Wikipedia is not a game or competition. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:15, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
I object to its deletion. It's a notable blog; amongst other things, it played a key role in the Virology Journal controversy. Could you undelete it? Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 08:17, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
Alexis Cohen
Why did you remove the protection and the redirect when there was a valid AFD deletion and Chzz advises it was rejected several times at AFC because it had been deleted and salted [55]. At the very least the draft should have gone to DRV.
(del/undel) 08:34, 4 September 2010 Fastily (talk | contribs | block) deleted "Alexis Cohen" (G6: Housekeeping and routine (non-controversial) cleanup: make way for a move) (view/restore) (del/undel) 08:33, 4 September 2010 Fastily (talk | contribs | block) unprotected Alexis Cohen (trying unprotection) (hist | change)
Spartaz Humbug! 10:41, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- I unprotected the page per a good faith request at by Ctjf83 WP:RFPP. At a quick glance, the AFC submission appeared just fine. I guess it wasn't... -FASTILY (TALK) 18:26, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- Which I appreciate, I think there is a lack of good faith from Spartaz. CTJF83 chat 18:27, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- Not at all, all I expect is for consensus to be respected and for protocol to be followed, which means the draft should have been discussed at DRV before this was restored. Its not for a user who admits to not even looking at the AFD or a single admin to overturn a discussion like that. I'd even have been happy for you to discuss with me and agree to restore and list. But being arbitrary about consensus isn't acceptable. Spartaz Humbug! 18:51, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- Which I appreciate, I think there is a lack of good faith from Spartaz. CTJF83 chat 18:27, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
I did not write this article!!! It is not advertising. The wiki article for the church of elvis was created many years ago with lots and lots of inaccuracy. Every now and then i made corrections and was encouraged to do so by the administrator. My last revision merely put the same facts up without error. I did add about weddings and comitment ceremonies, if you want to take that out that's fine, but everything else was just correcting the history of my artwork. Please respond because I will be asking for a review for sure. Don't be a tyrant. Thanks!70.102.40.185 (talk) 12:28, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- Er, I'm sorry but I'm not exactaly sure why you're contacting me. Could you please clarify? -FASTILY (TALK) 18:28, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
Unospocosconvalor.jpg
Hi you deleted this movie cover for http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Unospocosconvalor.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1 I put the source for the cover. I will like to know how can this be fixed.
Jhn504 (talk) 17:40, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
talkpage
Hi, I have created myself a user page for such occasions, would you indefinitely semi protect my talkpage please. Off2riorob (talk) 20:00, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- Semi-protected As you wish. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:52, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 00:57, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted Musician Page
Fastily, I noticed you deleted the page on Linda Welby (aka The Galway Fiddler), reason: "non-notable musician". What do you classify as a "notable musician"? Linda Welby deserves a Wiki page (more so than many other musicians). Ms. Welby is a best selling musician and well-known and loved singer/songwriter in Ireland and around the world, with many hit songs released and albums sold worldwide, she hosts her own weekly radio program from Nashville, TN, USA on Nashville Broadcasting Radio Network FM (Irish Cream of Country), and she practices philanthropy in the music business by performing and donating proceeds for charity organizations around the world, as well. In addition to all the above, Linda Welby is in the top of several recognized music charts, she has won many prestigious music awards in the United Kingdom and the United States, and Linda performs live concerts and other venues in Ireland and around the world, including her most recent North American tour and her upcoming Canadian tour beginning Monday, September 6, 2010. I didn't create the deleted page, I am just curious as to what exactly your definition of "notable musician" is. I am also one of many fans of Linda Welby and I am interested in seeing her Wikipedia page recreated or restored. Please advise. Thank you. Cynthia Gaines (talk) 22:27, 4 September 2010 (UTC)Cynthia Gaines
- Our Notability guideline for people may be found here. I think that should be sufficient to answer your questions. If not, feel free to drop me a line. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:54, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
done or not done
You said a while ago that you would consider giving me rollback. I am really sorry to keep bothering you about this but twinkle just work with the speed of my internet in many cases i will find vandalism and revert it and someone else will come along rollback of huggle and revert it when i'm in the process of reverting it. Thanks, Inka 888 00:24, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- I really don't know man, and I'm sorry. Frankly, I'm concerned you had the audacity to go forum shopping at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback#User:Inka_888_3, despite the fact that I gave you my word that I rethink giving you rollback. Regardless, I took a second look, and did not see the quantity of anti-vandalism activity I was hoping to see. While the quality of your vandalism reverts has improved since we last discussed the subject of rollback, the limited total number of actual reverts combined with the recent forumshopping attempt inclines me to say no. I really hate to say this, but
Not done. You're a promising newbie, I'll give you that. Very few new editors have the determined drive to that you do to fit in and learn the rules. But in all good faith, I believe more time and experience on Wikipedia would help you for the better. Btw - I will also be starting a thread at WP:ANI so the community may judge the validity of my decision. Best wishes, FASTILY (TALK) 01:19, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- It was not forum shopping you never answered my question LIKE YOU SAID YOU WOULD you said on September, 3 at 03:14 UTC you said in your note you would think about it for a "day" in other words 24 hours, i checked your talk page after 24 hours of that comment and there was no answer either way, so it came across to me that you were a. ignoring me, or b. you forgot about the conversation either way i wanted an answer from someone and you did not hold up your end of the deal. Inka 888 01:40, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- Give s/he a break. Sysop is a intense job. Fastily is proplaly swamped with life and wikipedia Jobs. Thanks. BTW Fastily is it he or she?--intelati 01:46, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- It was not forum shopping you never answered my question LIKE YOU SAID YOU WOULD you said on September, 3 at 03:14 UTC you said in your note you would think about it for a "day" in other words 24 hours, i checked your talk page after 24 hours of that comment and there was no answer either way, so it came across to me that you were a. ignoring me, or b. you forgot about the conversation either way i wanted an answer from someone and you did not hold up your end of the deal. Inka 888 01:40, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
I still want to know what was wrong with my vandalism reverts and i believe that since i started reverting vandalism i have made over 50 reverts.--Inka 888 02:44, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
How in the world
Was this discussion anywhere near no consensus? Right in my nomination statement, I pointed to the textbook violation the book cover was. As it reads at WP:NFC#UUI: A magazine or book cover, to illustrate the article on the person whose photograph is on the cover. However, if the cover itself is the subject of sourced discussion in the article, it may be appropriate if placed inline next to the commentary. The cover wasn't being critically discussed as necessary and the keep !vote didn't address that issue at all. This seemed like a pretty straight forward delete. — ξxplicit 00:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Had another look, can't say I disagree with your reasoning. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:59, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Thank You for your CSD Help - The Silent Man
Thanks for your help with The Silent Man, I wasn't sure if I was even in the right with it, but I am a book geek from my time working in a library, so I always update books when I see pages without infoboxes and things of that nature. File_talk:TheSilentMan.jpg is the only thing left connected with that and I am sure it is in que. Thanks again :D *passes cookies in thanks* --»Wolfnix« 01:58, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Wolfnix has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can 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.
To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!
Your false claims at ANI
There was never a complaint about me using reviewer before you blindly accuse me of using something incorrectly READ what it says on my talk page and i am not a newbie and before you use that term describing my editing PLEASE TELL ME WHY YOU ARE USING THAT TERM, i would like examples. Inka 888 04:06, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- Careful--intelati 05:04, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Confused about deletion
Your deletions of Jan Hilary and Talk:Jan Hilary, particularly your edit summaries there, have me a bit confused. Questions for you:
- Is the 1980 front cover of an adult magazine as famous as Playgirl and a 6 page article there always considered "no reliable sourcing"?
- Are people from the 1970's and 1980's always irrelevant due to "no relevant GNews hits of significant GBooks coverage"?
- Is it customary to delete a talk page so that the discussion about the article's deletion is no longer available?
Cordially, SergeWoodzing (talk) 02:42, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- The pages were deleted per the WP:PROD process. The rationales provided for the deletion of the pages are not mine, but the nomination statements of the users who PROD'd the pages. Because the pages were PROD'd, I can restore them for you if you like, although I recommend having the pages restored to your userspace so you can work on them without fear of redeletion before moving them to the mainspace. To answer your question, yes, it is customary to delete talk pages of deleted pages - see WP:CSD#G8. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:01, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you for the prompt response and for all the good work you do!
- In this case, I feel the article and talk page should be restored to project space and that the discussion that had only just begun about Mr. Hilary's relevance should be allowed more time to progress so that a deletion is more clearly motivated. I will then begin by asking for a 3O on it (if I remember correctly that only two editors were involved so far). I do not remember exactly what was said on the talk page, and since it has been deleted, I can't form a balanced opinion of my own as to whether or not your edit summary actually does reflect "rationales provided for the deletion of the pages [being] the nomination statements of the users who PROD'd the pages". Of course I am eager to give you the benefit of that doubt, but it would be better in general, I feel, if these issues were clear and obvious to anybody who may have noticed this article before, and now finds it gone - perhaps even Mr. Hilary's personal acquaintances. There is certainly nothing wrong with deleting an irrelevant article that has no reliable unsourcing [sic] about a subject which WP consensus has found not sufficiently noteworthy, but I feel quite strongly that the motivation for such a deletion must be made especially clear when we are dealing with a BLP that was published several years ago (as I believe this one was - though I cannot check that now) and is likely to have been noticed by quite a number of readers during all that time.
- I sincerely hope you don't find me too tedious in stating those opinions, nor in finding, through that G8 link you yourself provided, this text about what should be deleted: "This excludes any page that is useful to the project, and in particular: deletion discussions that are not logged elsewhere", indicating, I think, that an error was made in this case.
- Though it is understandable, as you explain it, that you choose not to anser my first two questions above, I think they could and should be answered in the context of this deletion discussion, enabling some of us perhaps to learn something valuable for our continued work on English WP. Personally, I really need them answered, as I would never desire to submit articles that are unsourced and/or irrelevant for those reasons, and then have them spooking around out there for years before they get deleted, much too late in the reputably sensitive BLP game. SergeWoodzing (talk) 21:59, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- Done. For the record, I am in no position to answer the first two questions, as I was not the one who nominated the page for deletion, but rather the admin who deleted the page after determining that there was no objection to the prod. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:05, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:16, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
question
greetings, I'm the founder and CEO of Ethiocinema group. I'm requesting an info why our page is deleted? our business is related to informing Ethiopians about the progress of the movie industry. We are agents of development in the country and i do not understand why wikipedia deleted our article. please email me at gedagem123@yahoo.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.15.131.159 (talk) 08:27, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- Hello. I'm sorry, but could you please link to the page in question that was deleted? It would help me better respond to your query. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:53, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
File:Watkins Tower.jpg
Hi, Fastily. You recently deleted File:Watkins Tower.jpg under WP:CSD#F4 (no licence info). I'm not entirely sure why this qualified, as the image was tagged as PD in June 2010. I don't deal with images that much on Wikipedia or Commons, so I'm well aware I may have missed something, but I'm confused as to why a file tagged as PD was speedily deleted rather than nominated through WP:FFD. Thanks, and apologies if I'm in the wrong! :) matt (talk) 10:27, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- I deleted the file as having no source information. Any file, free or copyrighted, is eligible for deletion under speedy deletion criterion F4 after being tagged for seven days as having no source. You're free to reupload the file if you still need it, but be sure to include a source this time around. Hope that helps to answer your question. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:55, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Cancellation of a photo on a Wikipedia page.
Hi,
I uploaded a photo on the Wikipedia page "Mirko Fait" that I created in agreement with Mirko Fait himself and I don't understand why the photo was cancelled. I stated that the photo was mine and I chose the licences recommended by Wikipedia.
Could you please let me know what I did wrong or maybe what I didn't do so that I can publish this photo again?
Thank you for your help,
Celine77 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Celine77 (talk • contribs) 15:36, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- I deleted the file as having no source and copyright status information. Per speedy deletion criterion F4, such files are eligible for deletion within 7 after being tagged as having no licensing information. You're free to reupload the file if you still need it, but be sure to include a source and license tag this time around. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:57, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Tipperary redundant categories
Thanks for the sensible decision. A great day for Tipperary - it defeats the cats and the Kilkenny "Cats" ! Laurel Lodged (talk) 18:49, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Would you please review a situation/article (as well as my contribution on the talk page) for me?
Hi Fastily, normally I would forward this request to my mentor, but he is on extended medical leave from Wikipedia. In working in RecentChanges and elsewhere, I've noted both your levelheadedness and willingness to explain rationale and Wikipedia policies in the past. Thus, I was hoping you would be willing to provide me some insight into both my interpretation of an ongoing situation as well as the situation as a whole, for me.
I would prefer not to discuss the incident/situation at this point and simply point you to the parts in contention, so you can form your own judgment unbiased by what I write here. I am concerned about my involvement in the discussion (properly portraying the policies here, and my tone (hoping it does not seem derogatory in an effort to ensure clarity)), as well as the situation as a whole and possible sockpuppetry noted by another editor.
The relevant pages are:
- Article's Relevant Discussion Page (also see earlier discussion please)
- The addition/edit in contention: User:Daenumen/Homophobia_Classification and various edits here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Homophobia&action=history
- The specific article this is related to (Homophobia)
Thank you for your time. If you are unwilling to look into this, please let me know and I will pass it on to another Admin.
Thanks again, RobertMfromLI | User Talk 20:20, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- I had a look and see nothing inadequate or inappropriate with the way you acted. From my point of view, Daenumen has been adding some pretty biased and OR material; his additions read more like opinionated essay content than an informative text. I very much like the amount of good faith you assumed when dealing with the user (especially when others were quick to jump to sockpuppetry), and I commend you for that. Keep up the good work! All the best, FASTILY (TALK) 21:40, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for the compliment, and thank you for taking the time to look into this! Though I disagree with the information presented, I have offered (on the user's talk page) to assist in making it Wikipedia ready (if possible) - I've also explained to the editor that my disagreement with the content itself will in no way contribute to me voting against it's inclusion if it's written and cited appropriately. Hope that helps move things along in the right direction. And thanks again! RobertMfromLI | User Talk 22:35, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Grog Shop
Look, I understand that the 'pedia is fraught with abuse, spam and self-promotion.
I think you were wrong to delete the entry on the Grog Shop, which is, in fact, a legitimate and notable institution; one that, for the record, I have no personal stake in other than my desire to see it, and my home city of Cleveland succeed. In my mind, the deletion of this page is yet another insult to Clevelanders, a people who have suffered a great deal as of late. A wiki entry for The Grog Shop is no different than having one for CBGBs or any other famous venue.
Please reconsider, and perhaps re-instate the page so that others in addition to myself and vestax05 can have a chance to weigh in on the matter and add content to the page.
Thank you, Christopher Neill —Preceding unsigned comment added by Und1sk0 (talk • contribs) 21:57, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- User_talk:Und1sk0#Re:Grog_Shop -FASTILY (TALK) 22:06, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
I have received your form letter: Hello Und1sk0, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Although it may have not been your intent, your article, "Grog Shop", read like an advertisement. On Wikipedia, we have a policy in which advertising/spam is subject to on-sight deletion under speedy deletion criterion G11. Of course, you are certainly welcome to resubmit your article, but please ensure that the revised text is compliant with the policies and guidelines described at WP:ADS, WP:MOS, WP:V, WP:NPOV, WP:POV, and WP:GNG; otherwise, you run the risk of having the article deleted again. Once you have resubmitted your article, you may find WP:RFF helpful; the WP:RFF noticeboard has many editors who are more than willing to give you constructive criticism on your article and/or help edit your article. If you have any other questions or are in need of assistance, please feel free to let me know. FASTILY (TALK) 22:06, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
That's all well and good, but it would be nice if you would at least re-post the mark up to the sandbox and allow us to tweak the page. I disagree that the page is advertisement, but if your editors truly are willing to give constructive criticism, then let's have that, line by line, section by section.
If it helps, the bathrooms are atrocious and the place smells like stale beer and puke.
Thanks for your help —Preceding unsigned comment added by Und1sk0 (talk • contribs) 22:16, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi Fastily. I need a bit of clue: how does this List of libraries in Thailand, and all the individual items on it, fit within our notability critera? Thanks for your help. --Kudpung (talk) 02:45, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I don't claim to be an expert of any sort on notability, but I had a look at the article. I dug around in some policy/guideline pages and came up with WP:L and WP:DOAL. WP:L makes no mention of notability as it has to do with Lists. WP:DOAL, point 5, implies that list entries that cannot be reliably sourced may be removed. I then did a Google search for some of the entries in the list. Not surprisingly, the National Library of Thailand appeared to have the most third party media coverage. If you're unsure of what to do, remember that AfD or WP:RFF are all viable methods for requesting community review and dispelling uncertainty. Of course, you could also PROD the article, but, your call of course. Hope that helps. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 06:36, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
my vandalism work
I think i can handle rollback i have read the entire page on rollback, done probably about 50 reverts of real vandalism, is that not the requirement forrollback? Why are you making such a big deal out of this. You have never once added up my total number of "real reverts" have you not? Inka 888 02:59, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Erm. What is going on?? -FASTILY (TALK) 06:39, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
"Inka 888's Request for Rollback" on ANI
I just wanted to make you aware with 100% of the respondents saying "endorse decline" and none saying "oppose decline", I have closed and archived the thread on ANI as "Good Decline. Inka 888 should wait a reasonable length of time before reasking for Rollback." If you feel the thread should be reopened and more responses are necessary, please feel free to reopen the thread, just please let me know. If you have any questions as to my close response, my talk page is always open. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:10, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, alright with me. Thanks for taking care of that. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 06:36, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
- Just a final note on this, since I archived/closed it, the bot has come by and put it in an archive file. There is another ANI thread open about Inka 888 if you wish to speak on that one, though it is not necessary. Hope all is well. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:58, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Lisa Shaw (singer)
Hey Fastily,
That Lisa Shaw page shouldn't have been deleted. I'm new around here and don't understand the policies all that well, but Lisa Shaw should be on wikipedia. She's something of a legend in the house music world. Check her out on youtube, if you like.
Thanks
db —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dbfrench (talk • contribs) 06:18, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- The page was deleted per the prod process. This means I can restore it for you if you like, but I strongly recommend keeping a copy in your userspace and work on bringing the article up to standard there as to avoid needless re-deletion. How does that sound? -FASTILY (TALK) 06:44, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
This refers to our earlier discussion here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fastily/Archive_5#Aloha_Editor.2C_deleted_page. Before I move the page back to articlespace I was wondering if you would mind to have a brief look whether it is good enough already? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Othertwice1504/Aloha_Editor Mainly took TinyMCE and CKEditor pages for reference to meet the same standard. Would appreciate your feedback. Thanks. Othertwice1504 (talk) 11:22, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Looks much better. I think it's ready to be moved to the mainspace. Feel free to do so at your discretion. -FASTILY (TALK) 06:46, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
An image
I have run across the image File:Blink-182_tour_picture_two.jpg, and am unsure how to deal with it. Two of the parent images where deleted by yourself here and here for lacking license information. I was thinking F11, since it's impossible to determine the copyright status of the original images. Rehevkor ✉ 22:47, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Indeed, F11 applies. Accordingly, I've tagged the file for deletion for deletion under F11 with {{subst:npd}} as a derivative work derived from photos missing evidence of permission. That should solve the problem. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 06:49, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
are you kidding me
do you even read edits before you revert them or do you just see an angry edit summary and get all "take this, vandal!"
you have restored incorrect unsourced text overtop of accurate sourced text. you moron. 76.66.93.87 (talk) 01:48, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker)Calm down, please. We are all human. It might help Fastily if you pointed out the edit in question. Allmightyduck What did I do wrong? 02:10, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Fastily, your revert has been reverted by the anon. In addition, the reason for the revert is "moron" which I suspect may have been directed at you from the tone presented above. Accordingly, I have warned the anon on their Talk Page. I believe (from the anon's and your edit history) that the article in contention is: Habitual be. The rest is all covered in the page's history and on the anon's talk page. Best, RobertMfromLI | User Talk 06:53, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Deletion opinion
When you get a chance, could you check out this article for deletion? It needs some more eyes and I'd definitely like to see some additional opinions. --JonRidinger (talk) 05:07, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
- Sure, I'll have a look and comment if need be. Although, TBH, it looks like this is going to end up as Keep. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 06:51, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Help for Apacer Technology Inc
Hi,
I just see you deleted the page of Apacer Technology Inc I did, without even giving me a chance to modify it. I did not promote anything, it was a very simple page, with many links towards other wikipedia sites. I used the example of Apple and kept a simple language. Why San Disk is allowed to have a Wiki page, and Apacer not?
Is there any content that I can post and stay online or I should just give up?
Thank you for your taking your time to reply (in case you will).
Adminsoc (talk) 13:40, 7 September 2010 (UTC)Corina
Deletion of page
I am not sure whom to contact.
You just deleted the Avail-TVN page due to my username matching the page. As a new Wikipedia user, I was unaware that I couldn't do this. The only changes that were made to the Avail-TVN page were updating the company name and logo. There wasn't anything written that was different than what had been online for some time.
Can you please bring the page back to allow me to make edits?
Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.161.190.65 (talk) 23:21, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
- The page was deleted as an advertisement. Per WP:ADS, advertising and spam is strictly prohibited on Wikipedia and is subject to on-sight deletion under speedy deletion criterion G11. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:54, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Tosca Lee Wikipedia Author
Fastily,
You recently deleted the wikipedia article for Author Tosca Lee.
I am curious why this page was deleted. The Tosca Lee article is linked to several other articles on Wikipedia and is just a quick introduction to this well-known author.
Can you please verify why this was deleted and provide feedback on how this article can be revised to pass the appropriate requirements?
Thanks, Katie Weaver 174.157.228.12 (talk) 23:54, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
- Do you have an account registered with Wikipedia? It would make it easier for me to reply to your query if I knew which editor you were, as, I wasn't able to tell through looking at the article's deleted revisions. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:57, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi
Hi,
Nrusinghnath is a place of religious tourist importance to entire Western Orissa and nearby state of Chhattisgarh. I am a native of this place, hence I know about this place.
Requesting not to delete the article hence forth. If you think there is any advertisement kinda stuff, then please communicate the same to amitabhpatra@gmail.com before deleting.
Thanks, Amitabh Patra —Preceding unsigned comment added by AmitabhPatra (talk • contribs) 01:26, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- User_talk:AmitabhPatra#Re:Hi -FASTILY (TALK) 01:34, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
File:Tim-pete2.jpg
I wrote Tim and Pete and would like to use this file there please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joyjoyfeelings (talk • contribs) 01:40, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- Er. Sorry, but the file was deleted per Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_August_28#File:Tim-pete2.jpg. Is that what you were looking for? -FASTILY (TALK) 01:42, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes, the file was used on the author biography so was set to be deleted but I used it on the book article where I think it's fine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joyjoyfeelings (talk • contribs) 01:47, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure if you saw my response, I put a note on the Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_August_28#File:Tim-pete2.jpg section that the file is used at Tim and Pete. I think it's fine to use on the article about the book. Can you reconsider? (talk • contribs)
Hey, you have again deleted this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paikamal What makes you think that it is containing any advertising material ? can you be more specific please ?
Thanks, Amitabh —Preceding unsigned comment added by AmitabhPatra (talk • contribs) 01:45, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Your decision in regards to File:Special Tribunal for Lebanon logo.jpg
Hello, you recently closed the discussion into File:Special Tribunal for Lebanon logo.jpg here. You said the result of the debate was "delete" although no one voted for deletion (other than the nominator) and my comment to the contrary was never addressed. Could you please reconsider your decision or at the very least provide a reason for your decision? – Zntrip 03:27, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- In your comment at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 August 25#File:Special Tribunal for Lebanon logo.jpg, you state you "think" the file is free, but do you know for sure? This was the entire reason as to why the file was listed at WP:PUF in the first place. Provide me with the document/website that provides solid evidence indicating the file is indeed free content and I'll restore the file. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:34, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi Fastily,
You just deleted my work on the solar thermal pump. It might sound like promotion, but the problem is that there is only one such pump in the world. Will this be a never ending story? Me writing and you deleting?
Eppo Maas —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maaseppo (talk • contribs) 05:56, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- User_talk:Maaseppo#Re:Solar Thermal Pump -FASTILY (TALK) 06:06, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Question: Why was my article deleted?
Hey I tried (twice) to write an article about a music festival- The Ashland Mind Music Festival. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashland_Mind_Music_Festival Both times it was removed- due to 'unambiguous promotion.' So here is my inquiry: how do I either 1.) have the page removed entirely OR 2) write an article the won't be removed?
blake_K_norris@hotmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karrgobossajova (talk • contribs) 06:20, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- User_talk:Karrgobossajova#Re:Question:_Why_was_my_article_deleted.3F -FASTILY (TALK) 06:32, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Your deletion of photograph: File:St. Pius X school crest.jpg
I am requesting an explanation of your deletion of the file St. Pius X school crest.jpg. 1. As explained in the deletion debate, the file was legally acquired under Irish law. 2. Your deletion note said, "The result of the debate was delete", however, the only one who voted for delete was the original proposer. The others who took part in the debate voted for keep, so I do not understand how "the result of the debate" was delete. I am planning to appeal this decision on these grounds but I thought I would see if perhaps a misunderstanding had occurred, first. Thank you. --O'Dea (talk) 19:09, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
- I deleted the file because of the egregious interpretation of FOP that was being applied to back the keep !votes. Remember that PUF discussions are not a poll and that deletion discussions are judged on the basis of the validity of the points raised. Since none of the rationale provided for the keep !votes was valid, I deleted the file accordingly. For future reference: FOP applies to images of entire buildings and statues ONLY; it is unacceptable to zoom in and photograph a logo on the side of a building and claim it as free content under FOP. Hope that helps to clarify. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:51, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- I maintain that my use of COM:FOP#Ireland is entirely valid and certainly not egregious as you argue. Let's look at the actual text of the law: "...sculptures...and works of artistic craftsmanship" may be reproduced. The law does not maintain that only entire buildings may be photographed, as you say, but clearly identifies that subsidiary elements may be photographed such as "sculptures and craftmanship", such as carving details and finishes, fairly small details. The law nowhere prohibits isolation of detail of a work in a public place: "The copyright in a work...is not infringed by...making a photograph or film of it" and the wording explicitly embraces building elements because they are displayed in public. Do you think this is allowed by FOP, File:Gonzaga College Crest.jpg? (See image description, too.) --O'Dea (talk) 16:42, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I'll look into it. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:32, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- Okay, thank you. You see, I was thinking of going at the question this way, too: I have a picture of the school gates with pillars, with the buildings in the background. Then I have a picture of just the pillars with gates between them. The school crest is up there publicly for all to see (and photgraph, I submit); the crest is not private. Then I have a picture of just one pillar. Finally, a picture showing a close-up of the crest on the pillar. Now, at what point does a picture become invalid, by your lights, along that continuum — and how do you know where to draw the line? I can take a picture of a church: are you saying I can't use a picture where I isolate a gargoyle or sheela-na-gig? (See detail pictures at those two articles, please, showing legitimate use of building detail; they support my case.) I submit that Irish law says I can capture an image of craftsmanship, including artwork on a school pillar. --O'Dea (talk) 19:15, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- Have a look at these building details from Wikicommons: Crest (isolated architectural detail); sign and logo; corporate logo/sign, plaque detail, plaque detail, organization logo. The taking of pictures of public phenomena is legitimate and legally protected in many countries. --O'Dea (talk) 19:29, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I'll look into it. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:32, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- I maintain that my use of COM:FOP#Ireland is entirely valid and certainly not egregious as you argue. Let's look at the actual text of the law: "...sculptures...and works of artistic craftsmanship" may be reproduced. The law does not maintain that only entire buildings may be photographed, as you say, but clearly identifies that subsidiary elements may be photographed such as "sculptures and craftmanship", such as carving details and finishes, fairly small details. The law nowhere prohibits isolation of detail of a work in a public place: "The copyright in a work...is not infringed by...making a photograph or film of it" and the wording explicitly embraces building elements because they are displayed in public. Do you think this is allowed by FOP, File:Gonzaga College Crest.jpg? (See image description, too.) --O'Dea (talk) 16:42, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
I noticed that you deleted the file "Jing Ulrich in 2010.jpg", but permission for the file had already been registered through a request to OTRS. May I ask what was the reason for the deletion? Kjosh2 (talk) 09:38, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- My mistake, page restored. Apologies for the inconvenience. I appreciate you letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:41, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Sacramento Station
Thanks for taking care of the history merge at Sacramento Station so quickly! Best, Mackensen (talk) 10:49, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for Dealing with PA Gov. Election
That was a bizarre encounter. John2510 (talk) 13:39, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- No problem. Just happy to have been able to help. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:42, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Image copyright
Hi, you deleted File:Carl freer.jpg for a lack of licensing information. If I remember correctly, the uploader, User:Truthmaker1, had claimed that the copyright belonged to Carl Freer. A virtually identical image has now been uploaded by the same user as File:Carl freer 1.jpg. This time the uploader claims to hold the copyright and releases the image under a Creative Commons license. To make matters more interesting, the image has been added to the article by an IP editor who also claims to hold the copyright. I have no idea whether the IP editor, User:Truthmaker1 and Carl Freer are one, two or three persons. I've asked Truthmaker1 for clarification, but he has not yet responded. Should anything be done, and if so, what? Yours, Huon (talk) 17:11, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- In that case, I think the file may be possibly unfree/copyrighted. I'll list it at WP:PUF. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:44, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Wow
Hey d***head, you blocked me from editing for "disruptive edits" but i didn't make any disruptive edits. i simply called that little gimp Hitler. Because he was acting like hitler. same way i've called you d***head, because you've acted like a d***head. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.155.231.33 (talk) 18:19, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Israel
I noticed you PP'ed Israel because PC stopped working. My understanding is that PC has not been turned off globally. I made a post at ANI to double check. You might want to comment. -Selket Talk 18:35, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, perhaps I should have been more clear in my log entry. I meant to say that PC was exhibiting limited effectiveness at preventing vandalism at Israel. Now of course, if there is consensus to use PC on Israel, I'll gladly revert. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:01, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Vandalism?
You have just sent me a message accusing me of "vandalizing".
I'm new to edits on Wiki. Vandalizing what, exactly? I made a couple of entirely genuine, reasonable and inoffensive edits to the North London Derby page.
So please enlighten me as to what, exactly, I've done to merit the accusation of vandalism. It might help to prevent me from repeating this apparently heinous crime.
Shelfsider (talk) 19:44, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Help with RfC
Hi Fastily, I seem to have really butchered an RfC and am not sure what to do next. The RfC is here: Talk:Homophobia#RFC_for_ongoing_debate_in_this_article and listed here (which I think is the wrong board): Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Wikipedia_policies_and_guidelines. Thanks for any help you can give me. RobertMfromLI | User Talk 22:39, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, I think you might have. The proper place to list the discussion at would have been at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Society, sports, and culture. Not to worry, I've corrected that issue. The RfC bot will relist the discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Society, sports, and culture shortly. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:06, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- Again, much thanks! RobertMfromLI | User Talk 23:38, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Per Template:Replaceable_fair_use_disputed, the talk page should not have been deleted and a valid deletion reason should have been given taking into account the fairly lengthy discussion on the talkpage. I think that two users gave quite valid reasons why a free-use image could not be found that properly shows the device.--Terrillja talk 00:56, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Not really actually. I had another look, and to be honest, I can't say I found any convincing reason to keep the file. But if you like, I can restore the file and list it at FFD. -FASTILY (TALK) 06:54, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Vandalism reverts
How many vandalism reverts do I have? Wayne Olajuwon chat 20:58, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- If you're interested in receiving the rollback right, please know that you will need at least 50 reverts of solid vandalism without having received any significant complaints. Currently, I do not see enough anti-vandalism work to warrant granting rollback to you. If you want the tool, continue working on reverting vandalism as you already have! -FASTILY (TALK) 23:03, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Okay. Wayne Olajuwon chat 14:52, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Travis Bean Deletion
Hey, didn't you see the hang on that I added to the Travis Bean page? Can you explain why you felt the need to delete the page so quickly without any kind of chance for discussion into why it should even be deleted? hellboy (talk) 22:57, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- I had another look, and I don't feel like it's beyond salvaging. If you like, I'll restore it to your userspace so you can continue work there. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:09, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- As I recall this was a fairly well-sourced article that had been in place without an advert tag or mention of advertising concerns on the talk page for several years. I feel it should have gone to AfD discussion instead of speedy deletion. It sounds like you think it should not be restored from your above comment. I ask again that you consider restoring the article, and I will remove any advert language within 24 hours. If this doesn't work for you, I'm planning on raising the discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Dialectric (talk) 23:13, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- I can do that too, although, I'm currently waiting on a response from Hellboy1975. Perhaps maybe you'd like to discuss with him? -FASTILY (TALK) 23:20, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- I've written a note on his talk page regarding this issue. I assume he would prefer the article be restored, even if taken to AfD, over having it stay deleted and copied to his user pages. Dialectric (talk) 23:35, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- I can do that too, although, I'm currently waiting on a response from Hellboy1975. Perhaps maybe you'd like to discuss with him? -FASTILY (TALK) 23:20, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- As I recall this was a fairly well-sourced article that had been in place without an advert tag or mention of advertising concerns on the talk page for several years. I feel it should have gone to AfD discussion instead of speedy deletion. It sounds like you think it should not be restored from your above comment. I ask again that you consider restoring the article, and I will remove any advert language within 24 hours. If this doesn't work for you, I'm planning on raising the discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Dialectric (talk) 23:13, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- You now have Hellboy1975's response. As I said above, I think there are a number of legitimate reasons for this article to have gone to AfD rather than speedy deletion. Fastily, will you restore the article and create an entry for it in Articles for Deletion? Dialectric (talk) 00:19, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- I should add Fastily that I realise it wasn't you who nominated the article actually be deleted, I'm just interested in getting what I feel to be a worthwhile page back up and running in a suitable format for wikipedia. hellboy (talk) 00:43, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
hellboy wrote above 'I'd rather see it restored and then edited rather than put in my userpage'. I've written above that I think it should be restored and taken to AfD. I can elaborate on why this is preferable if necessary, but in short, it will be simpler to keep the history and talk page, which go back several years, with a restore, and the call as to whether the entire article was 'Unambiguous advertising or promotion' is questionable. If you are seeing this differently, I'd like to hear your perspective. Dialectric (talk) 07:30, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- To add to that, I'm far from an expert on the subject, so I'd rather not personally be responsible for the page. Though I am willing to assist in making sure it stays on topic. hellboy (talk) 10:36, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Done -FASTILYsock(TALK) 19:45, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
User:99.88.78.94
This user you blocked, who has endless blocks and unblock appeals on the talk page, has used the "my brother/cousin did it" excuse numerous times and has been told numerous times to register an account to avoid that problem. I'd like to keep that option open for this editor, but your block also appears to disable account creation from that IP address (if that's what "account creation blocked" means). I would not presume to modify the block you imposed, so I ask that you consider modifying your block to enable registering an account. ~Amatulić (talk) 05:14, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- WP:BROTHER. I suppose the account creation aspect of the block could be removed, but if 99.88.78.94 is not telling the truth, we could end up with a sockfarm on our hands. Or, we could always assume good faith, unblock, and cross our fingers :) I'm fine with either way though. I'll leave the final decision up to you. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 06:57, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Changed my mind. Looks like my decline message fell on deaf ears. Another admin came along and fulfilled my promise to block the editor from his own talk page if he posts one more unblock requests. He can create another account if he goes to another IP address. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:18, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Travis Bean Guitars
Hello,
I noticed that the section of Original Travis Bean Guitars has been removed. Could you let me know for what reason this is. Travis Bean is a well respected luthier who build great guitars around 1975. Lots of great Mucisians have played Travis Bean guitars an/or still do. The person who claimed the Name Travis Bean and builds guitars under this name produces inferior instruments and is in no way related to the History of Travis Bean and his Guitars. In other words the German person is blatantly copying Travis and his reputation/history/product also he is doing what is called dilution, where as to cause confusion of existing product or service.
I kindly want to ask you to take this in consideration and let me know what you think.
Kind Regards,
JJ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Humbuck (talk • contribs) 08:08, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- By any chance would you be referring to Travis Bean? I did a search for "Travis Bean Guitars" but came up empty. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:59, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Hey you...
Fastily, it's been a while since we talked. I just uploaded a logo to the Reinhardt University page. I believe I did it correctly, but wanted to make sure with you - you're the expert. Can you let me know if I need to change something? Thanks Carsonmc (talk)
- Looks fantastic. I can't see any issues with File:Reinhardt College Logo.gif. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 18:56, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Awesome. Thank you. If you aren't too swamped, could you put a note to that effect on the discussion page (if not, no worries). I know in the past, there were many, many issues on the old logo. I just don't want someone less experienced than you to remove it. Thanks, again. Hope you are well. Carsonmc (talk)
Can you please tell me why you deleted the InfoPrint Solutions Company page?
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.21.100.130 (talk) 17:37, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- I deleted the page because it was advertising/spam. Per WP:ADS, advertisements/spam are subject to on-sight deletion under speedy deletion criterion G11. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:57, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Image fogged
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=24_Hour_Service_Station&oldid=382760549 The logo image for my record label is now showing as a black box after I sent rights confirmation to permissions at Wikimedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:LOGO24HourServiceStation.jpg I can BARELY make out the image when looking from the side of my monitor, so I know it's still there. Can you help me remove the fog and bring it back to its full black white & red glory? Thanks! Captain New Wave (talk) 17:47, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- I'm curious about this too. The image shows up fine when you click on the image page File:LOGO24HourServiceStation.jpg but it's all fogged to nearly black in the article 24 Hour Service Station. I've never seen that before. I removed the {{pufc}} template from the image link in the article but it had no effect. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:54, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) At File:LOGO24HourServiceStation.jpg I'm seeing the "main" image as fogged. The (one) thumbnail looks fine though. Just a drive-by comment - I can't offer any suggestions as to why this is ;-) TFOWR 17:56, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Try re-saving the image as either a PNG, or again as a JPEG (but with progressive scan and interlacing turned off in your image program's JPEG settings). That should solve your problem. Best, RobertMfromLI | User Talk 18:42, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- 3rd (talk page stalker)! Until you sort it out I replaced it for you in the article with a very quick svg autotrace: File:LOGO24HourServiceStation.svg Begoon•talk 19:27, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- 1st (talk page stalker) (straying off topic) Hey, that's pretty cool. How'd you do that? I've been looking for some way to convert Excel charts to SVG, and failing to find any solution. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:16, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- 2nd (talk page stalker) ;-) (straying (staying?) off topic) I'd love to know too. I've been trying to figure out how to do something like that decently for some logos I use for a long time. RobertMfromLI | User Talk 20:31, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, dear. The thing is, I don't really recommend it, because unless you redraw the image the auto-trace makes bad decisions in the trace, and the file ends up far too big, as in this case. I did it here because it was a short term thing. If anyone started uploading auto-traced SVGs wholesale, they'd quite rightly be "jumped on" for it. The feature I used is built into Adobe Illustrator, but first I had to blur the image and reduce it a bit, so that the trace didn't end up wildly jaggy. If you need stuff converting, you can post it at WP:GL/ILL, and that way it'll get properly traced by hand, or redrawn by one of the regulars. Also, with logos, read the advice at the top of the page about checking if a vector already exists, often in a pdf. For the excel charts, you can install something like Primo pdf, and print them to a pdf file, then post that at the lab to get converted. If you can't afford Illustrator, download Inkscape and have a go yourself at drawing them manually. Sorry I've set a bit of a bad example here - the only professional way to do these conversions is manually, usually by drawing over the bitmap in a "layer" of the Illustrator document. Begoon•talk 23:05, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Sadly, the ones I need done are for websites I work on, and even though it's only two of them, I would not of course burden the Wikipedia contributors with such. But, I think I may be able to accomplish something worthwhile following the tips you've outlined via using AI (wow, I havent touched AI in years, but I still shoulda thought of trying it for this... must be getting senile). Begoon, thanks so much for taking the time to explain it all, and Fastily, thanks for being so generous with your talk page! Best, RobertMfromLI | User Talk 03:51, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, if it's for your own use there's also a website that does autotraces, http://www.vectormagic.com - sadly, it's not free, there is a few dollars fee, but the results are often better than AI gets. If you use AI to autotrace - under Object-Tracing Options, be sure to preview the different presets to see which will give the best result: Detailed illustration/Technical drawing are good starting points, and the 'blur' and 'path fitting' options are usually useful to play with. Also consider doing the trace in black/white and then colouring the result - that can help with some images. At the end of the day it will depend on your original - best results from a large, clear bitmap, and the less intricate details it has, the better your chances... Begoon•talk 04:03, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Rollback rejection
I also posted this on Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback#User:Kvng. I assure you, I'm not taking this personally. I'd really rather spend my time creating and improving articles. I want to know what I can do when I multiple-edit vandalism shows up in my watch list.
- So, yes, this is not my first rejection. I don't think it is a good use of my time to become a spam fighter. If you're not going to give me the tools to clean this stuff up as I come across it, how do you suggest I summon someone with rollback to clean up Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol. It's already too late for rollback on Communications protocol - the vandalism has been is now insidiously integrated into the article. --Kvng (talk) 20:53, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
question
At ANI it was said that is should wait before I ask for rollback again how long were you and everyone else thinking? I think I have made 50 reverts of VANDALISM with twinkle. Inka 888 22:36, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Inka, I believe the mentioned consensus was two months... though you could always re-read all of those discussions yourself to find out instead of asking Fastily. Remember... always best to search first, then ask questions if you dont find or dont understand the answer. :-) Best, RobertMfromLI | User Talk 22:54, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
← FYI, the above thread is mentioned in an ANI thread. –xenotalk 02:43, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Optimus Minor
I was wondering if you could restore Optimus Minor from the PROD delete. I have a reliably third party source from a book for him now. Thanks! Mathewignash (talk) 00:00, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Ejmarten
He has now reverting the page 4 times in the past 24 hours.--Jerzeykydd (talk) 03:02, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- Since this was his fourth revert, and since he continued warring even after lots of policy explanations, I've blocked for 48 hours. EdJohnston (talk) 03:32, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
FYI
File deletion discussion Begoon•talk 07:47, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Refund?
What on Earth does this mean? J Milburn (talk) 10:22, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Fastily deleted this after a prod expired, but the prod was subsequently contested. TFOWR 10:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Ken Shirk
Hi. Someone tagged Talk:Ken Shirk and despite my hangon you deleted it. When Ken Shirk turns blue, please restore Talk:Ken Shirk. See Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ken Shirk. Thanks. 69.3.72.9 (talk) 04:06, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
The Society for Set Thinkers
I am one of a set of members in a society called "Set Thinkers." Over the last three days I have been bringing up our Wikipedia page, which describes our activities. This morning that page was deleted.
Therefore,I must be doing something wrong.
Could you tell me what it is and we'll will correct.
Thanks,
Gary Deines —Preceding unsigned comment added by Garydeines (talk • contribs) 12:56, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- Apparently the organization in question does not exist, or does not satisfy our general notability guideline. If you can provide me with a list of credible third party sources that satisfy our general notability guideline, I will consider restoring the page for you. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:29, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Photos of unclear origin
Hi Fastily. Greco22 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) has been uploading images of unclear origin. An example is this image. It mentions it is licensed under CC 2.0 etc. but I don't think the license is valid. Could you check it out as well as other similar pictures uploaded by Greco22? Thank you. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 20:37, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- I'll have a look. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:31, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Troutman Sanders
Fastily, updated Troutman Sanders logo. I'm sure it's okay. Let me know if you see something wrong. Thanks. Carsonmc (talk)
- Looks pretty good. The only one thing I would change, is the purpose parameter of the {{logo fur}} template, from "org" to "Infobox", as the file is being used in the infobox at Troutman Sanders. Other than that, no glaring issues. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:33, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm sort of confused about this. After being asked to apply a FUR, I did so and from their edits to the page, it seemed they accepted it as a legitimate addition. However, Elen of the Roads later added a speedy tag which you declined. Can I ask whether the article indeed satisfies the NFCC and if it doesn't what needs to be done? Christopher Connor (talk) 00:19, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- File:Victoria Climbié.jpg is fully complaint with the non-free content criteria. Although use of press photos is discouraged, it is not prohibited; since File:Victoria Climbié.jpg illustrates a subject in which a free licensed, alternate photograph can no longer be created, the use of the photo is complaint with Wikipedia non-free content criterion #1. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:25, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Can I check, I was of the opinion that WP:NFC#UUI #7 states that a Press agency photo (photo is copyright to Press Association) could only be used where "the photo itself is the subject of sourced commentary in the article." This photo is in the infobox - it's used for identification purposes only. There are other photos of Climbie that are not press agency photos. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 00:31, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- With respect, WP:NFC is only a guideline. But yes, if there are free photos of Climbie available, File:Victoria Climbié.jpg should replaced by a free version as soon as possible. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:34, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Fair enough (re the guideline). I'm not that familiar with image tagging - should I have tagged it with a different tag, or not tagged it at all. There are certainly photos that are not copyright to the Press Association - I would have thought the guideline meant that it would be preferable to use one of those.Elen of the Roads (talk) 00:50, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- With respect, WP:NFC is only a guideline. But yes, if there are free photos of Climbie available, File:Victoria Climbié.jpg should replaced by a free version as soon as possible. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:34, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Can I check, I was of the opinion that WP:NFC#UUI #7 states that a Press agency photo (photo is copyright to Press Association) could only be used where "the photo itself is the subject of sourced commentary in the article." This photo is in the infobox - it's used for identification purposes only. There are other photos of Climbie that are not press agency photos. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 00:31, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) With all due respect to Fastily, this image is from a press agency thusly is not allowed via Fair Use. There have been may discussions about images from press agency's and stock photo agency's. Elen is very correct, the guideline is based on policy. The template you removed form the image even states Use of historic images from press agencies must only be used in a transformative nature, when the image itself is the subject of commentary rather than the event it depicts (which is the original market role, and is not allowed per policy). Jimbo himself had the "final word" is deleting the press agency image File:Il-76 shootdown.jpg as a copyvio, despite having a FUR. You can read the deletion discussion as well: Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2007 March 28#Image:Il-76 shootdown.jpg. This image fails per policy *and* guidelines. Soundvisions1 (talk) 02:45, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- ((Edit conflict}}First off all I do not appreciate your comment about "forum shopping". I tagged the image and another admin reverted - I commented to them because off their choice - and if you note I had also posted here. I have reverted your reversion pending further discussion. Thank you. Soundvisions1 (talk) 05:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Perhaps you didn't take the time to read my reply to Elen above. No worries, I'll repeat it for you. WP:NFC is only a guideline. I've been working in images for over two years now, and I have never seen a policy prohibiting the use of press photos. If you can find me that policy page, well then touche, you got me - I won't push the issue. Otherwise, I'm going to kindly ask you to refrain from forum shopping, like you did here, and nominate the file at FFD instead if you still disagree. The use of press photos when no free image is available is to be taken on a case by case basis, and I think we would benefit from community review. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:03, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- I did, and now you are pretending I did not read your comments. Please re-read the policys about the use of press agency photos. And, gain, I am not, nor was I "FOurm shopping". Soundvisions1 (talk) 05:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)Sorry if I come off snippy but I tend to have this type of conversation over and over gain with admins who do not feel agency's photos are included in the policy - Read NFCC1 and CDS - both policies. I see you reverted - fine, lets take it to IFD for yet another press agency discussion that always seems to result in deletion. Soundvisions1 (talk) 05:21, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- I did, and now you are pretending I did not read your comments. Please re-read the policys about the use of press agency photos. And, gain, I am not, nor was I "FOurm shopping". Soundvisions1 (talk) 05:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Well, fact of the matter is, you didn't. You're referring to WP:NFC like it's a policy page when it is clearly not the case. And also, I would gladly re-read a policy page detailing use press agency photos, if you would cite one, assuming such a page even exists. With respect to forum shopping, please don't deny it, you've been here long enough to know what you did was wrong. You disagreed with my decline, so you simply re-tagged the file in hopes of having another sysop delete the file. If that's not textbook forum shopping, I don't know what is. I'm not interested in a revert war, nor am I interested in creating drama. If you disagree with my interpretation of media file guidelines/policy, make your case at FFD, instead of forum shopping and revert warring, which is disruptive. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:15, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Robert S. Capon Page
Hello. Robert Capon's wikipedia page was deleted because of the appearance of copyright infringement with his faculty page at the Darden Business School. Mr. Capon has given me permission to use the material from his Darden page in the creation of his wikipedia page. He, in fact, wrote (and owns) the biographical material on his Darden page, and owns the photographs that were used in the Wikipedia article. If you would kindly give me instructions, Mr. Capon would be happy to email you with his written permission to use the biographical material from Darden in the Wiki page. Mr. Capon does not claim copyright to the Darden biographical material, and was happy for me to use it in the Wikipedia article. Kind regards, Kettbotn —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kettbotn (talk • contribs) 00:42, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, have him email that information to "permissions-en@wikimedia.org". Be sure to specify the title of the article on Wikipedia and the license it is to be published under (CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL or a less restrictive license). For more information, see WP:DCP, and WP:PERMISSION. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:07, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. Mr. Capon has sent the requested email to "permissions-en@wikimedia.org." Would you be kind enough to restore the page? Thank you very much for your assistance with this matter. Kind regards, Kettbotn —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kettbotn (talk • contribs) 12:00, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
question
-discussion moved from Carnildo's talk page-
I just uploaded File:miners castle rocks and water.jpg and when I was uploading it, I messed up on the comment and it looks really weird now and it wont let me edit that section so i was wonder if you could tell me how to fix that? Inka 888 23:11, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) You could just do this... -FASTILY (TALK) 23:39, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- Take a look at where it says comment it gives the copyright information that is in the wrong spot there when all I meant to put there is say "self created by Inka 888", I can't remove what it says there. --Inka 888 01:43, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Two things: first I would open an account at the Wikimedia Commons and upload your public domain images there. You can connect it with your existing Wikipedia account by using the same user name there when you register. The photos can be used the same way here. Going to the Commons is much easier to categorize and it frees up space on Wikipedia. Second, do you have a bigger image file? A picture this small doesn't really help a whole lot. Generally, the only time you want smaller, low-resolution pictures is for copyrighted logos and insignias. For public domain photos, the highest resolution available is preferred. --JonRidinger (talk) 02:15, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Take a look at where it says comment it gives the copyright information that is in the wrong spot there when all I meant to put there is say "self created by Inka 888", I can't remove what it says there. --Inka 888 01:43, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
RfA thanks spam
Hello Fastily, thank you for supporting my RfA!
I was promoted with a final tally of 65/4/3.
I hope I can live up to everyone's expectations, do my best for Wikipedia, and take to heart the constructive criticism. Always feel free to message me if I'm around.
Magog the Ogre (talk) 11:20, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
And of course no matter what, I really appreciate all the time you were willing to put into this. I do, thanks Fastily. Magog the Ogre (talk) 11:30, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- And you're very welcome :) Enjoy the tools!! Best wishes, FASTILY (TALK) 19:23, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
User: 115.186.97.178
This user have stopped doing disruptive edits from this IP address but he is using other IP addresses to vandalize, they are, User talk:115.186.97.186, User talk:115.186.97.177, User talk:115.186.97.183, User talk:115.186.97.185, User talk:115.186.97.179. I don't know whether they all are the same users or the user, 115.186.97.178 uses different IP addresses to vandalize. Could this article be Semi-protected in order to avoid vandalism or disruption to the article of Climate of Karachi ???
Nabil rais2008 (talk) 11:22, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Done Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:25, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi! Could you please restore this image so that I could add the source? The poster was published before 1950 and is therefore, clearly in public domain. I just got to know of the deletion of the file. The tagger has never bothered to inform me.-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 15:36, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Done Be sure to remove the deletion tag once you have specified a source. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:26, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Robert W. Walker (Author) Page
I'm new here, I literally signed up minutes ago.
I'm an advanced reader for an author (Robert W. Walker) who is a professor at my college, West Virginia State University (although he's not teaching any of the classes I'm taking) and whose page you deleted last night.
I'm led to understand from what wikipedia says, his biographical page was deleted because it was "Unambiguous advertising and promotion."
What I would like to do is somehow directly or indirectly facilitate the construction of a "Biography of a living person" page for the man that meets the standards that Wikipedia has set. What I'd like to see as an end result is a page that has some biographical information about his place of birth, places he's lived, his education, personal life, list of pen names, list of works referenced with ISBNs, dates of publication, relevant formats such as hardback, mass market paperback, or ebook, and to appropriately cross-link to notable places (examples include Chicago and Belfast), things (RMS Titanic), and events (The World's Fair).
Wikipedia said I needed to contact you in order to make this happen, as the content would include information from a page you are responsible for deleting.
Also, as an admin, you'll probably be able to help me make sure that the information I gather for this purpose is of a high enough caliber, and appropriately verifiable.
--RobertFarleyJr (talk) 15:44, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Looking through the deleted edits, the page looks more like a job resume than it does an informative encyclopedia article. If you're up to it, I would recommend rewriting the article from scratch. Here are some links you may find useful: WP:YFA, WP:WIZ, WP:V, WP:BLP, WP:ADS, WP:MOS, WP:GNG, WP:CITE, WP:RFF, WP:NPOV, WP:POV. Feel free to let me know if you have any other questions or are in need of assistance. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:31, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Actually, I am well within 3RR; I have conducted two reverts, one of them unintentional; I undid and saved by accident before I could write a novel text. But I thank you for the comment, and have already requested protection; I see you declined it, and would therefore appreciate enforcement of 3RR.Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:06, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- This is an exact revert; indeed an undo. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:41, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- While that's probably true, I had to warn you if I was going to warn User:Kwamikagami. If you know you're not going to break 3RR, then go ahead and ignore my warning. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:33, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Neon Knights Page
Hey you never got back to me on my last question. You said you would reinstate the Neon Knights (Band) page once a few adjustments had been made. What adjustments are these? Thanks
- Er. I happened to notice this post just now. If still applicable, could the person who posted this indicate somewhere so I know who posted? Thanks, FASTILY (TALK) 01:00, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Its me (vansheboy), just wondering what changes I need to make to get page back up as per our last discussion that was removed. Thanks
- Looks like the page was WP:PROD'd. Did I tell you I could restore the page for you if you wanted? Although FWIW, I recommend having a draft restored to your userspace so you can work on it there before moving it to the mainspace. Your call though. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:07, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Yeh, you recommended that it be drafted in my userspace. But I wasn't sure what changes I needed to make so that it doesn't get deleted again. Also do you have the script for the page cause otherwise I would have to type the whole article again... Vansheboy (talk) 00:41, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- Done at User:Vansheboy/Neon Knights (band). Feel free to move the page back to the mainspace when you're ready. For reference: WP:ADS, WP:GNG, WP:V, WP:NPOV, WP:BAND, WP:POV, WP:V, WP:CITE, WP:MOS, WP:RFF, WP:YFA. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:09, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Thank you! I will review and post when readyVansheboy (talk) 01:58, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Leprous page
Hi there,
I have created a page for a band called Leprous with material that they have for public usage on their media webpage. I received the warning that the page was speedy deleted due to copyright issues. The photos are taken from http://leprous.net/media.html and they're under the title of official pictures. If this is still considered a copyright infringement, I can eventually use some poorer quality images taken in concerts. Thanks for reading this!
An the info on trying to recreate the page is 18:20, 7 September 2010 Fastily (talk | contribs) deleted "Leprous" (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.leprous.net/mobile/band/index.html) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lakeoftearz (talk • contribs)
Andrea —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lakeoftearz (talk • contribs) 12:25, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- Is the text of the webpage available under the same license as Wikipedia's license, CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL, or a less restrictive license (e.g. Public Domain)? If not, then the text is not suitable for Wikipedia. If the band is interested in donating their webpage text to Wikipedia, see WP:DCP for details on how to do that. If you ask me though, I would just recommend rehashing the text of the website in your own words, it's really much easier than the aforementioned method. As for the images, they too will have to be freely licensed. For a list of media file licenses compatible with Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:File copyright tags/Free licenses and Wikipedia:File copyright tags/Public domain. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:27, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- Hey. Ok, I will re edit the text myself and upload photos taken personally. Any chance you save me some trouble by reviving the page I created? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lakeoftearz (talk • contribs) 07:29, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again. Page is reedited with rephrased text in my own words. Also no photo for now, I'm considering one that the band has for press and media usage on their page. But, I need to ask you to revive the pages
- Hey. Ok, I will re edit the text myself and upload photos taken personally. Any chance you save me some trouble by reviving the page I created? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lakeoftearz (talk • contribs) 07:29, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Aeolia (Leprous album) 18:43, 7 September 2010 Fastily (talk | contribs) deleted "Aeolia (Leprous album)" (G8: Page dependent on a deleted or nonexistent page)
- Silent waters (Leprous album) 18:43, 7 September 2010 Fastily (talk | contribs) deleted "Silent waters (Leprous album)" (G8: Page dependent on a deleted or nonexistent page)
since they have a page to depend on now. Thanks. Andrea Lakeoftearz (talk) 10:51, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Userification
Hi, if you move content from article space into user space can you remember to non-wiki the categories? --Cameron Scott (talk) 10:12, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, of course. I'll keep that in mind for the future. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:22, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Chloé Graftiaux
Some time ago I tagged Chloé Graftiaux as not-notable and the article has been improved some but do you think, as I do, that she still does not pass the WP:ATHLETE threshold? ww2censor (talk) 16:22, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- It looks fairly acceptable to me. The sources appear reliable and the article is decently written. If you feel the article should be deleted of course, I think prodding would be your best bet. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 22:27, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Author Tosca Lee
Fastily,
Thank you for your response.
My account is WeaverWiki and I recent updated Author Tosca Lee's profile. I would appreciate your review and see if I can re-write portions of the article so it seems less promotional? Tosca is a well-known author and is linked to several other wiki articles.
Thank you, Katie Weaver —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weaverwiki (talk • contribs) 17:44, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- I see. And yes, you are more than welcome to resubmit the article after having removed promotional material from it. For reference: WP:PEACOCK, WP:ADS, WP:BLP, WP:V. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:29, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
File:Davidgreco.jpg
Good Day! I see that you responded to the CSD on File:Davidgreco.jpg and did not agree with my case on it's non-free fair use. I do have a question to ask, did you read the talk page, and answer the question regaurding the only alterative? If not, then please give me your reasoning for the agreeing with the CSD, as it unable to be replaced with a free image. Did you not agree with my statements? Did you choose to go though with it just because Chzz listed it? If you have any suggestions on how I can better this suggestion, please let me know, I ask for opinions and help for a reason. --Wolfnix • Talk • 04:05, 13 September 2010 (UTC) If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page.
- If I'm not mistaken, Mr. David Greco is still alive, therefore, it is theoretically possible to take a freely licensed photo of him. Additionally, the file also fails WP:NFCC#8, as a file which does not enhance the reader's understanding, to the point where it would be detrimental if excluded. Hope this helps to answer your questions. -FASTILY (TALK) 04:20, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Mr. David Greco, may be alive, but the point of the inclusion of the picture was to show who he was, head admin for twelve years, teacher for over twenty-five, whom recently retired, and also the admin who dealt the the ROTC scandal that happened at the High School, where Mr. Greco forced students to take part in JR ROTC and only yielded because of the NYCLU. The picture directly from a media interview dealing with the Jr. ROTC issue. These two points, is why I believed it passed WP:NFCC#8 and yes theoretically it is possible to take a picture of him, but as I no longer live in the area, and he is retired I used a a picture from a media snapshot, and properly credited it. Just my two cents in the matter. --Wolfnix • Talk • 04:50, 13 September 2010 (UTC) If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page.
Speedy deletion declined: Zahra Universe
Hello Fastily. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Zahra Universe, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Kimchi.sg (talk) 04:24, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Er...I wasn't the one who applied the tag. I reverted it's removal... -FASTILY (TALK) 04:27, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Category:Recipients of the Silver Buffalo Award
Nyttend just restored this after he deleted it, after I raised the lack of clear consensus at CfD (one keep and one delete within a few months), then you come along and delete it again. I had suggested to Nyttend that a new Cfd (once the category is populated) might be better than speedy. DuncanHill (talk) 08:12, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- The earlier CfD was at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 October 20#Category:Silver Buffalo awardees. Unfortunately, it was not linked correctly at the start of the second one. DuncanHill (talk) 08:28, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- I read that the result of the most recent discussion was delete. Am I missing something...? -FASTILY (TALK) 18:40, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- Well, you are missing that when another admin speedily deleted it because of that discussion, he restored it when questioned. So, an admin speedily deleted it, reconsidered it and restored. You then speedily deleted it within 24 hours without referring to him. I do appreciate that admins are under no obligation to discuss their admin actions with anyone, least of all other admins with whom they disagree and whose actions they are undoing, but it ain't conducive to a positive and collaborative atmosphere. Nyttend has described your behaviour as possibly wheel-warring, and suggested I take it to ANI. I'd rather not.
- So, we have two CfD's within a few months of each other, with opposite outcomes, and a recent recreation which one admin, on being asked about it, has decided should not be speedied. My position is that I do not believe that a clear consensus for deletion can be said to exist, based on my readings of the CFDs and Nyttend's decision to rescind his action. I'd be interested to know your reason for counter-acting Nyttend's actions without talking to him first. I would suggest that a new CfD (with the category being properly populated first) would have been more appropriate than speedying, if you believe that the category should be deleted.DuncanHill (talk) 20:51, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- It doesn't surprise me that Nyttend is already jumping to conclusions of wheel-warring; in my dealings with him, he is quick to assume bad faith and is frequently uncommunicative. I have not violated WP:0WW, and I'll personally start an ANI thread to evaluate and judge my delete if need be. In all fairness, if you can point me to a discussion that occurred more recently than Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_January_28#Category:Silver_Buffalo_awardees with a clear consensus to keep the category, I'll restore the page, no further questions. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:16, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- Can you point to one with a clear consensus to delete? Your insistence on speedying appears to be based on just the kind of proceduralist arguments that were discounted in order to allow a delete close to the last CfD. As to "uncommunicative", you could see from the logs of the page that Nyttend had reconsidered the speedy already, you disagreed with him, and chose to reverse his action without mentioning it to him. Is that him being uncommunicative, or is it you?
- As I said, I don't see a clear consensus for deletion. I do see confusion and disagreement between admins. Recreation, population, and a third CfD if you believe it should be deleted, seem to me to be a way forward. DuncanHill (talk) 07:04, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Please, please, calm down. I thought we were having a cordial and professional discussion. As far as I'm concerned, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_January_28#Category:Silver_Buffalo_awardees was closed as delete. That's good enough for me, and should be good enough for you. If there's a problem with that close, you need to discuss it with the deleting admin, not me. So far, you have failed to provide me with a more recent discussion than Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_January_28#Category:Silver_Buffalo_awardees, closed as keep or no consensus. If you've shown this missing discussion to Nyttend, please know that I would like to see it too. That being said, I will be requesting the opinion of the original CSD nominator and see what they have to say. If they too agree there is no clear consensus to keep/delete the page, I'll gladly restore and relist the page at CFD. Please understand that I am not trying to f*ck with you or make your life difficult. I am only interested in upholding policy and tangible consensus. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:17, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- I asked Nyttend to reconsider his speedy deletion of the category, he did, and restored. To my mind that is the same as declining the speedy. What does policy say to do when a speedy is declined? I don't know why you keep alluding to a "missing discussion" - I have never suggested there was another apart form the two contradictory ones already mentioned. For you to rely on procedural niceties, when the "delete" CfD which you support excluded "keep" !votes on the grounds that they were based on procedural niceties strikes me as, well, a bit off.
- As for the original CSD nominator, I don't know who that is, but I would guess he is someone who is currently using the deletion of this category as an argument for the deletion of certain other related categories - perhaps you would tell me if this is so?
- I never suggested that you were trying to make my life difficult, I'm just trying to get some clarity. DuncanHill (talk) 07:34, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Please, please, calm down. I thought we were having a cordial and professional discussion. As far as I'm concerned, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_January_28#Category:Silver_Buffalo_awardees was closed as delete. That's good enough for me, and should be good enough for you. If there's a problem with that close, you need to discuss it with the deleting admin, not me. So far, you have failed to provide me with a more recent discussion than Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_January_28#Category:Silver_Buffalo_awardees, closed as keep or no consensus. If you've shown this missing discussion to Nyttend, please know that I would like to see it too. That being said, I will be requesting the opinion of the original CSD nominator and see what they have to say. If they too agree there is no clear consensus to keep/delete the page, I'll gladly restore and relist the page at CFD. Please understand that I am not trying to f*ck with you or make your life difficult. I am only interested in upholding policy and tangible consensus. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:17, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- It doesn't surprise me that Nyttend is already jumping to conclusions of wheel-warring; in my dealings with him, he is quick to assume bad faith and is frequently uncommunicative. I have not violated WP:0WW, and I'll personally start an ANI thread to evaluate and judge my delete if need be. In all fairness, if you can point me to a discussion that occurred more recently than Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_January_28#Category:Silver_Buffalo_awardees with a clear consensus to keep the category, I'll restore the page, no further questions. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:16, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- I read that the result of the most recent discussion was delete. Am I missing something...? -FASTILY (TALK) 18:40, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- I see nothing improper in the original closing of the CFD as delete, no discussion in the intervening years that indicate that consensus has changed regarding the category (indeed, many similar categories for similar awards along these lines have been deleted in the intervening years), no indication that the category was needed or wanted (having lain deleted for well over three years and only re-created when it was mentioned as having been deleted in this CFD for two other Scouting awards. Had I not linked in the CFD I have no doubt that the category would not have been re-created. Reading through the 2007 CFD it appears that the closing admin interpreted the debate reasonably and within the bounds of his discretion. The deletion arguments appear to be superior both in number and in quality, with the comments by Dr. Submillimeter being particularly persuasive. As noted by the closing admin, many of the keep opinions were based on the recentness of the previous CFD and did not discuss policies or guidelines, nor did they in my opinion successfully rebut the assertion that the Silver Buffalo is the sort of award that warrants categorization with one editor questioning whether the award itself was even notable under WP guidelines. Since the determination of consensus appears to be valid, there should be no problem with the speedy deletion.
- I do not understand DuncanHill's assertion that there is no clear consensus, which if I am reading his comments correctly is at least partially based on the existence of the earlier CFD which closed as keep. Consensus can change and each new CFD is dealt with in turn. The existence and outcome of the first CFD were provided to the interested parties, who were free to consider it in formulating their opinions. The closing admin, however, was under no obligation to consider the old CFD when closing the new one. If an editor believes the outcome of a CFD is in error because the closing administrator misinterpreted policy or consensus, the editor may open a deletion review to allow the community to consider the matter. That did not happen here following the close in 2007 nor as near as I can tell in the intervening 3 1/2 years.
- I do not understand Nyttend's assertion that this category is "different from before" or hir comment on DuncanHill's talk page that "the entire contents" of the re-created page were different. As I said on Nyttend's talk page, whether the category is called "awardees" or "recipients" it's still for people who have been given the Silver Buffalo. If CFD results in the deletion of Category:Fooian Boos", allowing Category:Boos who are Fooian to remain for the same contents is an invitation to editors to game the system, re-creating their preferred categories under names that are variant enough for them to claim it's a completely new category. Are You The Cow Of Pain? (talk) 07:52, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- @are You The Cow of Pain, think you it possible that consensus might have changed since the delete CfD? Speedy does not allow us to judge this. I'd also be interested to know did you tag it for speedy twice? Someone tagged it, Nyttend deleted then reconsidered and restored, then you tagged it again. If you disagreed with Nyttend's restoration, perhaps it would have been better to have talked to him about it. The fact that it was recreated, and that Nyttend undid his speedy, suggests that there is not cler consensus for it remaining deleted. I have repeatedly suggested that the best way to achieve clarity is for it to be restored, populated, and a new, third, CfD to be opened by anyone who thinks it should be deleted. The two original CfDs were 3 years ago, it is not "gaming the system" to suggest a new go. The second Cfd so soon after the first "keep" was. DuncanHill (talk) 08:19, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- I'd also like to draw both Fastily's and Are You The Cow Of Pain?'s attention to this comment on the latter's talk page, [56], which is directly relevant to this case. DuncanHill (talk) 08:29, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Fastily, you have said you want to see policy kept to, please re-read WP:CSD, paying particular attention to the third paragraph "Administrators should take care not to speedy delete pages or media except in the most obvious cases. If a page has survived a prior deletion discussion, it should not be speedy deleted except for newly discovered copyright violations.". This cat had survived a previous deletion discussion. Now, Fastily you are an admin, so I think it is reasonable to assume that you were already familiar with this, and Are You The Cow, you had previously had your attention drawn to this, so I would like an explanation from both of you as to why you deliberately ignored the policy you pretend to be enforcing? DuncanHill (talk) 08:35, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Jclemens's interpretation of that statement is disputed. Note that the proscription on deleting such material is not absolute ("should not" does not mean "may not" or "shall not"). And no, based on the many deletion discussions relating to awards categories that have taken place between January 2007 and now I do not believe that consensus against them has changed in general or as it relates to this category in particular. Again, I believe that had the old CFD not been linked to the new one whoever remade the category would have never even noticed its absence. Are You The Cow Of Pain? (talk) 08:41, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Admins need a very good reason to ignore a "should" statement. When another admin has already effectively declined a speedy, then I can't imagine what such a reason would be (other than copyvio or BLP issues). DuncanHill (talk) 08:47, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, no, it's not disputed. A couple of people have said "Gee, that doesn't sound right to me", but no one has actually tried to change the plain text of WP:CSD to amend the meaning. What IS clear, however, is that you, Cow, tagged an article for G4 TWICE. That's disruptive editing: if you disagree with an admin's action (Nyttend) with respect to a G4, approach them on their talk page. The appeal of a speedy decline is XfD, not slapping the same tag back on. Jclemens (talk) 17:18, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Another sad case of the all too often admins acting without discussing, exacerbated by the "awards should be in cats/lists" debate. At least talk is happening now. I just wish both issues would be settled and stop flaring up. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:02, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Just adding a time-stamped comment to stop thread being automatically archived before Fastily gets a chance to respond. DuncanHill (talk) 14:24, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Honestly, I don't think there is anything left more me to say, unless you have a direct question for me. Everything I would have said has already been said. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:36, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- So you have no intention of replying to Nyttend or Jclemens or Rlevse, or of addressing the point about what CSD says about speedying pages which have previously survived deletion discussions (i.e. don't)? DuncanHill (talk) 08:21, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Honestly, I don't think there is anything left more me to say, unless you have a direct question for me. Everything I would have said has already been said. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:36, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Bring in Nyttend
Enough has been said already that I hope that all of you will permit me to start a new subsection.
- First off, Fastily, problems I believe that we've had between us are image-deletion-related; nothing of that has affected this process in my mind.
- As to the wheel warring — it's one thing if I decline a speedy deletion, but another if I delete and then undelete — anyone has the technical ability to decline a speedy deletion, but only admins have the technical ability to undelete or to undo that undeletion; that's why I say that it's wheel warring. I assure you that I did that because I changed my mind on deletion due to DuncanHill's comments; it wasn't because I wanted to be able to accuse a future deleter of wheel warring.
- On the question of categories being subject to G4 — we have a major problem with categories versus other types of pages. Other types of pages can be recreated after XFD if they're substantially different; nobody has a policy-based reason to complain if an article is deleted because it fails to show any evidence of notability and then recreated after several reliable print sources are found and added to the article, or if a navigational template is deleted because it only links two articles and then recreated because ten more articles have been created and thus linked by the new template. With categories, it's hard for the same to be true, since they work so differently; accordingly, I believe that this criterion should be applied more cautiously.
- For this category being G4-able — all of you admins can look at the category as it was when it was deleted the first time versus the way it was when I deleted and then undeleted it. You'll see that the code itself was substantially different; that's the standard by which we judge that other sorts of pages are G4-able, so I came to the conclusion that this page should be judged in the same way. I do not hesitate to delete page X if it's identical to page Y that was deleted at XFD; the thing is that this page was different from Category:Silver Buffalo awardees, not that it had a different name.
Have I addressed everything, or is there something to which I forgot to respond? Someone please let me know if I forgot something. Nyttend (talk) 11:58, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- As a correction of fact (make your own determination on the implications for derived assumptions), I raised Category:Recipients of the Silver Buffalo Award before I initiated the CfD for Category:Silver Wolf awardees and Category:Bronze Wolf awardees. At the time I was unaware of the original category Category:Silver Buffalo awardees or the associated two CfDs. The CfD is what drew attention to my creation of Category:Recipients of the Silver Buffalo Award and ultimately to its speedy deletion. Cheers, AusTerrapin (talk) 12:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC).
question
How does one revert vandalism manually without using a anti vandalism tool? --Inka 888 19:21, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Use the undo function. That's what I did when I was a new user looking to receive rollback. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:34, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
zoetifex Studios
I had a question posted on the zoetifex Studios page and also had a "hangon" tag posted as suggested. So why was it deleted before my question was answered? So I'll ask my question again. Why is it ok to have other animation studios on Wikipedia but not ours? You keep saying it's unambiguous advertising. Why is that not the case with the other studios? I didn't even get all of the content up there. I would appreciate an explanation. Mkadrie (talk) 00:25, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- By any chance, are you the same person as Kadrie69 or Zoetifex? -FASTILY (TALK) 22:21, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I first had the account kadrie69 (but that was personal). So I created a new account zoetifex. Then it wouldn't Wikipedia said I could not post the content under that user name because it was advertising myself. So I tried it under my kadrie69 account and then they said that I had used copyrighted material from LinkedIn. It's my content. I wrote it so why shouldn't I be able to use it? I tried again but when I needed to upload a logo for the page, Wikicommons would not let me log in as kadrie69 for some strange reason, so I had to create a new account there which was MKadrie. So that is the account I used to finish creating the page. I see other studios out here giving information about themselves and all I wanted to do was do the same thing. I don't see it as advertising, I see it as information. And as I had stated, if they can do it and it's not considered advertising, then why can't I? Just curious Mkadrie (talk) 19:01, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Robert S. Capon page still pending
Dear Fastily: I just wanted to let you know that the Robert S. Capon page is still pending. Mr. Capon has sent the requested email to "permissions-en@wikimedia.org." Could you please restore the page? Thank you, Kettbotn —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kettbotn (talk • contribs) 13:52, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- The page will automatically be restored and assigned a ticket number in the OTRS database once the email is received and the permissions are approved. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:24, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Again. Do you know how long this process takes? The page was taken down rapidly (about 5 minutes after posting!) but it's been three days since Mr. Capon sent the permission. Thank you again. Kettbotn. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kettbotn (talk • contribs) 19:31, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- I just now got around to this one. If you go ahead and restore it I'll tag it appropriately. VernoWhitney (talk) 19:38, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Hi VernoWhitney. I'm new to Wikipedia, so don't understand if you're asking me or Fastily to restore the page. Unfortunately, I did not save a copy with all of my edits. If Fastily can restore it to the way I posted it, that would be ideal. If he/she cannot, I'll muddle through by reloading my page and trying to remember my edits. Thanks so much. Kind regards, Kettbotn —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kettbotn (talk • contribs) 01:20, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry for being unclear: I'm asking Fastily to restore the page. I'm an OTRS member and handle permissions, but I'm not an administrator so I can't restore it myself. VernoWhitney (talk) 01:24, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- Hi VernoWhitney. I'm new to Wikipedia, so don't understand if you're asking me or Fastily to restore the page. Unfortunately, I did not save a copy with all of my edits. If Fastily can restore it to the way I posted it, that would be ideal. If he/she cannot, I'll muddle through by reloading my page and trying to remember my edits. Thanks so much. Kind regards, Kettbotn —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kettbotn (talk • contribs) 01:20, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- I just now got around to this one. If you go ahead and restore it I'll tag it appropriately. VernoWhitney (talk) 19:38, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Again. Do you know how long this process takes? The page was taken down rapidly (about 5 minutes after posting!) but it's been three days since Mr. Capon sent the permission. Thank you again. Kettbotn. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kettbotn (talk • contribs) 19:31, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
24 Hour Church of Elvis
Just curious, would you mind reversing yourself on this page move into mainspace without redirect? The article history shows that it wasn't really promotional until last June; a simple reversion of this series of edits would (at least in my mind) disqualify it from speedy deletion. Nyttend (talk) 19:39, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Good idea. I'll suggest it to WWB and see if they're alright with that. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:30, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
deleted "Kieran Leonard"
Hi! I feel rather out of my depth here so please correct me if I'm wrong but I think you said you would restore the "Kieran Leonard" page that was deleted to my personal userspace so I can work on it and later move it to the article space, when I've finished with it. Unless I'm looking in the completely wrong place, this hasn't happened. Could you please do this or alternatively email me a copy of the original article? myska_x@web.de Thanks! Michellemisfit (talk) 23:41, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Did I say that? So sorry I didn't get back to you earlier on this. I've restored a copy of the deleted article at User:Michellemisfit/Kieran Leonard. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:03, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
no worries, i'd forgotten about it as well and then thought that i'm probably doing this all wrong. thanks for restoring it!! Michellemisfit (talk) 22:59, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Use of File:Frodo.jpg in the article Frodo Baggins
Hi Fastily. I noticed that the non-free use image File:Frodo.jpg got added to Frodo Baggins. I thought it might be a questionable use of the image, but I don't know where to report it. You seem to know a lot about images, so I thought I would bring it to your attention. Thanks. Susfele (talk) 02:23, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Looks like a good faith edit that unintentionally broke the infobox. If I remember correctly, Wikiproject Lord of the Rings reached consensus to not include images of characters in infoboxes because many interpretations of each character exist and so that each interpretation can be given equal weight. At any rate, I have reverted the edit with a "good faith" edit summary. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:07, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Cross-namespace redirect deletions
Lots of those things you're deleting have inbound links from other pages (for example, Wikipedia:MeSH D08 points to many of the redirects to Category:EC 1.4). Might want to check with Wikipedia:WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology to see if there was a plan or reason for the redirects (that have existed for many years) or for help fixing your link-breaking. DMacks (talk) 05:33, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- I'll look into it. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:44, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Looks like I did break a number of links. Guess it's time to do a mass restore... -FASTILY (TALK) 05:49, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- I was actually making my way here to say the same thing about CAT:SD. I was boggled as to why this kept leading me to the search page instead of Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. You may want to restore all those redirects before an angry mob forms... — ξxplicit 05:52, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Agreed - this is a perfect time to invoke WP:IAR to permit CAT as a pseudo-namespace (I regularly use CAT:CSD for getting to the speedies). This should have been discussed at the very least... SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:54, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Also, how were you managing to do such a massive amount of deletions so quickly? At 05:37, you were doing a deletion about one every second and a half... SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:58, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) For what it's worth, Fastily's deletions have always been beyond any normal rate. He can go through and demolish the daily categories in Template:CSD/Subcategories without any automated tools in ten minutes on a good day. The fastest internet in the world and the never-crashing browser a 15 million open tabs could never go that fast. It's somewhat intimidating.
On a side note, I just wanted to point out that I skimmed through some of these deletions and I'd say most, if not all, don't meet the deletion criteria for R2. It does list exception, which include redirects from the article namespace to "Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help: and Portal: namespaces". — ξxplicit 06:15, 13 September 2010 (UTC)- Yeah, I realized that right after deleting those pages. I'll do a mass restore as soon as I'm back on my computer, but for the time being, I'd appreciate it if I could have some help cleaning up that mess D: Thanks, FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:34, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- @Explicit Tabbed browsing ftw :D -FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:35, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, I realized that right after deleting those pages. I'll do a mass restore as soon as I'm back on my computer, but for the time being, I'd appreciate it if I could have some help cleaning up that mess D: Thanks, FASTILYsock(TALK) 07:34, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) For what it's worth, Fastily's deletions have always been beyond any normal rate. He can go through and demolish the daily categories in Template:CSD/Subcategories without any automated tools in ten minutes on a good day. The fastest internet in the world and the never-crashing browser a 15 million open tabs could never go that fast. It's somewhat intimidating.
- Also, how were you managing to do such a massive amount of deletions so quickly? At 05:37, you were doing a deletion about one every second and a half... SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:58, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Agreed - this is a perfect time to invoke WP:IAR to permit CAT as a pseudo-namespace (I regularly use CAT:CSD for getting to the speedies). This should have been discussed at the very least... SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:54, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- I was actually making my way here to say the same thing about CAT:SD. I was boggled as to why this kept leading me to the search page instead of Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. You may want to restore all those redirects before an angry mob forms... — ξxplicit 05:52, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Looks like I did break a number of links. Guess it's time to do a mass restore... -FASTILY (TALK) 05:49, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of "What on Earth"
Hi Fastily
You just deleted my page about The What on Earth? Wallbook - the thing is this really is a new, innovative publishing concept, with a new word and it's notable for being the first attempt to illustrate all history graphically from the beginning of time to the present day . Iabsolutely want to reflect Wikipedia guidelines, and would very much appreciate you help in trying to get the piece into shape without it being deleted.
Here's a rough copy as it was - any advice you can give would be hugely appreciated.
Very many thanks!
-chris lloyd
- (talk page stalker) Hi Chris, among other things (and until Fastily has a chance to response) you may wish to read up on conflict of interests as I notice your proposed article is on a subject you may have a conflict of interests on (since you are the book series' author). Also, please remember to sign your posts with four tildes ("~~~~"). Best, RobertMfromLI User Talk/Contribs 16:17, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Proposed addition
Lede
The What on Earth? Wallbook claims to be the first ever attempt to illustrate the entire history of everything from the beginning of time to the present day on a single timeline. It also includes a 7,000-word narrative guide.
The A3-sized, hard-backed publication is concertina folded so it can be read like a book or hung on a wall. When fully unfolded it extends to a length of 2.3 metres. Along the timeline its creator has tried to include every major event in natural or human history on the 2.3 metre-long, A3-sized timeline – that’s well over 1,000 pictures and captions.[3]
Design
The Wallbook is notable for its use of a logarithmic timescale. At the beginning of the timeline 1cm represetns the passage of 1 billion years but by the end of the timeline the same space accounts for just 5 years. A total of 12 changes of scale accounts for how the whole of the past can be graphcially represented on a single piece of paper.
The 1,000 pictures and captions are arranged into twelve streams of colour which provide the backdrops along which the major events of natural and human history unfold. Space, Earth, Sky, Sea, Land and Humanity account for the story of evolution while Asia, the Middle East, Europe, the Americas, Africa and Australasia convey the rise and fall of human civilisations.
At the top of the timeline is a series of globes. To begin with these track the movement of the world’s continental plates which collide into a single supercontinent, and then prise apart again, a geological cycle that repeats over millions of years. By the end the globes chart the rise and fall of major human empires.
Creators
The What on Earth? Wallbook is the brainchild of Christopher Lloyd, author of two world history books, both published by Bloomsbury PLC, entitled What on Earth Happened? The Complete Story of Planet, Life and People from the Big Bang to the Present Day (ISBN 978-0747594598) and What on Earth Evolved? 100 Species that Changed the World (ISBN 978-0747599623). The idea of how it might be possible to illustrate a complete overview of all history came to him in on a skiing holiday in the Bernese Oberland in early 2010.[4]
To turn his original sketches into reality, Lloyd turned to Beckenham-based artist Andy Forshaw and book designer William Webb. Together with two Bloomsbury editors, they founded a new publishing company called What on Earth Publishing Ltd to publish the innovative wallbook.
Distribution
The What on Earth? Wallbook was launched exclusively through The Daily Telegraph newspaper on Saturday 4th September.[5] The paper sold more than 600 copies in the first week.
Nomenclature
Since the launch of the What on Earth? Wallbook the word wallbook has been defined in Macmillan's Open Dictionary as a new noun meaning: a large printed book which can be mounted on a wall [6]
References
- ^ http://www.npr.org/blogs/politicaljunkie/2010/06/28/128168209/senate-seniority-inouye-is-now-president-pro-tempore
- ^ http://thehill.com/capital-living/102101-the-25-hardest-working-members-of-congress
- ^ http://www.thebookseller.com/news/127565-publisher-launches-with-versatile-wallbook--.html
- ^ http://whatonearthbooks.com/What_on_Earth_Books/Wallbook_Story.html
- ^ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/bookclub/7979831/Family-Book-Club-The-What-on-Earth-Wallbook.html
- ^ http://www.macmillandictionary.com/open-dictionary/entries/wallbook.htm
- User_talk:Wallbook#Re:Deletion_of_.22What_on_Earth.22 -FASTILY (TALK) 23:51, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
CAT:SD
Fastily, why did you delete CAT:SD? R2 specifically excludes the "Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help: and Portal:" namespaces from deletion under the R2 criterion, see Wikipedia:CSD#Redirects. Courcelles 06:09, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Just a note, this is being discussed above.
— ξxplicit 06:16, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Whoops. One of these days I'm going to learn to read an entire talk page before commenting. Maybe. Maybe not given this talk page is 66K long, though. Ignore me, then. Courcelles 06:21, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi Fastily. Recently I have uploaded the file:Arpad album cover photo session.jpg however I did not indicate the copyright and it got deleted from the relevant page. I can confirm that the above jpg file has been created by me therefore it can go into the public domain. Could you let me know how to do that and also what do I need to do in order to get the jpg file back on the artists profile??? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.136.187.200 (talk) 14:35, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Reupload the file. Slap this text "{{pd-self}}" anywhere on the file's description page. That should solve the problem. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:52, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of Consona Corporation Article
Hello,
Wondering as to why Consona Corporation article was deleted. As one of the contributors of to the article, i tried to make it not an advertisement, but give accurate and factual representation of the history and offerings of the company. It is very common for companies to have wiki pages. Please let me know what i can do to contribute better content for you to consider not deleting Consona.
Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitch Briggs561 (talk • contribs) 14:56, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- The page was deleted per the prod process. This means I can restore the page for you, but I would recommend having a copy restored to your userspace first, so you can work on improving the article at your own pace without running the risk of re-deletion. Once you are finished making improvements, you can move the page back to the mainspace. How does that sound? -FASTILY (TALK) 23:53, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
This sounds goods - please restore the page content to my userspace.
thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitch Briggs561 (talk • contribs) 13:23, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Armenians in South Korea (deleted article)
Hello,
There was an article Armenians in South Korea that was deleted with following motivation: "A group of 40-50 people in a nation of 50 million simply do not represent anything like enough proportion of the population to warrant an article".
Please look at the list of items below about the article, representing disagreement of the above point of view:
1. The article "Armenians in South Korea" does not represent Armenians as a nation living in South Korea in comparison to other nations living in South Korea.
It represents Armenians that are living in South Korea related to Armenians all over the world.
2. There are many similar articles on Wikipedia which have more disproportion than "Armenians in South Korea".
For example "Armenians in Bangladesh" 50 Armenians and 160 million people in Bangladesh, "Armenians in Indonesia" 10 Armenians vs 229 million population in Indonesia and so on...
Could you please answer to above items or reconsider your decision about deleting the article?
Thank You. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.10.216.180 (talk) 16:40, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Er, could you please log in to edit? It would help me better respond to your query if you could. Thanks, FASTILY (TALK) 23:55, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Matt Berninger redirect
Hi Fastily! Hope you don't mind me asking you a question. I noticed that Matt Berninger redirects to The National and I'm not sure why that is. Other members of The National have their own wiki pages (the brothers have several, in fact!) and I was interested in starting Matt's but not sure if there's a specific reason as to why it was redirected? I checked the history and talk page but didn't see any issues explaining why and was wondering if it would be OK to move the page back? Of course, if you'd rather wait until I actually write the article and it is approved, that will be fine as well. Merci beaucoup! ~dee 19:18, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, I just realized I can remove the redirect myself. :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deed89 (talk • contribs) 19:52, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
the ron hamad jpeg that was deleted
I can not figure out which tag to use. the images is of ron hamad from his info page on his website. I have permission from him to use it and load it into the wiki page I am working on. It is a publicity shot. Just can not grasp the correct tag.
the tag page is not clear to, how should I put in a tag? {{Non-free promotional|1=http://www.urlofterms.com%7Cimage_has_rationale=yes%7Cimage_is_of_living_person=no}} is this a tag?
thank you in advance
laurence
Lucyanz (talk) 19:42, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Have Mr. Hamad send an email to "permissions-en@wikimedia.org", explaining that the file can be used on Wikipedia and under what license (see WP:ICT). For further instructions, see WP:DCP, WP:PERMISSION. Feel free to let me know if you have any questions or are in need of assistance. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:44, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
8Coupons
Hi Fastily,
I was just looking back at the 8coupons Wiki, which I wrote almost a year ago and saw the speedy deletion revert followed by the advert tag. Wondering where people felt the article needed improvement, since all this was done without any conversation on the discussion board.
Considering the time I spent writing the article (even if it was a long time ago) I'd be happy to incorporate whatever changes people feel are needed.
King4057 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:34, 13 September 2010 (UTC).
- I added the advert-cleanup tag, because I felt it was somewhat promotional in nature, but not enough to warrant deletion. Some links you might find helpful in cleaning up the file: WP:PEACOCK, WP:ADS. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:45, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Tagging a page for deletion
Hey Fastily. I had another question I hope you can help me answer. See Xx Faktor I was sure this warranted a speedy delete but I wasn’t sure it was appropriate to tag it as "nonsense" and couldn't find a more appropriate tag.. Is there a speedy delete tag where I can type in the reason? Or am I just being slow and missing something? :-) Thank you ~dee 06:16, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- It looks like the page was deleted under WP:CSD#A10. I guess you weren't missing anything :) -FASTILY (TALK) 07:19, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Page Deletion - Van Mildert Boat Club
Hi Fastily
I would like to appeal against the deletion of the Van Mildert Boat Club wikipedia article. I believe it to be both factual and informative. Could you please restore the page and highlight the particular areas that you thought were not well referenced so that I can make adjustments accordingly.
Regards Woody3254 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Woody3254 (talk • contribs) 13:25, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- The page was deleted per the prod process. This means I can restore the page for you, but I would recommend having a copy restored to your userspace first, so you can work on improving the article at your own pace without running the risk of re-deletion. Once you are finished making improvements, you can move the page back to the mainspace. How does that sound? -FASTILY (TALK) 22:23, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
That sounds reasonable. Could you point out the sections that you think need work on? I used University College Boat Club as a template for the page and as there seems to be no problem with theirs I was a little confused as to the reason that Van Mildert Boat Club got deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Woody3254 (talk • contribs) 17:20, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Done to User:Woody3254/Van Mildert Boat Club. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:38, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Your deletion of photograph: File:St. Pius X school crest.jpg (once more, with feeling)
I see you archived the conversation about the file. The last thing you said was, Fair enough. I'll look into it. -FASTILY 18:32, 8 September 2010 (UTC). I just came back to see how things were progressing. It's quite a while since the picture was deleted and I'm anxious to get it resolved. Thank you. --O'Dea (talk) 15:10, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- And I haven't forgotten. I've been busy in RL lately and haven't had time to do some research. I promise I'll back to you as soon as I can. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:54, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Uprising (Dance Event) deletion - please re-instate. Reason given for deletion was local entry. In fact, this is one of the UK's longest running dance events, having son numerous awards. If gatecrasher can be considered worthy, so should uprising —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.152.36.33 (talk) 12:49, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Uprising (Dance Event) Deletion
Hi Fastily. Can you please re-instate. Your reason given for deletion was non-notable, local entry. In fact, this is one of the UK's longest running dance events, having won numerous awards. If gatecrasher can be considered worthy, so should uprising
Thanks for reading Mista o (talk) 12:55, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- The page was deleted per the prod process. This means I can restore the page for you, but I would recommend having a copy restored to your userspace first, so you can work on improving the article at your own pace without running the risk of re-deletion. Once you are finished making improvements, you can move the page back to the mainspace. How does that sound? -FASTILY (TALK) 17:34, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of Cyberoam Security certifications
Why was this page Cyberoam Security certifications speedily deleted when I added hang on tag and wanted to contest this deletion. I also added a note on talk page sufficiently explaining my position that other articles similar to this one already exist in wikipedia. I wasn't given sufficient chance to rework or edit the article if at all any doubts were being raised. The article on Cyberoam Security certifications deserves inclusion in Wikipedia based on the grounds that there are articles by rival products that have a place too. Why was this page exclusively targeted?--Tech editor007 (talk) 13:07, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- Per your simultaneous request at WP:REFUND, the page has been restored to the userspace at User:Tech editor007/Cyberoam Security certifications. You may work on improving the article's assertion of notability at its new location, but please contact Fastily (talk · contribs), the administrator who deleted the page, again before moving it back to the article space. Please see the criteria for speedy deletion and the relevant notability guidelines - articles that are not in compliance will be deleted. --Tikiwont (talk) 16:20, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for your constructive help. I'll definitely try to improve this article but as I can see this user Fastily (talk · contribs) seems to have announced his retirement from wikipedia. That means he will no longer be available to check whatever changes I make. Who do I approach in that event? Can any other wikipedia editors verify my article for inclusion???? TikiwontFor example, will you do it? --Tech editor007 (talk) 19:34, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Your retirement
I have to say, this comes as a surprise to me. With your high activity, I honestly thought you'd stick around for a long time, but it seems that's not the case. Best of luck in your future endeavors, and thank you for your tireless contributions to Wikipedia, both as an administrator and an editor. Oh, and you still owe me. — ξxplicit 18:12, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Goodbye?
It looks like you've decided to move on. It goes without saying that we'll miss you and would like you to stay so I won't dwell on that, as I know there are more important things in life than Wikipedia. Still, I do hope to see you back someday even if at a lower level of editing then you've given us lately. —Soap— 18:13, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of U.S.S. Mississippi photograph
I believe your deletion of the U.S.S. Mississippi photograph may be an error. The source of this picture was a U.S. Naval Historical Center photograph NH 86646, (http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-usn/usnsh-m/bb41.htm) which should be allowable under Wikipedia guidelines. It is significant to the article about the battleship because it illustrates the effect post World War II conversion had on the appearance of the ship. If you concur, please restore the image. Thanks. Bruin2 (talk) 18:07, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- I see it now. My mistake, file restored. Apologies for the inconvenience. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:57, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Happy Trails
Sorry to see you go, but glad you are working on something cool. Good luck on your studies and life after Wikipedia. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 19:24, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- Good luck and G-d bless! -- Avi (talk) 19:41, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- All best, Fastily. Best wishes for a bright future. Thanks for being there for me when needed. Regards, --Manway (talk) 20:29, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- Best wishes, Fastily. May your future be full of fun and reward - and I hope that we will see you back when you have some time - yours is definitely a case of not leaving under a cloud! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 20:57, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- All best, Fastily. Best wishes for a bright future. Thanks for being there for me when needed. Regards, --Manway (talk) 20:29, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111--intelati(Call) 02:52, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
- Hope you come back. :)--intelati(Call) 02:54, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
- Whatttttttttttttttttt theeeeeeeeeeeeeee hellllllllllllllllllllllll. Now who's going to clear out every CSD category, all the expired prods, and every FFD open for seven days in just ten minutes after 0000 UTC every night? You
wereare always awesome, and I look forward to seeing you around whenever you decide to drop by. I'm glad that you're focusing on real life (biology is awesome too :D), and that you aren't leaving just because of some idiot user or anything like that. But I'm also sad that I'll no longer be seeing your name around anymore. Have fun and enjoy your freedom, and come back when you aren't too busy! —fetch·comms 02:59, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
- Whatttttttttttttttttt theeeeeeeeeeeeeee hellllllllllllllllllllllll. Now who's going to clear out every CSD category, all the expired prods, and every FFD open for seven days in just ten minutes after 0000 UTC every night? You
- Same here, you could still edit while your in college, as long as you could find the time for it. I'm also majoring in a very difficult subject (History) which involves alot of reading and research, I just use Wikipedia and do my classwork at the same time (though my editing should diminish soon). It doesn't need to be a full retirement, Wikipedia is better than facebook, youtube, etc. Secret account 04:10, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
- NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! Thanks for your hard work, really appreciate the work you've done and hope to see you in the future. Ғяіᴆaз'§Đøøм | Champagne? 06:16, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks so much
For the wonderful support vote. I was overwhelmed when I saw you voting in my RfA. Thanks again. Wifione ....... Leave a message 19:04, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
- And best wishes with your degree!!! Do well.. very well! Wifione ....... Leave a message 03:39, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Good luck
While we never interacted, I have always thought of you as the kind of editor I wanted to be. Here's to hoping your post-wiki life is as successful as your on-wiki one. Nolelover 20:28, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Another goodbye
You haven't that much direct interaction with me, but you've been a great editor. Good luck elsewhere! Allmightyduck What did I do wrong? 20:35, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Best Wishes and Thank You!
Hi Fastily, best wishes for happiness in every endeavor your non-Wikipedia life brings your way, with fond hopes that one day you will find the interest and/or time to return. Thanks much for the past few months of teaching by example, taking the time to answer all my questions and making yourself so available to everyone who stopped by your page. Best, RobertMfromLI User Talk/Contribs 18:37, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the honourable mention on your userpage, and for participating in a meeting of minds with me. –xenotalk 20:37, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Bajalan photos you have flaged
Hi,
The Bajalan photos you have flaged are from the Bajalans family personal archive which have been scanned by them and posted on wiki. there is no copyright of there personal photos.
thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bokani (talk • contribs) 23:26, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
- If you mean that the copyright has expired (possible, if they were taken in Iraq), or that the author/copyright holder (the latter of which is probably the Bajalans family) has released the images into the public domain, please either say why the copyright is expired (under which terms), or have the photographer/copyright holder email
permissions-enand state that the images are in the public domain. —fetch·comms 13:51, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
wikimedia.org
Retired!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
Please come back! Wikipedia needs you. 
~NerdyScienceDude 03:06, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
- Hey Fastily, you fo' real? Aw, shucks. Well, it's been nice working with you. I did always enjoy seeing you and your sock's names go by, knowing that the place was in good hands. All the best in Southern California. Make sure you pay attention in your lit classes--poetry always beats taxonomy, no matter what Ucucha says. Be well! Drmies (talk) 04:44, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Very best of luck to you, I've grown accustomed to seeing your name in the logs! Have a great time at school, and if you should get a second (during or afterwards), stop by and say hey. Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:52, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Very best of luck, and thanks for your assistance in the past - Wikipedia will be poorer without you until you come back. Begoon•talk 13:55, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Hey Fastily!
Sad to see you go, I'm not sure where to look for help anymore!!! I need to find another Admin as good as you! Anyway, thanks for your help and dedication and I hope to see ya round! Best of Luck in School.
Your Fellow Wikipedian, tofutwitch11 T. C. 20:21, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
I haven't known you for a long time but in the short time I've known you, you were a great Wikipedian. I hope you come back once in a while. Best of luck at school! Nations United (talk) 00:52, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Aww man
Well it was nice knowing you. I'll always remember you witty comments and how fun it was to be around you on here. You're awesome :) Good luck outside of Wikipedia. All the best,--White Shadows Your guess is as good as mine 21:36, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
All the best
All the best in your studies - even though I bet you sneak back occasionally :) --Elen of the Roads (talk) 10:01, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
- ...and on that note (sneaking back) I'll bid you, not "goodbye", but au revoir! And I'll echo Elen's best wishes for your studies! TFOWR 10:45, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Billboard Family
You just deleted my page The Billboard Family . I hit save and I got the message .... after I just completely created all the content. Luckily, I was able to save the content, so it is ready to go. Can you un-delete this page? Thanks!
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:33, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Best wishes
Hi,
wishing you best of luck, for your future endeavor, you were the one to delete my first writeup on wiki, but I am learning now how to write good in wikipedia. Thanks a lot,
AmitabhPatra (talk) 04:14, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Request for mediation rejected
The Request for mediation concerning User talk:Fastily, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. An explanation of why it has not been possible to allow this dispute to proceed to mediation is provided at the mediation request page (which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time). Queries on the rejection of this dispute can be directed to the Committee chairperson or e-mailed to the mediation mailing list.
For the Mediation Committee, AGK 23:05, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
(This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.)
the dreamscapes project
Hi Fastily,
Let me start by apologizing, am quite new to wikipedia, so don't know all the proper channels. Recently I found out that the wikipedia article for my band "the dreamscapes project" was deleted due to your recommendation.
Even though you are no longer active, I wanted to touch base with you before initiating a deletion review, per the instructions on the site.
I believe that with a little research you will find that "the dreamscapes project" meets the first criteria for being a notable band. We have had articles written about us in the Washington Post (also picked as a top band in their reader choice awards), Northern Virginia Magazine (just picked as Northern Virginia's best musicians), and CWG Magazine (2nd in popularity only to Pitchfork) to name a few.
I will be happy to supply you with over 40 articles written by various publications and blogs if it will convince you that our article is both legitimate and notable.
Thank you for your time and consideration. Keith Center 208.193.40.254 (talk) 17:59, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
- The page was deleted per the WP:PROD process. This means that you can request the page's undeletion. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:07, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
Unblock request
Hello Fastily,
I just want to tell you that 98.177.155.42 (the one you blocked on June 24) requests to be unblocked. He says he understands waht he's been blocked for, and won't do it again. Blocking admin(istrator) was Ckatz, so can you discuss the block with that user? Thanks
174.17.38.104 (talk) 21:36, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Retirement
Sorry to see you go, but all the best in whatever you decide to do. Perhaps we will see you back here again sometime. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 02:55, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
huh
Are you back on Wikipedia; I noticed you were editing again? --Inka888 02:07, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
He is not really "back", he has made minimal edits since September 14 when he retired. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 19:24, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted Company Profile
You deleted our company profile page for 'Interdean International Relocation' due to advertising or promotion. This was however not intended and the page was intended as a profile page for information only. Is it possible for you to reinstate this page, or advise what we detailed that caused the deletion. We would like to recreate this. RelocationPro| (talk • contribs) 08:30, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
- User_talk:RelocationPro#Re:Deleted_Company_Profile -FASTILY (TALK) 00:22, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
I realized you're retired but
... it sure would be nice if, as one of your last acts, you could take a look at this monster: Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/Florida uploads by User:83d40m. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:48, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
- I'll have a look. Can't make any promises though. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:48, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
The Norwegian School in London
Well, even if you are "retired" i can not say anything but this: Why did you delete the article "The Norwegian School in London". It is a school for young pupils who enjoyed the article, and the text was agreed upon with the school management and the copyright was agreed, also. What you did was not very vice or nice, and when I read your reason for leaving Wikipedia, I understand that you have tried to do to much of the work you shouldn't have done. My conclusion is that you may not "like" private schools. Maybe all your so called "contributions" should be revised an checked regarding quality. Thor-Ivar Guldberg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thor-Ivar Guldberg (talk • contribs) 08:49, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
- Lol. For the record, I am retired. If you want me to help you, you can start by asking again, politely. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:48, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
That would not be necessary, thanks. Good luck with your new life! Thor-Ivar Guldberg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thor-Ivar Guldberg (talk • contribs) 12:17, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Benchmark Displays
You deleted my entry and several related entries. The article on Benchmark Displays does not differ from that of other companies i.e.: Best Buy. The article/submission stated the history of the company, its entities and what it does. Referring articles sited scientific entries on Wiki as well as defining entries.
Please explain this action and what one has to do to have a listing like BEST BUY!
Additional submission were totally generic about items/products used in the retail business, just like knives in cooking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MEHNTOR (talk • contribs) 20:15, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
- User talk:MEHNTOR#Re:Benchmark Displays -FASTILY (TALK) 17:12, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:KingDedede200px.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:KingDedede200px.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 03:39, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Belen Echandia
Dear Fastily,
On September 14, 2010 at you deleted a page, titled Belen Echandia, that I created citing that it was ‘Unambiguous advertising or promotion’. This was not my intent. I am relatively new to contributing to Wikipedia and would appreciate your guidance on this issue...
I presented a concise, factual, and fully cited article about this young, quickly growing, global company. Although my intention was to publish a neutral point of view, but found this quite difficult to do as the company is luxury good / fashion based. From the short article that you deleted (5 sentences total), was there one particular line that motivated the deletion? If so, can you please reinstate the article and allow me to make the appropriate changes and bring the page up to Wikipedia’s standards.
Thanks in advance, Parafianowicz (talk) 01:39, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
PS. Enjoy retirement!
User:Fastily/Sandbox/RfA Notice
Hi Fastily, I hope you don't mind, but I have been using your subpage User:Fastily/Sandbox/RfA Notice to ask other users about their untranscluded RfAs. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:03, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, thank you. I'd lost the link and couldn't find it again. —Soap— 22:06, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
- Wait, no. There's another one that goes into much more detail, which if I remember correctly was designed after people realized that the first message wasn't "sharp" enough to get people to think twice before submitting an obvious no-chance RfA. —Soap— 22:08, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
- I've moved the page to User:Fastily/RfA Notice, tweaked the code, and added template documentation. It's finally out of the sandbox! Thanks for helping to clean up old RfAs you guys. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 04:48, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
- Wait, no. There's another one that goes into much more detail, which if I remember correctly was designed after people realized that the first message wasn't "sharp" enough to get people to think twice before submitting an obvious no-chance RfA. —Soap— 22:08, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
hello
what does ir all mean a new programming language —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.56.88.86 (talk) 14:38, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
InkHeart?
Hey. It looks like InkHeart may have finally returned... Aman329 has twice readded unsourced episode ratings. Ωphois 00:56, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
- There isn't enough recent activity from the account to warrant a block as a sock. I've reverted some of the recent edits, but will actively watch for suspicious edits from the account. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:40, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Retired?
You're not very good at retiring :P. Great to see you around more, though. Maybe you should trade that black and gold in for some blue and gold :) Pilif12p : Yo 03:32, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
- Meh, easier said than done to stay away from Wikipedia. For what it's worth, my activity levels will be nowhere close to what they once were, but I'll definitely consider it. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 18:46, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of InfoPrint Solutions Company
You deleted InfoPrint Solutions Company. A user has posted at Wikipedia:New contributors' help page#How do i find the status of an article I've submitted. The article didn't look so spammy before 27 July 2010. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:08, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
- I'm retired and I've resigned the bit, so I'm afraid there's not much I can do to help. I trust your judgement on this matter, and will support whatever action you decide to take. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:39, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
- OK, I have offered to userfy if the IP creates an account. You make a lot of edits for a retired user... I saw your contributions page and assumed you were active but I didn't view your user page or check for the bit. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:36, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
- I think it's a good plan. The article can truly be expanded to be something worthwhile. Being someone familiar with both the company and their previous owners (IBM: when it was a division of them), the company/division has made numerous firsts, such as their high volume color printers (which also doubled as book printers) like the InfoPrint Color 105 and upwards. They've also not just set the way for such things, but have been the provider or licensor of the technology, patents and/or machines themselves (rebranded) of many large printers/publishing machines sold by Xerox and others (such as much of the InfoPrint line, that IBM designed and holds the patents on and either built or licensed to Xerox - the Color series being one such).
- The only difficulty I see is digging up all the old (or even somewhat new) information to support the content that should be in the article - but alas, that's not my project ;-) Best, Rob ROBERTMFROMLI TALK/CNTRB 21:47, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
- OK, I have offered to userfy if the IP creates an account. You make a lot of edits for a retired user... I saw your contributions page and assumed you were active but I didn't view your user page or check for the bit. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:36, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Semi-retired
I noticed that you are still editing a bit. Maybe you might want to change {{retired}} to {{semiretired}}. Just a thought. Inka888ContribsTalk 02:17, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
- Glad you're now only semi-retired. A Wikipedia without Fastily is kinda like pizza without cheese... I know some people eat their pizza that way, but not me. :-) Hope things are going well for you! Best, Rob ROBERTMFROMLI TALK/CNTRB 21:50, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the kind thoughts Rob. I am still retired, but I'll definitely try to be around. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 18:25, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
- I saw your signature earlier and was all excited at the prospect of having you back. you might not be out of retirement (yet!), but it's good to have you around, if not entirely back. I hope all's well. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:31, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
- Hope to see your sig around more often Fastily. Glad to see that you're still poking your head around here and there :)--White Shadows Your guess is as good as mine 01:51, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
- I saw your signature earlier and was all excited at the prospect of having you back. you might not be out of retirement (yet!), but it's good to have you around, if not entirely back. I hope all's well. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:31, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the kind thoughts Rob. I am still retired, but I'll definitely try to be around. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 18:25, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
You've got mail. Have a good day! :) MJ94 (talk) 03:19, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi, you have deleted File talk:HMAS Australia LOC 16921u.jpg because the image (File:HMAS Australia LOC 16921u.jpg) was moved to Commons, I presume. However, it seems that there was some pertinent information regarding the file and its subject per the Description's "HMS Indefatigable (1909), previously mislabeled as HMAS Australia (see en:File talk:HMAS Australia LOC 16921u.jpg)". Could you look at the deleted revision and copy/transfer the contents to the talk page at Commons? Thank you. Jappalang (talk) 06:36, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Fastily resigned his admin bit not too long ago, so I hope neither of you mind my butting in. There was only one revision made, which was the following text: "This is actually Indefatigable as Australia and New Zealand had no spotting top on their mainmasts. See Burt's British Battleships of World War I. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:29, 12 April 2010 (UTC)". Hope that helps. — ξxplicit 07:08, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Blocking user
Hello could you pleae block this wikipedia acocunt user Eaglestorm for being a mental cyber bullier and a orchestrater please. --Keating 1991Keating 1991 (talk) 06:39, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Fastily is semi-retired. Just a side note, I've left you a warning on your talk page. Assuming Eaglestorm is bullying, you still should not be calling him "mental". You also may wish to cite your claims by providing diffs to pages where Eaglestorm is engaged in bullying. The better place to do this, since Fastily is retired, is WP:RfC or WP:ANI. Best, Rob ROBERTMFROMLI TALK/CNTRB 07:00, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
- Hey Fastily, just so you don't waste your time, user is on an indef: (Revoking talk page access: inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked: Disruption, avoidance of block of title="" href="../wiki/User:Whitmore_8621") Best, Rob ROBERTMFROMLI TALK/CNTRB 03:19, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
Happy Halloween
 |
 |
Puffin has given you some caramel and a candy apple! Caramel and candy-coated apples are fun Halloween treats, and promote WikiLove on Halloween. Hopefully these have made your Halloween (and the proceeding days) much sweeter. Happy Halloween!
Puffin Lets talk! 13:12, 31 October 2010 (UTC) |
Hi
How are you? Are you still on here? I thought I'd stay up with the admin who helped me through my RFA process. I had my first WP:SPIDER losing my temper the other day [57]. I'm none too happy with myself; I had two really frustrating moments at once. :P Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:06, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Magog, real life's been quite a handful lately, but I'm still here...just not nearly as often as I used to be; thanks for asking. With regards to WP:SPIDER, don't sweat it, stuff like that happens to the best of us, and sometimes, a short break away from the drama can be helpful. I suppose you're now entitled to say you know what it's like to be an admin. Wielding the mop and bucket is no easy task, and I'm glad you're hanging in there. Keep up the good work! Best, FASTILY (TALK) 05:50, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
It's raining thanks spam!
- Please pardon the intrusion. This tin of thanks spam is offered to everyone who commented or !voted (Support, Oppose or Neutral) on my recent RfA. I appreciate the fact that you care enough about the encyclopedia and its community to participate in this forum.
- There are a host of processes that further need community support, including content review (WP:GAN, WP:PR, WP:FAC, and WP:FAR). You can also consider becoming a Wikipedia Ambassador. If you have the requisite experience and knowledge, consider running for admin yourself!
- If you have any further comments, input or questions, please do feel free to drop a line to me on my talk page. I am open to all discussion. Thanks • Ling.Nut (talk) 02:21, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
You are invited to participate in the Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2010 ArbCom election voting procedure which is expected to close in a little over a week. If you have received this message, it is because it appears that you participated in the 2009 AC RfC, and your contributions indicate that you are currently active on Wikipedia. Ncmvocalist (talk) 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/StartrekismylifeJadzia
Hi Fastily, User:StartrekismylifeJadzia created an RfA (Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/StartrekismylifeJadzia), and I added User:Fastily/RfA Notice to their talk page. However, an MfD was started for the page (Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/StartrekismylifeJadzia) and the consensus of the discussion was keep. Since a week has passed since I added the RfA notice to the user's talk page and they have not responded (or edited, for that matter), what do you think I should do? Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:20, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
- I was thinking of starting a thread on ťhe question of whether RfA's like this should be deleted as Fastily and I and a few other admins have been doing. Do you think Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) is the best place, or should I go to WT:RFA or somewhere else? I would have no objection to not deleting them, except that I imagine there's probably a maximum of some sort beyond which the switch statement in the Tally template will start malfunctioning. (Imagine if that were just a whole flood of un-transcluded 0/0/0 RfA's). —Soap— 22:33, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
- IMHO, I don't think it's necessary to bring this up at this time. The deletion of new users' RfAs accompanied with a notification falls well within the scope of CSD G6 (and sometimes G2) and IAR. Unless some editor (or a group of editors for that matter) is tenaciously objecting to the cleanup of premature RfAs, we can continue with what we've been doing. But of course, those are just my thoughts; Soap, feel free to act as you believe necessary. Eagles247, after reading through the MfD, I think it should be safe to delete the page, considering that you have notified the user, and they have made no visible objections. !voters at the MfD agreed that while StartrekismylifeJadzia is entitled to create an RfA, a deletion following a notification or some attempt at discussion would be acceptable. Mentioning this in the deletion summary might be a good idea. Of course, that's just my take; I'm not the one with the tools after all ;) Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 05:01, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
No-source tags
None of them were blatant copyvios, and those to which you object as possibly unfree still had sources. No-source tagging is not a valid way for an image to be deleted unless it has no source. Nyttend (talk) 21:00, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
- You should know, by the way, that every time I go through a future day's no-source taggings, I open every single image. If I had been editing too fast to care, I would have detagged many more. Nyttend (talk) 21:26, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
- F9. Unambiguous copyright infringement. Obviously non-free images (or other media files) that are not claimed by the uploader to be fair use? Just saying. Just because someone puts PD-self on an image does not necessarily mean they took the photograph. for example - meta data indicates a photograph taken in 2006, but the image is (a) plainly much older and (b) plainly a professional photograph printed as a postcard at some time in the past when colour photography was not the norm. I'll leave it up while you offer an explanation, then I'll delete it under F9 as it is a fairly unambiguous copyright violation. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 21:37, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
- Indeed. It's one thing to AGF, but it's completely different when one ignores a copyright violation. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:52, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
- It's possible for people to produce such images as the Tilly-and-Bush photo and later release them. One photo I've taken (but not uploaded) is of a professionally-staged wedding photo; I was nearby and was permitted by the photographer to take a picture while sitting under his camera's tripod. If that image were uploaded, and if you found it, would you tag it as no-source because it was obviously professionally posed? As far as the Kandy image, how do we know that we don't have an old image taken on film by the uploader, developed and captioned by the photographer, and later uploaded here? For this reason, they're not blatant, and thus these images mustn't be deleted under F4. Your concerns for the authorship are quite valid, and "could be" isn't a good enough reason for "keep" at FFD, but it's enough to prevent speedy deletion. Nyttend (talk) 22:01, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
- What in particular causes you to ask this question? Or are you simply saying this as something in general? Nyttend (talk) 04:17, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
- Per your edit summary — unless you're talking in relation to Mvincec's link removal question, I see no good reason for your latest comment to be in that section. I'll leave it there, since you obviously disagree with its move, but please understand that I didn't refactor anything. And thanks for the answer to my question. Nyttend (talk) 04:42, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
- What in particular causes you to ask this question? Or are you simply saying this as something in general? Nyttend (talk) 04:17, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
- It's possible for people to produce such images as the Tilly-and-Bush photo and later release them. One photo I've taken (but not uploaded) is of a professionally-staged wedding photo; I was nearby and was permitted by the photographer to take a picture while sitting under his camera's tripod. If that image were uploaded, and if you found it, would you tag it as no-source because it was obviously professionally posed? As far as the Kandy image, how do we know that we don't have an old image taken on film by the uploader, developed and captioned by the photographer, and later uploaded here? For this reason, they're not blatant, and thus these images mustn't be deleted under F4. Your concerns for the authorship are quite valid, and "could be" isn't a good enough reason for "keep" at FFD, but it's enough to prevent speedy deletion. Nyttend (talk) 22:01, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
- Indeed. It's one thing to AGF, but it's completely different when one ignores a copyright violation. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:52, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
- F9. Unambiguous copyright infringement. Obviously non-free images (or other media files) that are not claimed by the uploader to be fair use? Just saying. Just because someone puts PD-self on an image does not necessarily mean they took the photograph. for example - meta data indicates a photograph taken in 2006, but the image is (a) plainly much older and (b) plainly a professional photograph printed as a postcard at some time in the past when colour photography was not the norm. I'll leave it up while you offer an explanation, then I'll delete it under F9 as it is a fairly unambiguous copyright violation. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 21:37, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
I know this discussion has pretty much run its course, but [58]???. The whole point with that file is that the uploader probably owns the image, he just doesn't own the copyright. Elen of the Roads (talk) 17:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
- I don't understand why you're confused about my comment; could you explain what you see as confusing or incorrect? Nyttend (talk) 01:14, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- Where did I say I was confused. I said I thought you were wrong. A URL is only proof that a file can be found in another location - it is not proof of copyright. I also believe you are wrong in your assumption that it is better to retain dubious material than to delete it. I also think you're argument about how the photographer may have taken the image 85 years ago and then decided to upload it is faintly ridiculous. PD-old may have it, as the school moved from the Brownrigg Street site in 1925 - although it is possible that the photo was taken immediately before the move, in which case it would be more complicated. Sri Lankan law (which is published in English) grants copyright for life plus 70 years, or for 70 years from the date of creation where the publication is anonymous. One would really want to see the back of the photograph, to be sure that it did not have the photographer's name printed on it, but it is possible that it would fall into the published outside the US prior to 1978 and PD in 1996 category. <-- This is the sort of thing that falls into 'proof of copyright', or rather 'lack of proof that work is pd', which is what is actually significant. Elen of the Roads (talk) 02:00, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- You are confused: I've never said that we should retain dubious material rather than deleting it, and my "delete" vote at FFD is further evidence that I disagree with the statement that you say I believe. Moreover, no evidence was presented that this photograph is 85 years old; it very well could be, but I don't see where you get the 1925 date that you cite either. Again: these are reasons that the image is not blatantly a copyvio, and thus must not be deleted except after discussion. Nyttend (talk) 03:02, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- See for evidence of date]. Research, not assumptions are the key. Also, I never said that you said that it was better to retain dubious content. Your whole approach suggests that you believe it to be so. For example [59] (now deleted) was an unambiguous copyvio. The uploader originally loaded a shot taken outside the scrum at a Hollywood premier, which he may or may not have owned the copyright for. He then replaced this with a scan of a magazine cover which he most certainly did not. Calliopejen tagged it for missing source, which you removed, insisting that pd-self (which clearly could not refer to the magazine cover) was a valid source. Elen of the Roads (talk) 14:41, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- You are confused: I've never said that we should retain dubious material rather than deleting it, and my "delete" vote at FFD is further evidence that I disagree with the statement that you say I believe. Moreover, no evidence was presented that this photograph is 85 years old; it very well could be, but I don't see where you get the 1925 date that you cite either. Again: these are reasons that the image is not blatantly a copyvio, and thus must not be deleted except after discussion. Nyttend (talk) 03:02, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- Where did I say I was confused. I said I thought you were wrong. A URL is only proof that a file can be found in another location - it is not proof of copyright. I also believe you are wrong in your assumption that it is better to retain dubious material than to delete it. I also think you're argument about how the photographer may have taken the image 85 years ago and then decided to upload it is faintly ridiculous. PD-old may have it, as the school moved from the Brownrigg Street site in 1925 - although it is possible that the photo was taken immediately before the move, in which case it would be more complicated. Sri Lankan law (which is published in English) grants copyright for life plus 70 years, or for 70 years from the date of creation where the publication is anonymous. One would really want to see the back of the photograph, to be sure that it did not have the photographer's name printed on it, but it is possible that it would fall into the published outside the US prior to 1978 and PD in 1996 category. <-- This is the sort of thing that falls into 'proof of copyright', or rather 'lack of proof that work is pd', which is what is actually significant. Elen of the Roads (talk) 02:00, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
RfA page
Response here: User talk:Sphilbrick#Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Sphilbrick -- Avi (talk) 04:54, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- (responded at my page first, adding here to make sure) My apologies for some miscommunication. Avi had indicated his willingness to nominate me, and I indicated my willingness to run. However, immediately after doing that, I realized I had selected a time that was not convenient for Avi, so I posted somewhere that waiting until January was acceptable. I didn't realize that Avi had found the time and written a nomination. Unfortunately, I'm in the middle of an intense three day workshop, so now is not the right time to transclude it. Workshop ends Thursday, I will look at it then.--SPhilbrickT 13:08, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Fastily, would you consider restoring your indefinite semi-protection of the above? You added it on August 5, but on October 23 the page was fully protected for a few days, and when that ended, the page lapsed to no protection. We've had a fair bit of unhelpful IP editing since then. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 06:40, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- I suppose I would, but I resigned the bit upon retiring :( Of course, you're more than welcome to protect the page if you feel it necessary. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 06:55, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
WP:AIV
Could you take a look at the User:Mynamismik entry on AIV, it has gotten overlooked. Thanks...Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:07, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- User:Elen of the Roads took care of it since you were away. Take Care and Have a Good Night...Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:45, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Your retirement seems to be going well...
Seriously though, I think you should change that to the {{semiretired}} tag. I say this for two reasons. First of all, you're a great user, and I think you are an asset to the project. Second, the PhD process is long, hard, and sanity draining. You're going to want a comfort to fall back on, something to keep you grounded to reality. Wikipedia is a much healthier option than doughnuts, and is much more adaptable to your soon to be eclectic schedule than say, a puppy. You don't have to take up the mop again, in fact with the stress of the PhD, you might not want to, but don't abandon Wikipedia entirely. Just my two cents, Sven Manguard Talk 06:39, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the kind words, Sven. As much as I would like to return to full time editing, my current level of activity fits well into my schedule and will hopefully be sufficient for the time being. All the best, FASTILY (TALK) 02:54, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Fastily, or anyone, can you all revert this page back to Rivertorch's edits. Some vandal is screwing with the page. I cannot figure out how to revert.
BS
|
The Original Barnstar | |
| Too often great editors like you are overlooked and not given the credit deserved for all their great contributions. So I am awarding you this barnstar to let you know I greatly appreciate all you do for Wikipedia, and please keep up the outstanding work!! CTJF83 chat 03:10, 17 November 2010 (UTC) |
Image deletion
If you look carefully, you'll notice that the deletion tag was F1 — it was totally unrelated to copyright. I know nothing about this type of image, so I had no reason to imagine that it wasn't likely to be an own work. Moreover, you seem to have no use for PUF — you could try taking images there. Nyttend (talk) 22:40, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
- Moreover, WP:CSD says "Administrators should take care not to speedy delete pages or media except in the most obvious cases". It is not an obvious copyright violation in my eyes: kindly refrain from objecting to my adherance to policy. Nyttend (talk) 22:45, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm beginning to think Nyttend ought to find another area to work in. "I know nothing about this type of image" doesn't sound reassuring. I've deleted the other one as an obvious copyvio. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:49, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Retired?
Hello there. I noticed that you have been asking some very hard questions at PresN's Administrator Request. I followed the link and saw that you retired on September 14. Has someone hijacked your account? — Fly by Night (talk) 19:29, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, my account has been completely and totally hijacked. By me :D I retired on the 14th of September from day-to-day editing, but that doesn't mean I'm done with editing for good. I'm still around...just not nearly as active as before. Hope that helps to clear up the confusion. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 07:26, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- But how do I know that that's you and not someone else pretending to be you?! — Fly by Night (talk) 19:57, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- On the topic of retirement let me apologize for completely missing your absence. I've hardly been what anyone would consider active, and didn't see that you had retired. It's a shame, Wikipedia is missing out on a great editor. Oh well, so it goes. Thanks for the mention; I didn't realize I had even made an impact. Best of luck in school! Leo 04:16, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Contribution team
Greetings! Please excuse this intrusion on your talk page, and allow me to invite you to participate in the newly-formed Wikipedia Contribution Team (WP:CONTRIB for short)! The goal of the team is to attract more and better contributions to the English Wikipedia, as well as to help support the fundraising team in our financial and editing contribution goals. We have lots of stuff to work on, from minor and major page building, to WikiProject outreach, article improvement, donor relations, and more—in fact, part of our mission is to empower team members to make their own projects to support our mission. Some of our projects only take a few minutes to work on, while others can be large, multi-person tasks—whatever your interest level, we're glad to have you.
If this sounds interesting, please visit WP:CONTRIB and sign onto the team. Even if there does not appear to be anything that really speaks out as being work you'd like to do, I'd encourage you to join and follow the project anyway, as the type of work we'll be doing will certainly evolve and change over time. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me, or ask on the team talk page. Regards, ⇒DanRosenthal Wikipedia Contribution Team 22:21, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
- By the way, this is a human edit (not a bot). I'm specifically contacting you as you expressed interest in the Campus Ambassador position, and the Wikipedia Contributions Team has a lot of commonality in working along with the Campus Ambassadors. You can reach me on my talk page, or by email at drosenthal@wikimedia.org with questions; I can't guarantee that I'll be checking back on your talk page often enough to hold a sustained conversation there. Regards, ⇒DanRosenthal Wikipedia Contribution Team 22:21, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
I would understand if you said this account wasn't blocked because it was stale but because it wasn't warned enough? If anything this user was warned too much. JDDJS (talk) 05:45, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- Users are blocked for vandalism only when they engage in persistent vandalism in a short period of time, despite having received multiple warnings in a short period of time. Blocks ≠ punishment. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:53, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
Minor bracket fix
Well spotted and thanks. RashersTierney (talk) 23:59, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia Campus Ambassador
Hello,
I am retired and live in the San Diego area. I give genealogy and genetic DNA type classes. I find myself teaching Wikipedia plusses and minuses to more mature people who use the Wikipedia and related wikis. I would be willing to help you out in a few classes as support and some of the harder lessons I have had to learn on Wikipedia. Contact me @ jrcrin001 at cox dot net. Jrcrin001 (talk) 07:46, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
- Great! I'll contact you as soon as I have my assignments from the Wikimedia foundation. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 20:35, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Retired
Hello, your user page claims you are retired which is incorrect, I recommend you put "semi-retired" template on your page. Thanks! --Monterey Bay (talk) 18:45, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
New changes Albert Muis
Hello Fastily, Thanks a lot for the changes you have made, if you have time left there are two other files, my translation in Dutch and in French. link: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Muis link: http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Muis I need also some help for the gallery : http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jurgenborgers
Category Albert Muis
Sincerly greetings Jurgenborgers--Jurgenborgers (talk) 22:14, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- No problem. Certainly, I'll see what I can do to help. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 02:46, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you
Thank you for your support at my RfA last week. I'll do everything I can to live up to your expectations and if you ever need help from a janitor please feel free to drop me a line! PanydThe muffin is not subtle 21:11, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Painting still copyrighted.
Hello,
Sometime ago you removed a photo that I had uploaded that my grandfather took of Herman, Arkansas which was named after him because you questioned the rights, which is fine. My grandfather took it and as his grandson I was releasing it. However, now a painting that I pruchased is pictured here [60] it is of a painting by Pietro Pezzati and is still under copyright by the artist or his family. The photo, it seems was taken off a website where the painting had been listed for auction. I don't know what the rules are for this but the painting was painted sometime in the 1940s so it would still be under us copyright. Just thought I'd let you know. Friuli (talk) 17:15, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Friuli, thanks for the note. While the image was uploaded under Fair use (which allows for it to be used on Wikipedia), it is missing fair-use rationale, and I have tagged it as such. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:04, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Rfc: Nyttend
A proposed closing statement has been posted here. Please could you confirm whether you support or oppose this summary. Thanks. Elen of the Roads (talk) 21:00, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Unblock request
I see that you are still making a few edits per day, so I hope you'll consider this request. Please unblock User:Zsero for the reasons explained here. Thanks.Anythingyouwant (talk) 19:01, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
- Hi there. I'm afraid there are two problems with your plan: I will not agree to an unblock unless Zsero himself agrees to respect media file policy and understands his mistake. I don't have the sysop flag at the moment. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:50, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. What's a sysop flag? If you don't have one, does that mean that an unblock request would have to be submitted elsewhere?
- Regarding Zsero, I made the request above (and edited his talk page) without having any contact with him, though I subsequently emailed him. According to my understanding, the media file policy to which he objected no longer exists because the tag he liked is now deleted, and the tag he disliked no longer "lies" (i.e. it was edited today so that it no longer says images are copyrighted even though we don't know if they're copyrighted). Anyway, if you're insisting on some kind of statement from Zsero, I doubt it will be forthcoming; blocks are not supposed to be punitive, and the reasons for this block no longer exist, in my opinion.Anythingyouwant (talk) 00:03, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- Sysop flag = admin tools. I resigned my bit upon my retirement. You're correct in that blocks are not punitive, rather, like the case regarding Zsero, they are used to prevent disruption to the project. The license tag Zsero insisted on using, Template:Non-free unsure was orphaned and deprecated in favor of Template:Non-free fair use in. Despite the bold lettering on Template:Non-free unsure indicating it was retained only for historical purposes and not meant to be used as a valid indicator of copyright status, Zsero tenaciously insisted on using it in violation of Wikipedia non-free content criterion 10b. Following the Zsero incident, I nominated the template for deletion at WP:TFD, so no one will end up using the template by mistake. The conditions surrounding his block are outlined quite lucidly here and here, if you carefully read them of course. That said, I have no intention of agreeing to any sort of unblock unless Zsero agrees to respect and acknowledge media file policy. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:30, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- Again, if you don't have a Sysop flag, does that mean that an unblock request would have to be submitted elsewhere?
- Regarding media file policy, do you agree with User:jpgordon that some evidence of consensus is necessary in order to properly deprecate a tag, and that such evidence was never forthcoming during this controversy, despite Zsero's good faith request for such evidence?
- If you are going to insist on a statement from Zsero that he agree to abide by an aspect of policy that no longer exists (i.e. the Wikipedia policy of inaccurately stating copyright status), then that seems like an unwise requirement for Zsero to have to satisfy. If someone asked me to promise compliance with past, present, and future Wikipedia policy no matter how hare-brained, I would decline. I expect that Zsero would prefer your lifetime ban rather than acceding to such a demand, though I could ask him if you like. Cheers, and I hope you enjoy a long and happy retirement. :-)Anythingyouwant (talk) 00:45, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but I have no interest in debating a 6 month-old, resolved issue with you- particularly when I'm retired. For the third and final time, I'll agree to an unblock if Zsero agrees to respect and acknowledge media file policy. A simple ok, or acknowledgement of error and promise to stop would be sufficient for me. Realize that my job was to enforce policy, not make life hard for others. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:31, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- You successfully defended what you perceived to be the policy. Today that policy changed.[61] It clearly does not need any protection any more, because the change is what Zsero asked for.
- Zsero was a good editor from what I saw, and that's the only reason why I'm interested. Since I don't know if this is the right place to request an unblock, I'll investigate further.Anythingyouwant (talk) 01:56, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- Fine, I'll be bluntly honest, because my last approach doesn't seem to have worked. I completely disagree with just about everything you said just now - check your egregious interpretation of Wikipedia policy before trying to engage me in a debate: changing a template does not change policy and there is a major distinction between policy and guidelines. For the record, the policy Zsero violated was WP:NFCC#10b and not some nonexistent and unnamed policy you keep referring back to as needing "protection". I think I've made myself quite clear; if Zsero wants to return to editing, he can file a request to be unblocked himself, and if the request meets the aformentioned terms, I will personally see to it that he is unblocked. There is no reason for you to be badgering me six months later without having actually bothered to carefully read the discussion in the first place, particularly after consensus at Zsero's talk page has determined that my block was appropriate. I have no doubt that Zsero was a good editor, but being a good editor does not place one above the rules. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:24, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- I tried to carefully review the situation at the user's talk page, which should be evident from the very long comment I added there. Considering that it may turn into a lifetime ban, I don't understand your reluctance to review the situation every once in a long while, particularly on the same day that the cause of the whole controversy disappeared (i.e. today Wikipedia stopped claiming that images are copyrighted when actually we don't know that).Anythingyouwant (talk) 02:42, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- ANI, FYI.Anythingyouwant (talk) 06:26, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- I tried to carefully review the situation at the user's talk page, which should be evident from the very long comment I added there. Considering that it may turn into a lifetime ban, I don't understand your reluctance to review the situation every once in a long while, particularly on the same day that the cause of the whole controversy disappeared (i.e. today Wikipedia stopped claiming that images are copyrighted when actually we don't know that).Anythingyouwant (talk) 02:42, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- Fine, I'll be bluntly honest, because my last approach doesn't seem to have worked. I completely disagree with just about everything you said just now - check your egregious interpretation of Wikipedia policy before trying to engage me in a debate: changing a template does not change policy and there is a major distinction between policy and guidelines. For the record, the policy Zsero violated was WP:NFCC#10b and not some nonexistent and unnamed policy you keep referring back to as needing "protection". I think I've made myself quite clear; if Zsero wants to return to editing, he can file a request to be unblocked himself, and if the request meets the aformentioned terms, I will personally see to it that he is unblocked. There is no reason for you to be badgering me six months later without having actually bothered to carefully read the discussion in the first place, particularly after consensus at Zsero's talk page has determined that my block was appropriate. I have no doubt that Zsero was a good editor, but being a good editor does not place one above the rules. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:24, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but I have no interest in debating a 6 month-old, resolved issue with you- particularly when I'm retired. For the third and final time, I'll agree to an unblock if Zsero agrees to respect and acknowledge media file policy. A simple ok, or acknowledgement of error and promise to stop would be sufficient for me. Realize that my job was to enforce policy, not make life hard for others. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:31, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- Sysop flag = admin tools. I resigned my bit upon my retirement. You're correct in that blocks are not punitive, rather, like the case regarding Zsero, they are used to prevent disruption to the project. The license tag Zsero insisted on using, Template:Non-free unsure was orphaned and deprecated in favor of Template:Non-free fair use in. Despite the bold lettering on Template:Non-free unsure indicating it was retained only for historical purposes and not meant to be used as a valid indicator of copyright status, Zsero tenaciously insisted on using it in violation of Wikipedia non-free content criterion 10b. Following the Zsero incident, I nominated the template for deletion at WP:TFD, so no one will end up using the template by mistake. The conditions surrounding his block are outlined quite lucidly here and here, if you carefully read them of course. That said, I have no intention of agreeing to any sort of unblock unless Zsero agrees to respect and acknowledge media file policy. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:30, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Two
- Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive219#More_eyes_please.
- Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 November 26
More like two days than two weeks (per DRV closure of the 3rd, and your time stamp of the 5th), but what matter time? : ) - jc37 23:51, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
- Oh Gosh, my bad. I'm not sure how I managed to translate two days into two weeks -__- -FASTILY (TALK) 17:42, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Onyx Primal Prod
Can you please return the page Onyx Primal, I have a source I wanted to add to it. Thanks! Mathewignash (talk) 04:36, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Mathewignash. I'm afraid I do not have the ability to restore the page at the moment. Please consider making a request at WP:REFUND instead; someone there will be able to help you. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 07:03, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
BAGBot: Your bot request Fbot
Someone has marked Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Fbot as needing your input. Please visit that page to reply to the requests. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 12:00, 12 December 2010 (UTC) To opt out of these notifications, place {{bots|optout=operatorassistanceneeded}} anywhere on this page.
G'day
Glad to see you're still more or less around. I've noticed you off and on in the year I've been here and thought I'd finally say hello, so hello. I'm having a thread going on the current Commons poll and you're someone I feel I can ask: am I being a bit slightly - out to lunch there? I can't plead newbie anymore but I'm sure I still have things to learn. Biology eh? Slightsmile (talk) 17:01, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
- Hello there! I definitely agree with your view that policy should be more specific as to prevent damage to someone's image/reputation in real life. Although FWIW, potentially slanderous media files should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. At any rate, I'll gladly keep an eye on the thread and comment as necessary. And yes, Biology - that's what happened to all my editing time :| -FASTILY (TALK) 00:57, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- I appreciate that, thank you. Slightsmile (talk) 01:55, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
You Deleted a Photo
Dear Fastily, You deleted a photo for my page, Ayurveda.
Author/photographer: Heather Ainsworth
I have been authorized with full permission to use this photo as long as credit is given to the photographer -- which it was and will be. The authorization to use freely was given from Heather Ainsworth to Tom Burchinal, Ayurveda band member via e-mail dtd Jul 14 2010. Tom then forwarded the photo to me (via e-mail dtd Jul 28, 2010) to add to Ayurveda's Wikipage that I am working on. Since having my first attempt to use the photo was deleted, I have been in contact with photographer, Heather Ainsworth, again to see if she used Wikipedia and would load it herself. She does not use Wikipedia and has no intention of doing so. Again, she granted full permission for the photo to be used as the band (Ayurveda) sees fit and specifically on their Wikipedia page. I again assured her she would be cited in the photo caption.
I have tried to re- upload the photo through various ways in Wiki and I am in a loop...it says the file already exists even after I rename the photo on my computer before uploading. I am very discouraged with this process. I may need some serious hand holding to get through the process. I hope you can help with that. Whysosirius (talk) 23:07, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Re: Ayurveda Photo
P.S. I went through wp:otrs to try to upload and there, among other places, is where I got in the loop. Whysosirius (talk) 23:21, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- Try uploading the file again. At the page where you select the file on your hard drive to upload, check the box "Ignore any warnings" under "Upload options". See if that works. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:40, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
David R. Hawkins
I was about to donate on a regular basis to Wikipedia, when I noticed that the fact that one of two of my most favorite teachers, David R. Hawkins, whose work has benefited numerous people in my own practice as a counselor, was deleted from Wikipedia. Certainly given the great number of books that David R. Hawkins has authored there should be no problem with verification of any information regarding him. In a effort to find out why there is no entry about him, his work of his life, I have gotten to here. I would greatly appreciate some reasonable insight as to why David R. Hawkins is not an entry in Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.69.73.190 (talk) 12:35, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
- David R. Hawkins was deleted per the WP:PROD process. If you would like the article to be restored, make a request at WP:REFUND. -FASTILY (TALK) 04:06, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Seigo Yamaguchi
I can see that you deleted the article on aikido teacher Seigo Yamaguchi, since the article did not show that the subject was notable.
If I may guess that the article was identical to this, http://www.worldlingo.com/ma/enwiki/en/Seigo_Yamaguchi for an aikido practicioner it is obvious that he is among the people that clearly are notable as aikido teachers. He was a direct student of the founder of aikido, Morihei Ueshiba, he taught att the world headquarters (Aikikai Hombu Dojo) for many years, and he has a large following of students who continues his line of aikido.
So may I ask you. Is the problem with the article simply the lack of sources? Otherwise I think this prodding and deleting is a case of people not knowing the subject not being capable judging notability.
Best regards, and Merry Christmas --83.188.196.6 (talk) 10:12, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of image without notice on talk page
Hi,
I see you deleted the image here :
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:ISTE_certi.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1
This was done without any intimation about the action going to be taken on the talk page, why is that ?
--TvKimi (talk) 13:40, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
- As a matter of fact, it was After Midnight who deleted your file. Please check with them. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:15, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Hola
Hey there. I'm sorry about my long leave of absence. If you don't mind, I'm going to list my admin coaching subpages for speedy deletion because I'd like to focus on editing and getting back into the swing of the wiki things. Thank you so much for being an excellent editor, administrator, and admin coach. MJ94 (talk) 16:25, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
- No worries. Thank you for being upfront about it. Happy New Year! Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 03:34, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
- Please would you do something against IP 70.82.96.170 (known under the IP 76.65.240.91 too), he vandalizes systematically articles about history and linguistics, by adding small things (words or short sentences), that are generally untrue and never sourced. His attitude is anti-collaborative et he revokes systematically the one who wants him to add sources. He does not hesitate to say bad words to other contributors. Thanks in advance. Nortmannus (talk) 20:32, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
Clearing of User:SqueakBox
Hi, I don't think it's very good form blanking SqueakBox' userpage, while his block is still discussed. Didn't want to revert it right away, before I caught your opinion on it. Would you consider unblanking the page? Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:04, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- I have always been under the impression that userpages of the indef blocked may be blanked and replaced with a blocked user template. This is not the first time I, or many other users have done such, and I fail to see how it is "bad form". Of course, if you can point me to a policy page which indicates otherwise, I will be happy to revert. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:14, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- Seeing his block is still being discussed, I believe this is premature and poor form. I would really appreciate it if you unblank it. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:17, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Undeletion request
Hello, Could you please undelete this file? You deleted it because a user had copied it to Commons. But actually, as a non-free image, it should not have been copied to Commons. It should get deleted there eventually. That is why it is necessary that this file be on Wikipedia, with of course the appropriate tags relative to the use of non-free images, in this case {{Non-free currency-EU coin national}}, {{Non-free currency}} and {{Non-free use rationale}}. The description page would, with minor adjustments, look like, for example, the description page of this other image. Thanks. -- Asclepias (talk) 20:03, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
- Hi there. I would if I could, but upon my retirement, I resigned my administrative permissions. Please consider making the same request at WP:REFUND, telling them everything you told me. If anyone gives you a hard time, tell them I sent you. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 20:20, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) I went ahead and restored the file, although I tagged it for lacking a fair use rationale. Regards. — ξxplicit 20:28, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Free image query
Hi Fastily. I have a free image query, so you first came to mind. I wasn't aware that you had retired. I note you are still editing, so I'll ask you, and if you don't respond, I'll go bother someone else. I am uncertain if File:Frompastarchives.jpg can be used in the Unhalfbricking article. It is placed there as an illustration of the band on TOTP. The band released a single from the Unhalfbricking album, and did appear on TOTP performing the single. My understanding is that the band only made that one appearance on TOTP, so it is likely, though not confirmed, that the image is of the band playing the single from the album. Is that connection enough to allow usage of the image? Regards SilkTork *YES! 14:27, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
- Hi SilkTork. I'm no longer actively editing, but I'm still around (mostly) :P In regards to File:Frompastarchives.jpg, I believe a better question is "how does this non-free image add to a reader's understanding of the article and would removing it be utterly detrimental to a reader's understanding of the article?" In accordance with Wikipedia's non-free content criterion #8, a non-free file may only be used in an article if the context of the article refers heavily to the image in question (in such a manner that removing the image would be detrimental to a reader's understanding of the article). As far as I can tell, the article File:Frompastarchives.jpg is used in only gives three sentences' worth of recognition to the file, in a section devoted largely to various reviews/statistics. At the moment, the file does not warrant inclusion in the article, and may be flagged for deletion with
{{subst:dnfcc|8=yes}}. Of course, if you feel otherwise, you're certainly more than welcome to improve Unhalfbricking's coverage of the file, but this would involve starting a completely separate section devoted to the significance of Unhalfbricking with regards to the 1969 Fairport convention. Hope that helps to clarify things. All the best, FASTILY (TALK) 00:22, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Uniform Mechanical Code
Would you be willing to verify if Uniform Mechanical Code had any previous non-copyvio revisions? Thanks in advance! VQuakr (talk) 05:08, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
- Fastily has stepped down as administrator to focus on school, and can't see the deleted revisions any more. Based on a quick google search, it seems that even the very early revisions of the page were copyright violations of literature distributed by the IAPMO, though they were much shorter than the version of the page that was noticed and deleted. —Soap— 14:07, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
It's been over a year, but,
Fastily, thank you for the response on the image I uploaded. Yes, I realize the image did not have the proper copyright information listed, but another user listed the correct information, and also transferred the image to the Commons for me, which was very much appreciated. Thank you again for your help. Veldin963 (talk) 18:55, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Elizabethswann600ppx.png
Thanks for uploading File:Elizabethswann600ppx.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. Courcelles 03:30, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Redirect
Hello! If you look back at the page history, I guess you'll realize that some users do not agree that it should be redirected to the user page (I'm not one of those, BTW). The main reason is that the user in question still can edit their talk page. Thanks in advance, HeyMid (contribs) 10:35, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Ain Gordon
Hi there,
I am the General Manager for the Pick Up Performance Co(s) which produces the work of Ain Gordon and David Gordon. I am trying to set up Ain's Wikipedia page, and see that the last one I submitted was deleted by you since the information also appears on Ain's LinkedIn page. I assure you Ain has permitted the information to be updated on his Wiki pae and ask that you NOT delete the new page I'm creating today January 19th.
Thaks, Dorit Avganim General Manager Pick Up Performance Co(s) 212-244-7622 Pupcsorg (talk) 19:57, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
I have recently noticed that an article I added, with permission of the Director of Peacock Visual Arts has been deleted for copyright infringement of the history page located on the Peacock Visual Arts official website. As I had permission to add this information, although perhaps I did not attribute it correctly, would it be possible to reverse this and return the page to wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.141.251.175 (talk) 18:43, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
- You would need to email proof that you own the text or that it licensed under CC-BY-SA to the address at WP:DCM, but, sadly, Fastily's not an administrator any more. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:49, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
User:Reenem and his block log
I don't see a block a week ago. Am I missing something? Dusti*poke* 06:37, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- Shit. I'm still in 2010 :/ My bad. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:03, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- LOL it's fine, I think a lot of us are. Dusti*poke* 07:42, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- How funny, I came to make exactly the same point. I was gobsmacked to see someone at RfA only a few days after a substantive block. Then I was gobsmacked to realize I am calendar challenged.--SPhilbrickT 16:02, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- LOL it's fine, I think a lot of us are. Dusti*poke* 07:42, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
My rfa closure
I don't think a user with 76 edits will have a chance of passing an rfa. So why would you reopen an rfa that you decided to oppose anyway? Inka888 07:15, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
- In case you didn't know, it's bad form to close an RfA with only one !vote only 30 minutes after it was opened. There is no doubt this RfA will eventually be closed per not now, but the manner in which you closed that RfA was incredibly bite-y towards a newcomer. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:18, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Proposed for deletion
The Miss Supranational article that you proposed for deletion [62] which was eventually deleted has been revived and it was expanded with the following additional articles.
- Miss Supranational 2009
- Miss Supranational 2010
- Miss Supranational special awards
- List of Miss Supranational countries--Ped Admi (talk) 14:47, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
hi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.56.44.98 (talk) 15:32, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
What should i do to get an admin coach?
I've been on WP:ADCO/RFC#Current requests for a few years; what else would help? Warmest Regards, :)—thecurran Speak your mind my past 05:41, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
- Hi thecurran. I recommend directly contacting several administrators listed at Wikipedia:Admin_coaching/Status#Active coaches. At the very minimum, I'm positive there will be at least one admin on that list willing to coach you. Alternatively - although I'm presently 'retired', if you'd like me to be your admin coach, I believe I have adequate time on my hands to take you as a pupil, provided of course, that you're willing to edit more actively for the next few months. Hope that helps. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:57, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Peter LaBarbera
Hi! I notice that the page was speedily deleted as per G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion - But the article had passed AFD the month before: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Peter_LaBarbera
I wonder what the heck happened... WhisperToMe (talk) 03:17, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- Ah, I notice that you had retired... WhisperToMe (talk) 03:18, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Please restore this page to my userspace, as in my opinion Montgomery now meets the GNG. Thanks Clavdia chauchat (talk) 22:19, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
Apologies
I'm sorry for this initial response. I've been here too long to quote WP:DICK at people. I've revised it. In any case, we can continue this dialog if you want, but as DGG says on his userpage, my aim is at persuading newcomers to the RFA. I'm not trying to change your views, which I respect.--Chaser (away) - talk 18:21, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
SIMATIC STEP 7
SIMATIC STEP 7 page exists in three other wikipedias, such as Germany and Russian. Why is it not notabile enough for English, could you please explain? Vihljun (talk) 23:41, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Clarification
Because some things are not what the appear is the short answer, give be 20 minutes to gather all the relevant information. Please don't defect to oppose right away. And I say this, If I cant explain it to your satisfaction, I withdraw my RfA right now because I would have to be of the most incompetent kind. Give me a little time cause a lot of shit happened there and I was acting as an ambassador to assist this professor. I'll give you all the thank you diffs and everything. Ok? And thanks for asking me this as you stated before reverting because well you got the mop because that is what it would have taken to fix it back once you revert me. My76Strat 05:09, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
- Um...What? I'm confused; what are you trying to say here? It didn't cross my mind to oppose your RfA, but now that you mention it, I'm tempted to do so on the grounds of your ability to communication effectively. Please clarify asap. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:26, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry for that confusion. I knew it would take a long minute to explain what happened in the context of as it happened. And I felt context was necessary to get the best understanding. I didn't want to loose your support, I already felt this debacle might have pushed Logan to oppose. And I am sorry for how the content rendered, somewhere I did state that I had forgone a copy edit to gain precious few minutes. Then the loss of session data and the page appearing to not save the content. But I will try to clean it up a bit. My76Strat 07:51, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
I am slightly confused here. This page was moved to Jonathan A. Obar a couple days ago. OK, fine. But today, there has been a flurry of activity deleting the mainspace page, then the user page, moving the mainspace page to userspace and back again. Now it is going back to mainspace. I have to ask....what the hell? This is confusing for me and I have been here over 4 years, so I know it has to be confusing for this guy and he has only been here for a couple months. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 08:44, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
- Yes it would be confusing. I was also confused. To the extent possible, please take notice the the majority of the moves you mentioned were done by the user himself. He asked me to help him, and ultimately I did. the redacted text above carries the context which is necessary to see what happened. I will append a summary of the missing context. And if it helps I would be glad. My76Strat 09:13, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Jaobar's Response
Well first of all, my apologies for creating this situation. It was not my intention to get anyone in trouble, I simply had a slight problem, that to me, didn't seem all that unique. User:My76Strat was very helpful and polite, and though apparently there were some rules broken, I have no problem with what Strat apparently did (though perhaps I'm not totally understanding what happened here).
Specific to the issue of how this all started - I must say that I didn't realize that a newbie trying to figure things out would cause such an uproar. I would imagine though that when recruiting "experts" as the USPPI has attempted to do, those recruited will create or edit articles about the research and academic centers that they are affiliated with, thus, the reason that I thought it appropriate to join my colleagues Steven S. Wildman and Johannes M. Bauer who have articles linked to our Quello Center for Telecommunication Management and Law. I will also note that other colleagues of mine also have articles, see Amit Schejter. Perhaps I'm not as established as they are, so perhaps that is the reason why I do not pass the "notability" criteria, though I'm not quite sure what one has to do to be considered "notable" on Wikipedia (though I'm sure there is a whole list of arbitrary rules that have been created). I assumed that being a volunteer teaching fellow might give me a free pass, but clearly not. Look, I don't really care either way. Enforce the rules as you see fit. Hopefully someday soon I'll pass the test. Though I must clarify, that I'm not looking for "self-promotion," as you stated, which I find an utterly condescending way to describe what has gone on here. I thought WP was about expanding knowledge, not limiting it.
Lastly, I'll repeat again, that I hope that User:My76Strat isn't in trouble because of this 10-minute interaction. Strat was only trying to help me figure things out, and I don't see why that's cause for such concern (and public humiliation, which to be frank, is a bit shocking). I'm not an administrator, and wouldn't assume to know more about this than you all, so I'll just say that this is my newbie opinion. Jaobar (talk) 16:28, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Just a Heads-Up
Passionless isn't living up to his name with this edit. I reverted and left a note on their talk page, but I am not sure how you want to proceed on that. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 06:50, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
- I reopened the case as I made it actionable, was that not the entire reason it was closed? Passionless -Talk 07:29, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Response
- I get an alert that someone needed help in the Wikipedia classroom. I responded to the request for help.
The user tells me they moved the content of their userpage to article space, and their userpage got deleted. Then the user moved the article back to his user page, leaving a redirect in userspace. He states he no longer needs the article. so I tag the redirect for deletion. Within a minute the user copies the content he had just moved back to his userspace into the redirect removing the CSD tag. Then he comments that the article is where he wants it but the history is still in his userspace. I told him what had happened. I eventually ask him to give me a few minutes without editing or moving and I would get it fixed. The only thing I did regarding all the confusing stuff is this: I got the article space page that was missing the history deleted, Moved the content of his userpage, which was the article he had moved there earlier, to the location he wanted it with its history and canceled the userpage redirect left behind. I hope this helps My76Strat 09:38, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
- Dude, I have just observed so many egregious errors in the last 10 minutes I almost fell out of my chair. You're a nice guy and good editor, but honestly, what the fuck were you thinking from the point you answered User:Jaobar's question to the point when you posted this thread?? God...I don't even know where to start. For starters, and for future reference, never post irc chat transcripts anywhere on Wikipedia unless you have the explicit permission of the users you were conversing with. Doing so is a violation of our licensing policies and is interpreted as a copyright violation; any content posted to Wikipedia is released under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL, in which you, the sole author of that text agree to license it so. As far as I can tell, you were not the sole author of the irc chatlog you posted to my talk page. Next time, just email the chatlog. That way, you will not be releasing it under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 and GFDL. Now, for the User:Jaobar incident. My jaw dropped when I saw that YOU yourself agreed AND moved User:Jaobar to Jonathan A. Obar. Simply unbelievable. As far as I can tell, professor Obar does not meet our notability criteria (therefore, his page could have been either been PRODed or speedily deleted under A7). Additionally, the text of the userpage, to my knowledge, fails WP:ADS/WP:NOTPROMOTION (point four), Wikipedia:Autobiography, and WP:BLP (as an unsourced BLP). I understand that the Obar is a newbie member of the fledging campus ambassador program, but that does not give him the right to flaunt our policies and do whatever he desires. The professor came to you asking you if it was acceptable to create an article on himself and from what I can see, you said yes. What you should have done, was gently guide Obar in the right direction, and explain to him why he should not create an article on himself, or move his userpage into the mainspace to do so. You know the rules that govern this site, so why did you knowingly violate them?? Or do you not know those rules? Were you thinking this through at all? What amazes me the most is that you had the incredible audacity to revert my move within minutes without bothering to ask me why I had moved the page in the first place! In case you didn't know, this is called move-warring, and is analogous to edit-warring. Additionally, I must note that you have difficulty conveying your thoughts, or unable to function under pressure. All I can say is that Wikipedia is not a race, and that there is something called the preview button. As an administrator, we deal with pressure like this on a daily basis, and if you start fucking up when you're under scrutiny as slight as this, then adminship is not for you. And with that, I have struck my support at your RfA. I hate to do that but, what I can I say? I have lost all confidence in you. Consider yourself lucky I didn't start an ANI thread on your behavior. I appreciate you taking the time to explain, but I'm afraid it won't help here. Sorry mate. All the best, FASTILY (TALK) 10:09, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
- Before it was changed, User:My76Strat's original post: [63]. -FASTILY (TALK) 10:11, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
- I am glad to see this. I can address some of your concerns directly. Mostly it would not matter. You are right about most of what you have pointed out. However this test came about I did fail. But I do not think it's productive, deliberately or not to require someone, in failing, to also take credit for mistakes they did not make. The timing of your post here is impeccable. I actually came here with intentions to send you some small message. At least to extend the olive branch that acknowledges we can work together and move forward. Everything else about this post can only serve the deeper understanding, and then if there is no necessity there may be no motive. But if you are at least curious enough, some of those questions could be answered. My76Strat 07:31, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
- Had a closer look, and it seems there was no move waring. Nonetheless, that does not, and will and justify this. Good day. -FASTILY (TALK) 10:09, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
- I certainly disagree. And now that you have admitted an error on your part, thus removing the shroud of hallowed sanctification, it becomes that much more likely that my interpretation could emerge as correct. While it is not your fault that prior to my RfA I held an unrealistically high opinion of you, it is exactly a consequence of our interaction, primarily the conduct of your actions, that I now hold your opinion on par with my own (in some cases below). I am not going to clutter your talkpage with a bunch of unsolicited commentary, but I have copied all of the relevant text to a section of my own talkpage where I intend to parse the entire content for validity (at my leisure). Your last post is rot with fallacy, even while being concise. I hold with contempt, any person of the class who invoke a response, having no authentic desire to evaluate any subsequent, perhaps obligatory, reply. Simply by choosing (assuming you chose your words carefully, and for effect) the word "justify", You are invoking a response. Assuming you meant "and will not justify" where you posted "and will and justify" (a reasonable assumption to me), implies you are already predisposed to the only view you are willing to entertain. The day you invoked unto me the acronym ASAP, regardless of your intention, you set me to a task which was to be accomplished according to your time-line, irrespective of my own. And then your voice is heard in the unholy choir singing repugnant praise to the observable consequence. Bravo to you sir, it was rather effective. The character flaw you did document, while used to reflect on my skills in decision management, time management, and prioritization, is more accurately attributed to an unwarranted level of respect I had for you. In spite of everything that has transpired, you did not relegate yourself from esteem, unto the masses, until you appended these utter-able words: "Consider yourself lucky I didn't start an ANI thread on your behavior" Idle threats are perhaps the lowest form of arrogance, and the point where I diverge. The last remaining vestige of regard I am willing to hold on your behalf, and the reason I did post this message, is the assumption that you are sufficiently mature as to not incline prejudicial against me for having appended this candor. If I am again wrong, and even this is higher regard than you warrant, so be it, it would be the last positive assumption anyway. But if I am right, I will see you appending support at my next RfA. I say that because I intend to eradicate any valid opposition, by correcting my own shortfalls. Nothing in this comment is meant to imply I am blameless in the debacle of my current ire. I simply prefer focusing on the areas where I did make mistakes, while forgoing the drama associated with false and defamatory, accusations, and characterizations. Your conduct included these, and sentiments remain. And a good day to you as well. My76Strat 15:08, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
- Had a closer look, and it seems there was no move waring. Nonetheless, that does not, and will and justify this. Good day. -FASTILY (TALK) 10:09, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Inadvertent removal
I apologize for an inadvertent consequence of an action I can only speculate upon. I assure you unequivocally It was unintentional. Is that sufficient to say an accident, and I apologize? My76Strat (talk) 08:03, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
- I accept your apology. Next time, when you encounter an edit conflict, don't simply override the latest version. -FASTILY (TALK) 08:23, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Personnel Attack !!!
I have been editing on climate related articles of Pakistan, but there is the absence of consensus between me and this user, User:HunterZone i am trying to negotiate with this user in order to reach the consensus but this user is continuously deleting my messages on his talk page by insulting me (Personnel Attack), every edit i do is reverted by him, with out any explanation, please suggest me what should be done in order to avoid this. The user seems to be not interested in negotiating with me in order to resolve the dispute.
Nabil rais2008 (talk) 17:24, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
- I have left the user a warning. Next time he does something like that, report him to WP:ANI. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:41, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your quick response.
Nabil rais2008 (talk) 18:58, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Personnel attacks
I think you have heard one side of the story...Actually my edits are always reverted byUser:Nabil rais2008. He always bullies me and treats me like a dumby..He started calling me a fool that is why i delected his post and used bad language. In fact I told him in a peaceful manner that we should aviod eachother so that we dont get into a conflict (because we have got into a conflict a number of times in the past) but calling me a "fool" by him led me to use bad words and he was not negotiating with me. HunterZone (talk) 11:41, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
I can also show you his post on my talkpage that how he started taunting me http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:HunterZone&oldid=417783208 ... Thankz HunterZone (talk) 11:46, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
This what he said to me on March 8, that is not how a experienced editor behaves. Infact he attacked be first. "Its your habit to indulge yourself in every article and after messing up the article with your foolishness you got run away without giving any explanation regarding the particular issue." ..I always give explanations to my edits and make article better infact he copied my style of Pak cities's climate aticle pattern and made several other climate article on that basis and then he says I ruin every article..So please do something about his bad attitude. He provoked me.. HunterZone (talk) 11:50, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
- I don't care who started it; you should know better than to fight back. The next person to make personal attack will find themselves blocked. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:59, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
CFX Bank History
Hi, Just went thru the history of CFX Bank.The bank was not formed in 2006.It was formed much earlier and in 2004 (not 2006) it merged with Century Bank. This link is useful - http://allafrica.com/stories/200404160641.html
Please follow the link which shows CFX Bank was in existance as of REGISTERED BANKING INSTITUTIONS: 30 JUNE, 2003 http://www.rbz.co.zw/300603/appendix2.asp
In addition look at the lastest report which shows CFX has been liquidated mostly due to the ownership dispute with EX-ENG Capital director.So on its History its relevant to include the ownership dispute which is well documented such that it cant be eliminated from CFX History.Please follow link.
http://www.newsday.co.zw/article/2011-03-14-cfx-to-windup-operations
And this link too http://www.assetrecovery.org/kc/node/dc1241d3-4f52-11de-bacd-a7d8a60b2a36.0;jsessionid=809A69B1CD59C82ACE33458D59AEE7D7 — Preceding unsigned comment added by HAILTHECHIEF (talk • contribs) 21:55, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Strat
As a favour to me, perhaps you could cut him a little slack? The RfA isn't going anywhere and I don't think the two of you are going to see eye to eye before the close. I'd like to think you could chalk it up to just meeting him in the wrong place at the wrong time. On another note, I don;t suppose you've given any thought to rejoining the admin corps yourself, have you? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:54, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
- Ah, happened to sign on after the RfA had already closed. In retrospect, I should have held my tongue. I realize I was hard on him, and I can only begin to imagine the strain he felt from RfA. Strat, if you're reading this, I just want to say that it was nothing personal. In other news, I have given thought to returning to Wikipedia, but I honestly don't know if I can set aside enough time for editing; I blame school - it devours all my time. If I come back, it'll probably be by summer at earliest. Can't say for sure though, I'll have to see what my plans for the summer are. RL can be a real handful sometimes :/ Hope all is well with you, and nice to hear from you again. All the best, FASTILY (TALK) 00:57, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
- My eyes did come upon these, Upon happening, I see two fine examples, and they are not the design anticipated. They are better! And they lend themselves to a fine transition, indeed. Of course I should set my hand to such intentions. It is ironic, that you say, "it was nothing personal". This was reiterated by the formal tone I had been asked to dispense. And yet I did know; "nothing! was personal", If you don't believe me, ask Fastily. But yes it is true, I walked in wearing my formal best. If everyone else was laid back, shorts and T's, I would look funny. Not a stitch was tattered on exit, however.
- The lawyer is already preparing his remit, And then, by insult, delivers his consequence. To the extent this also besmirched the support, who had my formal! respect; That time had come, to deliver by courteous slap to the face, notification! "Excuse me sir, SLAP, I believe it's time for a duel". Sir, regarding Q5, I did extended to you decency; I called you strenuous, enough to do things; Which a man would need, in doing an upright thing. Within the fold, a colleague, I'll be known; And the clue which was relegated to a quip, and thoroughly rejected, wasn't really rejected at all, but invited to help with repairs. My words are seen, giving answer; Indeed!, we will have cause, and prose will form, but mine will not be against soul. Some however, will always!, be sufficiently candid, heard clear, crisp, and fresh,(sting of slap optional); And in the telling; Until everyone, knows they agree. If I feel, another point worthy, You can count upon, that I will append that point! With well formed prose I will advocate thought, which had been disregarded; To give regard, with sentiment. Moving from here, forward! My76Strat (talk) 06:38, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
- You know, I really could do this all day with you, but with respect to HJ, I'll take the higher ground and back off. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 00:41, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
- Fastily,
what the hell is wrong with you? (I was heated) "With respect to HJ", you'll "back off"? How about: "With respect to a dedicated editor," you take the higher ground and apologize? Though, I guess it's too late anyway. I don't squarely blame you for driving Strat away. But you certainly didn't help. Swarm X 04:36, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
- Fastily,
- You know, I really could do this all day with you, but with respect to HJ, I'll take the higher ground and back off. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 00:41, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
- The lawyer is already preparing his remit, And then, by insult, delivers his consequence. To the extent this also besmirched the support, who had my formal! respect; That time had come, to deliver by courteous slap to the face, notification! "Excuse me sir, SLAP, I believe it's time for a duel". Sir, regarding Q5, I did extended to you decency; I called you strenuous, enough to do things; Which a man would need, in doing an upright thing. Within the fold, a colleague, I'll be known; And the clue which was relegated to a quip, and thoroughly rejected, wasn't really rejected at all, but invited to help with repairs. My words are seen, giving answer; Indeed!, we will have cause, and prose will form, but mine will not be against soul. Some however, will always!, be sufficiently candid, heard clear, crisp, and fresh,(sting of slap optional); And in the telling; Until everyone, knows they agree. If I feel, another point worthy, You can count upon, that I will append that point! With well formed prose I will advocate thought, which had been disregarded; To give regard, with sentiment. Moving from here, forward! My76Strat (talk) 06:38, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Fastily, I have huge respect for you. And think you're mostly right. I also think you would want to know about this, and want to comment there. User_talk:My76Strat#Poll. Your !vote there, of course, would mean the most of all. Best, Chzz ► 06:20, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I was just about to add to the conversation when you closed it, I was wondering why did you stifle it when it was so active, and was not in favour of either side yet? Passionless -Talk 00:30, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
- You really have not learned, have you? -FASTILY (TALK) 00:40, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
- Can you please assume good faith and answer my question. Thanks, Passionless -Talk 00:45, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Did you mean to delete this? Marcus Qwertyus 22:25, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I can't help you with that. I can't see it. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:34, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
A drink
On 29 March 2009, I took my first small steps as a Wikipedian.
Now, 2 years, 47,000 edits, 2 RfAs and many memories later, I'd like to share a drink, on my "wiki-birthday", with a few editors who made my early experience here a pleasant one. As much as I would like to thank each of those editors in non-templated fashion, or even buy them a drink in person, I fear I would be celebrating my fourth wiki-birthday (and very drunk!) before the task was complete. Thus, please accept this as a small, if slightly impersonal, token of what these collaborations, words of advice and moments shared have meant to me.
Here's to all the happy memories of the last two years and to many more to come! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts?
—You need to get your mop back, but I'll always be indebted to you for the RfA nom that gave me my own. ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:43, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Quick Question
The user page claims you are retired which is contrary to your current activity on Wikipedia. Please clarify whether you are really retired or perhaps merely semi-retired. It would be greatly appreciated to let the community know. thanks!Monterey Bay (talk) 05:48, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
I've removed the per character images on this article per WP:NFLISTS. This has had the effect of orphaning the images that were extant on that article, including 6 uploaded/edited by you:
- File:Sebastianthecrab.png
- File:Flounder200ppx.png
- File:PrinceEric250ppx.png
- File:Scuttle250ppx.png
- File:Morgana200ppx.png
- File:Undertow200ppx.png
On an unrelated note, sorry to see you're retired, though you do at least seem to be editing a little. Hope the retirement is not permanent. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:36, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
I see you deleted this image. Please restore it, and when you notify me of that I'll gladly provide a better fair use rationale. Thanks, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:23, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
- Fastily is semi-retired and no longer an administrator. You can post this request on the administrator's noticeboard along with the fair-use rationale you would attach to the photo, and see if someone there is willing to restore the image. Regards, MacMedtalkstalk 23:38, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Back in July 2009 someone tagged this article "db spam. information merged into Anton Dreher" and you deleted it per G11. Yesterday, Ajh1492 (talk · contribs) extracted it from the Wayback machine and reposted it, without its history. Another user asked at WP:REFUND#Dreher for the history to be restored, which I did, but seeing the history decided to dump in your lap the question of whether to zap it again, send it to DRV, leave it, or what. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:48, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
- See User talk:Ajh1492#Dreher. JohnCD (talk) 20:36, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
- I read the article over again, and it still has an awfully spammy feel to it. While the article really isn't a clear case of G11, it's not exactly compliant with WP:ADS. That said, I would support a DRV/AfD, but I'll leave the final judgement call to you. Thanks for letting me know though. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 08:10, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
I've been away for a while so sorry for dredging up an old issue, but I wondered on what basis you deleted it. One person called for deletion based on rather flimsy evidence. I had all the copyright information covered on the file's page. As an image of a now-dead individual who can no longer be photographed, I believe the image met fair use rules. Could you please take a closer look at the matter? - Mgm|(talk) 19:56, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hi Mgm. Indeed, it has been awhile. Unfortunately, I am unable to view the deleted image because, well, I am no longer an administrator; I am therefore unable to restore the file, much less recall what was going through my mind when I closed the discussion. Please consider making a request at Wikipedia:Deletion review, and tell them everything you told me. Best of luck to you. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 09:22, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Status
Greetings - this page and your user page state that you have retired or no longer active - clearly this is wrong! Brookie :) - he's in the building somewhere! (Whisper...) 11:27, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Ha... Retired...
We all know there's no retiring from Wikipedia! You are living proof! Welcome back :p demize (t · c) 03:31, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
- Glad you're back, Fastily! Best, ROBERTMFROMLI | TK/CN 05:46, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Welcome back, Fastily. Jafeluv (talk) 12:50, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
- At least you now admit that you are still here --Guerillero | My Talk 12:53, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Closing an active discussion?
Might I ask why you did this? It was clearly not a WP:SNOW matter, and whether you think it's a good idea or not really doesn't matter at this juncture. NW (Talk) 00:21, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
- I hope you realize topic banning TT will result in nothing but more drama, hot air, and fluff. TT is rightfully entitled to voice his complaints at ANI about whatever he so desires; the community needs neither to take his grievances seriously nor act upon them. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:37, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
- If you notice, I have not commented nor do I intend to comment on that thread. But I don't believe it's your place to close sanction discussions because you personally think they're a bad idea when other editors disagree. NW (Talk) 01:50, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
- With all due respect, I believe it is within my discretion to close such a discussion. If you had actually read my last reply to you, you might understand where I stand. Nonetheless, I neither intend to close the discussion again nor do I want anything to do with it. Have a good day. -FASTILY (TALK) 06:54, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
- If you notice, I have not commented nor do I intend to comment on that thread. But I don't believe it's your place to close sanction discussions because you personally think they're a bad idea when other editors disagree. NW (Talk) 01:50, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Consultation
Hi, I am consulting you to inform you that I have reversed your closure of that discussion at WP:ANI, because several of us had not concluded our discussion. Best regards -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:28, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
- Very well, it appears that a number of users are in favor of keeping this witch hunt open. I want nothing to do with this anymore... Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:39, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hi. Apologies for my comment of last night being a bit testy - I was in the middle of trying to talk to someone and just got a bit frustrated. I expect you're probably right that it's a waste of time - I haven't actually revisited it today, and may not do so. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:43, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
hey
saw the re-flag post. Welcome back. — Ched : ? 15:42, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. It is quite nice having these extra buttons again :) Best, FASTILY (TALK) 01:35, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
- Same here, glad to have you back.--SPhilbrickT 12:23, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Please review...
Hi Fastily, if you have a moment, can you please review the discussion here[64] and provide your input on any of the interpretations given by those in the discussion. Thanks, ROBERTMFROMLI | TK/CN 23:54, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
- Certainly, I'll have a look and comment where necessary. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 00:08, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- Much thanks. ROBERTMFROMLI | TK/CN 01:39, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Just a note...
...To say I'm glad you decided to reclaim your mop, even if it was a week ago and I evidently wasn't looking at my watchlist very carefully! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:55, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- As am I. It's good to hear from you again my friend. All the best, FASTILY (TALK) 20:13, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
File:LonaBarrison.jpg
Hello. I wish to know why you tagged File:LonaBarrison.jpg as unsourced, when the source is specifically stated in the "source" field. Thanks for your feedback. Infrogmation (talk) 22:45, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Honest mistake. Don't know why "Vanity Fair" didn't register with me at first. Must be getting prematurely old :| -FASTILY (TALK) 23:05, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Cool, thanks. Thanks for your prompt response. Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 00:43, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Word Association redirects
Why did you delete them? They should be kept due to historical reasons, especially with the deletion reviews. Simply south...... unintentionally misspelling fr 5 years 22:53, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
- #Word association redirect deletions -FASTILY (TALK) 03:22, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
ProvincialGDPofPRC.png
Hi, Fastily. Would you pls help me deleting the File:ProvincialGDPofPRC.png on English WIKI? There exists another copy on commons, Thank you.
copy on English WIKI
copy on commons
Cncs (talk) 01:33, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
- These images are not identical. Why should I delete the local en.wikipedia copy? -FASTILY (TALK) 06:40, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
Word association redirect deletions
I notice you've deleted a large number of redirects of the form Wikipedia:Sandbox/Word association citing R3. However as these were all the result of page move the "recent" criterion of R3 means from when the title was created, not the redirect. In (almost?) all these cases the pages have been at those titles years and so are by no stretch of the imagination "recent".
Even if it was dated from the move, the word association pages were moved in early November 2010 - nearly 7 months ago - and so still not "recent" by any reasonable measure.
Finally, given the content was at those titles for several years, they certainly don't count as "implausible" either. While they may or may not remain useful, that is a question for WP:RFD to decide - not speedy deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 22:57, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
- A few things:
- The definition of "recent" is relative and flexible; it can refer to values ranging from a few minutes to a few years. Furthermore, I neither know of, nor can find a policy page restricting the time period in which redirects may be deleted as recent. That said, your "recent" argument/assertion does not stand. Nonetheless, feel free to try convince me otherwise.
- For the record, if the use of R3 bothers you, I can always re-delete the redirects under G6.
- If you honestly feel strongly about preserving these orphaned redirects, go ahead and restore and list them at RfD. I'm just trying to do my job as a sysop and clean this place up. FWIW, I am indifferent about the fate of these redirects and I do not intend to fight a war to keep them deleted. If the community decides to keep them, then so be it.
- Hope that helps to clarify my position. Let me know if you have any other questions/comments. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:21, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
- G6 is strictly for uncontroverisal deletions, given that both myself and Simply South objected, that's hardly uncontroverisal. While "recent" isn't defined, I cannot comprehend how you can consider either 6 months or several years "recent" in the context of Wikipedia, where edits from one month ago or less are frequently regarded as "old". Just because redirects have no incomming internal links does not mean that they are necessarily useless - please see RfD. While cleaning up is valuable, speedy deletion is only for those cases where the strict criteria apply - and none of them do in this case. Please restore them and list them at RfD if you still think they should go. Thryduulf (talk) 18:41, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
- See also Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#R3 - Clarifying "recent". Thryduulf (talk) 18:51, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
- May I also ask you to clarify there your definition of "shortly". It has now been over 2 days since you said that you'd detail your understanding of the "recent" with respect to redirects "shortly", a far longer time period than any other use of the term in similar circumstances on Wikipedia that I can recall. Thryduulf (talk) 22:10, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
- It means I'm busy in RL. Your discussion can wait, can it not? -FASTILY (TALK) 17:37, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- While it is indeed not the world's most urgent thing, it is generally courteous to not indicate you will do something shortly if you cannot (whatever the reason) - particularly when the topic is related to an admin action you have performed. Thryduulf (talk) 23:30, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- It seems we must agree to disagree in what is meant by "shortly", and I'm afraid you'll just have to live with that. While I have indeed promised a comment, I am unable to provide one at the moment. Incessant badgering will not accelerate my response time. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:11, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
- While it is indeed not the world's most urgent thing, it is generally courteous to not indicate you will do something shortly if you cannot (whatever the reason) - particularly when the topic is related to an admin action you have performed. Thryduulf (talk) 23:30, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- It means I'm busy in RL. Your discussion can wait, can it not? -FASTILY (TALK) 17:37, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- May I also ask you to clarify there your definition of "shortly". It has now been over 2 days since you said that you'd detail your understanding of the "recent" with respect to redirects "shortly", a far longer time period than any other use of the term in similar circumstances on Wikipedia that I can recall. Thryduulf (talk) 22:10, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
Welcome back :)
OMG I can't believe I missed your unretirement! Welcome back Fastily!!! —James (Talk • Contribs) • 6:59pm • 08:59, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- Aw thanks :) I must say, it's nice being back. All the best, FASTILY (TALK) 17:37, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- Will you be resuming your areas of expertise or will you be taking it slowly? If it's not much trouble, could you possibly be my admin coach? Cheers, —James (Talk • Contribs) • 9:03pm • 11:03, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- I'm busy in RL at the moment, but I expect to be free after the end of next week, so I'll probably resume full activity then. And yes, I'll gladly take you as a coachee. I'll set up subpages in your userspace asap. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:04, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- Will you be resuming your areas of expertise or will you be taking it slowly? If it's not much trouble, could you possibly be my admin coach? Cheers, —James (Talk • Contribs) • 9:03pm • 11:03, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
???
What the heck. Why do you want me to do that? I gave it a license. Why are licenses such a big deal? They are just stupid images used for people's encyclopedic viewing. Atum World There's an Acadia for that too!
I've neither edited your userspace nor deleted/edited your contributions (i.e. we've never interacted). I think you have me confused with someone else. -FASTILY (TALK) 06:04, 3 June 2011 (UTC)- I believe they are talking about User_talk:Atum_World#Fair_use_rationale_for_File:Yoshi_Mario_Party_VIII.png, where you gave them a warning. —GFOLEY FOUR— 20:20, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- Pardon me, I didn't recognize the name of my own alternate account. The message I left at your talk page does a fairly good job of explaining why you must supply a fair-use rationale and a license tag, particularly this line: " the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale." If you have any specific questions, feel free to let me know. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:32, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- I believe they are talking about User_talk:Atum_World#Fair_use_rationale_for_File:Yoshi_Mario_Party_VIII.png, where you gave them a warning. —GFOLEY FOUR— 20:20, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi Fastily, thanks for your work at the RFPERM pages. Just a small note about marking as notdone/done (which my bot uses for archiving). On the confirmed page, if you're not giving the confirmed right specifically because the user is already, or is going to be, autoconfirmed, could you mark requests as {{already done}} or simply {{done}}, this is simply to help the bot with archiving, nothing to do with which rights you should be giving. Cheers, - Kingpin13 (talk) 12:53, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Thank you
Thank you for taking care of this for me. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 16:00, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
RevDel Part 2
Hi Fastily, a few days ago I requested a revdel to get rid of outing info posted on AN/I. Protonk[65] worked with me to get it done, but I suspect we missed a few revisions that still contain that info: [66], [67], [68]. Your assistance would be greatly appreciated. Best, Rob ROBERTMFROMLI | TK/CN 18:38, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- deleted Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 18:49, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- You're the best! Thanks Fastily! -R ROBERTMFROMLI | TK/CN 18:53, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Edit war comment on my talk page
Hi, you left a comment on my Talk page about being involved in an "edit war" and mentioned I should've requested semi protection. The XRumer page has a history of malicious inserts. I've requested semi protection twice, and it was honoured twice. I've done my research when establishing xrumer.co as the official website namely: IP checks and later -- when a persistent IP editor persisted another website was official -- I contacted the software's author to confirm authenticity. Prior to that I had REMOVED the external links because there was a dispute. I specifically asked on Talk to not remove the EL without broad concensus on Talk, and referred the IP editor to discuss on Talk when I reverted the malicious edits. I don't feel as though I deserve being wristslapped for allegedly being involved in an "edit war". There's a long history and a lot of prior discussion and research that have gone into the edits. Given the history of the page I still feel the page should be reverted to the last known good version and semi-protected for a longer period of time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Berfasmur (talk • contribs) 19:26, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- I see. JamesBWatson has removed the link altogether. For the time being, please don't add the link back, or edit war to with the IP to remove/alter the link should they re-add it. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:41, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I have found out some lies after i involved myself in Wikipedia recently and I wanted to put the truth there for everyone to know. how can i do that, while it is considered vandalism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.235.4.130 (talk) 07:38, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 06:15, 5 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
—HXL's Roundtable and Record 06:17, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Why me? Dougweller (talk) 05:03, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- I've clarified my reason at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled#User:Kittybrewster. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 05:09, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Rollback
Please do.--1966batfan (talk) 06:23, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
50.36.57.143
This IP blanked his block notice twice. The IP vandalizing the Israel soccer team page was from Jordan. I suspect some anti-Israel thoughts caused that vandalism, which involved lots of section blanks.--1966batfan (talk) 07:07, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- Don't worry about the IP's removal of its block notification; the IP isn't going to unblock itself simply by removing the block notice. For future reference, there is no need to revert talk page blanks, as users are allowed to remove messages from their talk pages per WP:BLANKING. Hope that helps, FASTILY (TALK) 07:12, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Compliment
You are a very nice administrator. However,with vandals, you are very strict and stern. Thanks for the rollback and helping round up those vandals.--1966batfan (talk) 07:19, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- Aw thanks :) Thank you for helping to keep Wikipedia free of vandalism! All the best, FASTILY (TALK) 07:23, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
User:50.36.57.143
Hey Fastily, User:50.36.57.143 was the IP you blocked who kept blanking his talk page history. Well, he blanked the fact that you banned him. I don't know what recourse you have to deal with this but if he keeps blanking his talk page then other admins are going to overlook him like you did and he'll be back to vandalizing as soon as his block expires. Thanks. Noformation Talk 07:47, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hi there. Someone actually asked me that same question above. Admins generally check a talk page's history before making a block/warning a user, so there's no need to worry about warnings being lost through page blanking :P Hope that helps to clarify things. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 08:28, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hey again, I suppose it was rather presumptuous of me to assume you guys wouldn't read the history :). I guess it just set off a red flag that this IP has such a long history of warnings. Thanks again! Noformation Talk 23:43, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Romar9124
Thanks for blocking this sock. I know admin can't block potential usernames from being used, but please keep an eye on similar usernames such as Romar9125 and Romar9126. As per MO, the puppetmaster would very likely use these usernames next. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 09:00, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
??
I cannot make sense of this User_talk:72.193.240.28, I warned this IP user at least twice yesterday and reported the actions to WP:AIV. This same Admin defended this user, asking me "Why was their edits Vandalism" ? here You answered at AIV "Because it is" could we get a third party to help clear this up ? Peteypaws (talk) 12:44, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hm, conversion templates make internationalization easier. IMHO, removing them, or converting them to hard values is vandalism. Then again, Materialscientist brings up a good point, they're hackish and slow page loading times. That, and the Mediawiki developers are actively looking into a replacement for conversion templates. We can probably gain more insight into this matter by starting a WP:AN thread. Would you like to do the honors? -FASTILY (TALK) 21:13, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Automated tools on Talk pages
Hi. If you don't mind my asking, where are the rules that say you shouldn't use automated tools on Talk pages? I'm only really asking because I've done it myself occasionally, and I'm now concerned that I was breaking the rules when I did it -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:44, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- I've responded via email. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:13, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- Got it, thanks -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:20, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for rollback
Thanks for giving me rollback. I asked for rollback so that I could try out Huggle for size, I'm aware that Twinkle's functionality achieves the same effects. The mention of current dispute issues was to head off objections on possible edit warring grounds. But thanks again! --Topperfalkon (talk) 22:02, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- No problem. Thanks for helping to keep Wikipedia free of vandalism! -FASTILY (TALK) 22:13, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
AN notification
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding Template usage. The thread is "Vandalism, or not ?".Thank you. Peteypaws (talk) 00:25, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
New admin question
Hey Fastily, in regards to this, it is happening again, here. IP address is almost the same. How do you decide someone is an IP hopper? Duck test? Thanks! Drmies (talk) 22:28, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hi there. Yes, the duck test works just fine. That, and the fact that the IPs are almost the same means that this vandal is likely IP hopping. I've gone ahead and rangeblocked 78.79.0.0/20 for a week. That should take care of it. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:27, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Requesting salt.--The Σ talkcontribs 00:23, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
- Fully protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:26, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Borgore
Hello Fastily, why did you reject my request to unsalt Borgore? doomgaze (talk) 23:49, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- The AFC submission, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Borgore, which you wanted to move to Borgore, was declined. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:54, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- Is this not just one vicious circle? The original editor who rejected the submission said that this was because it was salted; now you reject the request to get it unsalted because the submission was rejected. Gotta break the chain somehow eh. doomgaze (talk) 13:06, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
- Meh, ok, sure. I honestly don't feel that strongly on this, and if it gets deleted, not my problem :P Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 00:00, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. I don't know why I'm bothering, I don't even like the guy! Would it be terribly against procedure for me to move it now or would the original author have to re-submit it first? I haven't any experience with AfC. Rest assured that if the page gets deleted I'll send a long rant your way haha. Cheers, doomgaze (talk) 00:39, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
- Meh, ok, sure. I honestly don't feel that strongly on this, and if it gets deleted, not my problem :P Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 00:00, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
- Is this not just one vicious circle? The original editor who rejected the submission said that this was because it was salted; now you reject the request to get it unsalted because the submission was rejected. Gotta break the chain somehow eh. doomgaze (talk) 13:06, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Sorry Fastily, the activity check I mentioned a while back never got pushed to server. It shouldn't report inactive users any more. Noom talk stalk 11:03, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Lgmagone and the Mortenson article
If you haven't already, would you please take a look at the responses from Lgmagone (still editing as an IP, by the way) and myself at the edit warring noticeboard here [69]? He maintains I am seeking to make his life in Wiki miserable and that is just not the case. What's more, the reverts I made were not in response to a content dispute (as you stated in the resolution) -- I have explained more completely from my perspective what was actually happening at the Mortenson article. I just don't want to see this become a battleground again as it was when Lgmagone was editing and edit warring a month or so ago. Also.......it it permissible for him to continue editing using various IP addresses rather than his established account? Thanks for looking further into this situation. Lhb1239 (talk) 15:05, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
- He's now using personal attacks and removing comments I made in the response I provided at the edit warring noticeboard. I changed them back to what they were when I first left them and explained that editors don't edit what other editors write on talk pages. Could you or someone please reign him in? He's behaving like a loose cannon. Lhb1239 (talk) 15:28, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
- #Outing in recent 3R noticeboard -FASTILY (TALK) 00:01, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Suspected Block Evasion
Hi. Just wanted to let you know that the user (User:PublicAdvocate who you blocked for edit warring[70] seems to be back on the talk page,[71] posting as an anon IP from Denver, picking up the same contentious argument within a few hours after the block was applied. A block extension may be called for. Perhaps it's a coincidence that the anon IP traces to the same city as the headquarters of the subject of the article in question (i.e., LifeVantage, the manufacturers of Protandim); and perhaps not. Rhode Island Red (talk) 15:36, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Blocked – for a period of 1 week Thanks for letting me know. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:07, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Outing in recent 3R noticeboard
The user who has reported me to the 3R noticeboard has also recently revealed the owner of the IP address where I made some edits and trying to out me personally in real life. Can this be edited out? I tried and then he put it back in.
I've posted an apology to his talk discussion if I have offended him in the past. I don't wish to continue with the petty fights, but would like to be able to contribute to the Greg Mortenson article now and then without it being automatically reverted. 98.203.237.77 (talk) 16:01, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
- This is pretty disheartening. After offering what seemed like a sincere olive branch on my talk page, this user then came here to accuse me of attemtping to out him and alleges that I will continue to "automatically revert" his edits. I've tried and tried with this user to get him to understand that my editing isn't about him but, as evidenced here, it has been to no avail. Hoping you can help out, Fastily. I am also asking Will Beback to take part in this. Lhb1239 (talk) 17:32, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
- LHB, please let it go. I've extended an olive branch on your talk pages and wish to let the whole issues go away. I would appreciate it if you'd delete the geolocate information from the other page. It'd be a nice gesture and show that you are sincere in your efforts as well. 98.203.237.77 (talk) 17:54, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
- The geolocate information is available for anyone to see every time you post as an IP only user. For that reason, I will not remove it from the 3RR noticeboard page. If an admin wants to remove it, then they are welcome to do so at their discretion. If you don't want people to know where you work and post from, don't use an IP only account to edit. I suggest you open your old Lgmagone account and request an account name change. An administrator should be able to find a way to get you back into the account. At this point, if you open another account and edit with it, you will likely get in trouble for sockpuppetry. Lhb1239 (talk) 18:25, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
- LHB, please let it go. I've extended an olive branch on your talk pages and wish to let the whole issues go away. I would appreciate it if you'd delete the geolocate information from the other page. It'd be a nice gesture and show that you are sincere in your efforts as well. 98.203.237.77 (talk) 17:54, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Against my advice, the above user (formerly editing from the account Lgmagone) has created a new account and is now editing as WhereTimeStandsStill. I tried to explain to him that creating a new account could equate sockpuppetry in the eyes of some and that having his previous account name changed was a better course of action. He ignored my advice and is already editing with the new account. Since Will Beback has been involved in this mess, I am also notifying him of this latest development. Lhb1239 (talk) 21:13, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
- IMO, this appears to have been resolved with this and this. If there's something I'm missing, please let me know. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:02, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Rollback Template
I saw on the Requests for Rollback page that you and Σ were talking about how there was a need for a template and so I created Rollback not yet, it may need a few changes but I believe this is generally what was being requested there. Adwiii Talk 21:36, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Block of User:86.8.218.114
Could you explain to me why you used the word vandalism when blocking this user? As far as I can see none of their edits are vandalism but rather are attempts to improve the encyclopaedia. Per WP:VANDALISM that is not vandalism. A block may well have been warranted but I would have thought it would have been for edit warring rather than vandalism. Dpmuk (talk) 09:30, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
- That's reasonable. Block reason amended accordingly. -FASTILY (TALK) 09:42, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
- Cool. Both you and one of the other blocking admins have now agreed it probably wasn't vandalism so I now feel more able to leave them a message on their talk page explaining things and hopefully, if they do want to become a useful contributor, we may not have lost them. Dpmuk (talk) 13:42, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Rollback rights
I eventually want to get rollback rights, how many vandalism edits would you recommend for me to have made and over what period of time?
Favour
Hi Fastily - I see you're about. As you're really active at WP:PERM can you just respond to this for me - the editor has come back asking again. I've already declined, but to be fair to the editor a second opinion would be handy. Thanks in advance. Pedro : Chat 10:22, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
RfA for an IP?
Did this and this really happen? Or is it a blatant hoax or something else? --The Σ talkcontribs 18:57, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
- They did not. It is technically impossible to rights of any sort to an IP. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:22, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Deletion of "Certified Penetration Testing Engineer" and "Mile2"
Greetings,
I am trying to find out how to get these article, replies, back on Wikipedia. We have a new SEO guy and there may have been some issues with the way that things were posted. Certified Ethical Hacker - had some links removed for Information Security Certificates regarding Certified Penetration Testing Engineer and we are not sure why. We do have associations with certifications and have enough pertinent information to get our certifications listed here on Wikipedia and would like to know the proper way to have Mile2 (company) listed and our certifications which have been globally recognized since 2001.
Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Witelytr (talk • contribs) 19:01, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
- Well, you're welcome to recreate the article(s) if you like, but please familiarize yourself with WP:ADS, WP:MOS, WP:V, WP:NPOV, WP:POV, and WP:GNG first. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:11, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
- (comment from a random passerby)
- WP:GNG is likely to be the biggest hurdle - bear in mind that below the biggies like CISSP, there's a sea of minor qualifications of dubious long-term notability, and many businesses in this field simply can't get past the notability threshold. However, if you need any help creating/improving infosec articles, the nice people over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computer Security might be able to help, or just try my talkpage. bobrayner (talk) 12:46, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Nair
You told me to consider dispute resolution as a solution to the edit wars and disputes on the Nair page. I have not made any edits to that page and have no dispute with other editors. I requested that the page be protected so that the editors involved would need to use discussion in order to make changes to the page. Could you please elaborate a little bit as to why the page should not have been protected? Ryan Vesey (talk) 02:55, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
- Perhaps I could have used a better reason to decline your request. I declined your request because no one has blatantly violated 3RR and even because there doesn't appear to be much of a heated dispute, if at all. Should someone violate 3RR, these users know where to go. I can keep an eye on the article if you like, but I doubt I'm going to be taking administrative action anytime soon. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:08, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Thank you
A level of protection for the neologism article probably has been needed for a while now. -- Avanu (talk) 07:33, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Gaming the System at Woodlawn Cemetery (Detroit, Michigan)
Hello Fastily: Goldnpuppy was Gaming the System when he persuaded you to block my account on 8 June 2011. He falsely informed you that I have been “unresponsive to requests for accurate citations or or [sic] prior administrator warning.” In my last contribution to the article on Woodlawn Cemetery (Detroit, Michigan) on 8 June 2011, I attempted to include the name of a respected community member who is interred on the south side. I provided two working references to support the inclusion. These references refer to an obituary in a local Detroit, MI newspaper and an online video tribute. No administrator had ever issued a warning to me regarding my work on the Woodlawn Cemetery article. Goldnpuppy has also sought to protect the article to restrict collaborative editing and promote his nonneutral point of view. --99.60.184.133 (talk) 17:14, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
The info on prior contacts and history of the edits is posted on the Woodlawn Cemetery talk page. The user was contacted 17 April by an administrator regarding the unsourced post and did not respond. He was also advised about an inappropriate edit on another page which is mentioned on the Woodlawn page. He reposted the information within 60 minutes of its deletion wihtout comment or explanation.Goldnpuppy (talk) 03:04, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
True to Gaming the System, Goldnpuppy, now claims that he was referring to multiple articles when he persuaded you to block my account. Let's look at one of my "inappropriate edits" in another article: I referred to the estate of Matilda Dodge Wilson as "magnificent." Please compare your home to her home. Her estate features a 110-room mansion that sits on 1,400 acres with an 18 hole golf course. The mansion is the fourth largest historic home in the United States and is now a part of Oakland University. It features stone and wood carvings, sculpture, and fine art. --99.60.184.133 (talk) 04:49, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Enthiran - revert war
I replaced fan/media speculated box office data with official data published by the producer/distributor Sun TV of the the film Enthiran. But my edits were reverted 1st, 2nd and 3rd time by two editors User:Vensatry and User:Bollyjeff who are blindly reverting the article (with misleading edit summaries) to keep inflated figures (about 2.1 times higher).Kollyfan (talk) 18:07, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
- The page has since been fully protected due to edit warring. Rather than edit war, please engage fellow editors in discussion about what should and should not be included on the article's talk page. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:14, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Santorum (neologism)
Hi. You recently applied full protection to this page. I wonder if you might consider lifting it now. The editor who requested it appears to have never edited the page. Although there is a great deal of discussion going on there, it's all meta stuff, and editing of the article is pretty orderly. We have one user who began warring but a unanimous consensus against his edit has formed on the talk page here, and he's been warned at ANI, so he can be dealt with by sanctions if he persists. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 21:45, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
- I agree with this. Editing on that article has been remarkably peaceful, considering the circumstances, and as it's a matter of one person doing repeated reverts in the face of talk-page opposition from a number of editors, the problem to deal with (if any) is that editor, not the article. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 22:08, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
- It is not unanimous consensus, and the idea that it is without any conflict seems to present a pretty picture that isn't completely accurate. While it is certainly professional and mostly courteous, this paisley field of pretty roses image is hard to reconcile with the actual debate. The problem is bias. Wikipedia is being used as a feedback loop (Wikipedia:BLP#Avoid gossip and feedback loops), with prominent people citing Wikipedia as a resource for this word. Unfortunately there is sometimes a partisan or percieved partisan bias in what gets included and excluded from this article. Some editors have said that the motivation to change the article is pro-Rick Santorum people. On the other end, this word page is part of the LGBT portal. Its a word definition in theory, but yet it is included in a section that has a clear bias on the outcome of the article. This is just part of the many concerns. The same thing is happening in reverse at the Sarah Palin/Paul Revere articles. I'm in favor of an honest and fair portrayal of this event. I don't see a problem with allowing the hold to continue. This doesn't prevent editors from discussing, it prevents potential edit warring, and Admins can still edit it. -- Avanu (talk) 22:42, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
- For the record, the assertion that there wasn't unanimous, bipartisan opposition to Avanu's edit is a falsehood. Martin has reduced it to semi- and I have asked at ANI for it to be lifted altogether, as there is a regular IP editor at that article. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 11:35, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
- I don't mind that this was unprotected, but the plea to remove the protection was filled with inaccuracies which I believe go beyond mere mistakes. I'll quote it here for full disclosure:
- For the record, the assertion that there wasn't unanimous, bipartisan opposition to Avanu's edit is a falsehood. Martin has reduced it to semi- and I have asked at ANI for it to be lifted altogether, as there is a regular IP editor at that article. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 11:35, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
- It is not unanimous consensus, and the idea that it is without any conflict seems to present a pretty picture that isn't completely accurate. While it is certainly professional and mostly courteous, this paisley field of pretty roses image is hard to reconcile with the actual debate. The problem is bias. Wikipedia is being used as a feedback loop (Wikipedia:BLP#Avoid gossip and feedback loops), with prominent people citing Wikipedia as a resource for this word. Unfortunately there is sometimes a partisan or percieved partisan bias in what gets included and excluded from this article. Some editors have said that the motivation to change the article is pro-Rick Santorum people. On the other end, this word page is part of the LGBT portal. Its a word definition in theory, but yet it is included in a section that has a clear bias on the outcome of the article. This is just part of the many concerns. The same thing is happening in reverse at the Sarah Palin/Paul Revere articles. I'm in favor of an honest and fair portrayal of this event. I don't see a problem with allowing the hold to continue. This doesn't prevent editors from discussing, it prevents potential edit warring, and Admins can still edit it. -- Avanu (talk) 22:42, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
- Editing at this page has been orderly until yesterday when a single editor, Avanu, launched an edit war, and at his third revert (against 3 different editors) spammed ANI, and BLPN with a complaint, which was ignored at BLPN and dismissed, with some concerns expressed about the Avanu's behaviour, at ANI. Fastily protected the article at the request of an editor who, as far as I can see, has never edited or had anything to do with it.
- In #First sentence (parenthetical comment), above, Avanu received unanimous opposition to his edit, including from those on his side of the RfC discussion. I and another editor asked Fastily 12 hours ago to lift page protection, and our request was followed by one from Avanu to keep it (and his unanimously opposed edit) in place.
- I left a request at ANI for anyone to lift page protection three hours ago and, so far, no one has commented. I can understand admins not wanting to get involved in a what appears to be highly charged, sexual political dispute, the length of this talk page alone is pretty daunting. So brief comments from editors here stating their position on page protection might help clarify the situation for an admin brave enough to look into this. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 10:10, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
- I've prepared a response, mostly because I don't mind people debating points of view or even being mistaken, but simply making things up to win an argument doesn't strike me as being right or fair.
- The information above has several inaccuracies, and really accuses me of bad faith editing, using terms like "orderly until yesterday when a single editor, Avanu" and "spammed". In addition, the "unanimous opposition" comment is also inaccurate. Reo argued that other things were higher priority, and Tarc and Collect made statements that showed they agreed that bias is present. The sentence which has "our request was followed by one from Avanu to keep it (and his unanimously opposed edit) in place" is *ALSO* inaccurate because I only made a case for continuing page protection, NOT a defense of my edit. In short, a very biased and inaccurate picture was painted in order to get an admin to intervene on this again. If we're going to work on this together, editors cannot do this. -- Avanu (talk) 12:51, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
- I'm talking about opposition to your edit, not your stance - I share your attitude toward the article, though not the former senator, I suspect. As for "keeping the page protection in place" = "keeping your edit in place", I wasn't implying you said that, I was pointing to the concomitancy. If you want to pursue this, let's take it off Fastily's talk page. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 13:10, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
- OK, that addresses 1 inaccuracy. As far as our personal opinions on political people, that doesn't mean we give or withhold favorable or unfavorable coverage of them in our editing. Personally, I don't have much to say about Rick Santorum. I wouldn't vote for him for President, but honestly I don't know much about the guy beyond the press conference back in 2003. I am much more interested in law than the latest politician. Lawrence v. Texas was intriguing to me because I was curious about the Court's basis for the ruling. You might think my edits just represent some kind of pro-Rick Santorum bias, but you would be hugely mistaken. -- Avanu (talk) 13:27, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
- I'm talking about opposition to your edit, not your stance - I share your attitude toward the article, though not the former senator, I suspect. As for "keeping the page protection in place" = "keeping your edit in place", I wasn't implying you said that, I was pointing to the concomitancy. If you want to pursue this, let's take it off Fastily's talk page. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 13:10, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
- The information above has several inaccuracies, and really accuses me of bad faith editing, using terms like "orderly until yesterday when a single editor, Avanu" and "spammed". In addition, the "unanimous opposition" comment is also inaccurate. Reo argued that other things were higher priority, and Tarc and Collect made statements that showed they agreed that bias is present. The sentence which has "our request was followed by one from Avanu to keep it (and his unanimously opposed edit) in place" is *ALSO* inaccurate because I only made a case for continuing page protection, NOT a defense of my edit. In short, a very biased and inaccurate picture was painted in order to get an admin to intervene on this again. If we're going to work on this together, editors cannot do this. -- Avanu (talk) 12:51, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Please see WP:RFP/A#User:Eugen Simion 14. You recently gave this user the rights after an automatic bot request, but I've registered an objection there. Best, StrPby (talk) 00:06, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
A question
Given your RfA criteria, which include "A clean block log or no blocks for the last two years of sustained editing", what's your view on an administrator's block log like this one? Are all bets off once the tool belt has been granted? Being blocked before is a NoNo, but after is perfectly OK? Malleus Fatuorum 01:06, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
- Well, put it this way, if he is recalled, I'll likely oppose on those grounds. I didn't even know he had been recently blocked, until you told me today. I find it odd, really, because I always imagined Sarek to have more common sense. Apparently not. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 07:33, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
- Really? You were support number 23 here. Didn't you bother to check? The last block was only six months before, not two years. Malleus Fatuorum 00:10, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
- I was aware of the last block, but I think I have my doubts now :/ -FASTILY (TALK) 00:13, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
- Really? You were support number 23 here. Didn't you bother to check? The last block was only six months before, not two years. Malleus Fatuorum 00:10, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Re: Warning
It would be nice if you gave the same warning to the user who started with reverting my changes. Twice. Second time he just erased a whole bunch of my changes because he did not like one of the 4 or 5 edits. BottomDog (talk) 20:48, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
- Please check the changes. He has again completly undone mine and other people changes and added the advertisement links.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=PocketBook_eReader&action=historysubmit&diff=433625523&oldid=433508947 BottomDog (talk) 22:38, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
- BottomDog, you need to argument your changes and reply to my arguments. "Other people" is one person of which I also wrote on edit warring report --Brainsteinko (talk) 22:48, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
- none of the links is advertisement and that version stabilized after considerable previous scrutiny and extensive discussion--Brainsteinko (talk) 22:53, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
- BottomDog, you need to argument your changes and reply to my arguments. "Other people" is one person of which I also wrote on edit warring report --Brainsteinko (talk) 22:48, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
- Why remove the controversies section and the info about using last gen e.ink display. That information is more accurate than your claim that the 360+ is twice as fast.
- Why remove additional technical specifications and corrections like the number of page turns that you again set to 14 thousands even tho the pocketbook site itself says 7000. BottomDog (talk) 23:05, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Misunderstanding
I'm so sorry for misunderstanding dear Administrator. He showed to be a specialist in programming and I was afraid he might do smth to my report. I checked often and waited for your first reply to then inform him. As I understand, we need more "edit warring". I will inform you then as you said. Sincerely yours--Brainsteinko (talk) 21:03, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
- No worries. And will do. Thanks, FASTILY (TALK) 00:28, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
- What exactly would I have been able to do to your report Brainsteinko other than to present my side? Are you saying I'm gonna OMGHACKYOU? But at least we're talking on the discussion page now and have admins that directly get involved and hear both sides instead of just blindly warning one side. BottomDog (talk) 00:52, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Inquiry about semi-protection
Good day. I've posed a question regarding a protection you made here: Talk:Winter_Is_Coming#Inquiry_for_Administrative_Staff. As a summary, you semi-protected an article citing edit warring, where policy states it should be full protection. Does this mean you are deeming the version that a certain IP is changing it to as vandalism? If so please clearly state it so this content dispute can be resolved and the current version gains consensus. If you are not deeming the edits as vandalism, then surely you should be full protecting as confirmed editors are involved in the edit war as well as non-confirmed. Thanks, --81.98.49.11 (talk) 07:46, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
From left field - this article should be removed (moved). It is an ad for a movie/series and not general content for Wikipedia.
Was looking for where to move to but don't deal with Video that much. Jambay (talk) 09:11, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Rollback request for permission
Hi Fastily. I recently requested permission for the Rollback flag, which was declined. You probably looked at my last 50 edits and saw that I hadn't done much vandalism fighting - I appreciate with a large number of users requesting this, that method is an easy and quick way to determine eligibility, so I have no problem with that. But as I do generally react to vandalism/inappropriate editing that I see from my watchlist, my request was more from the point of view of my long-term (if not as frequent) vandalism fighting. As far as I'm aware all my previous vandalism reversions have been correctly identified, I always leave the appropriate warning messages and I am always more than civil to fellow users. I do feel that I am an editor to be trusted with this feature and would help for when I have come across cases where an editor has vandalised over several edits.
So I'd be grateful if you could review my case please (I came here on the suggestion of Salvio). Thanks, Zangar (talk) 14:52, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Followed this thread over from WP:PERM - Fastily I do think in this instance we should be adding the flag - over 4000 edits and more than a years tenure (IMHO) are enough to evidence trust even if a lack of recent reversions doesn't show need. As most tools on WP are granted because of trust I'd urge you to reconsider Zangar's request and grant this. Pedro : Chat 14:59, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Barnstar!
|
The NPP Admin's Barnstar | |
| Thanks for helping out at WP:PERM/AP intensively. ~~EBE123~~ talkContribs 21:12, 14 June 2011 (UTC) |
Default
Please, relist Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2011 May 23#File:NY Times Best Seller List May 25 1980.jpg or just leave the original discussion run. We don't default to keep in discussions about non-free material. The onus in those wanting to use the image. --damiens.rf 12:27, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- Done -FASTILY (TALK) 17:59, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks, --damiens.rf 18:19, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Declined speedy?
re: File:Back-mk.jpeg this file. The user is clearly not Matt Sayles working for AP. (See this for a reference.) Especially, since the user also claims to be Dan MacMedan in File:Amanda Seyfried Oscars 2009.jpg. (See this for a reference.) Not sure what the confusion is. Nymf hideliho! 15:57, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- A copyright violation exists only if a user claims someone else's creative work as their own OR if a user uploads a copyrighted work under a free license. Neither of these conditions were met in the aforementioned file, so a copyright violation does not exist. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:02, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- According to what policy? Seems to me that it fits the F9 criteria at WP:CSD#Files. Quoting: "Obviously non-free images (or other media files) that are not claimed by the uploader to be fair use." What do you propose the license should be then? Nymf hideliho! 19:38, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
RE: Speedy Deletion request for File:SobratPutriSmall.jpg
Hi Fastily, I was wondering if you noticed the rationale I posted under the speedy deletion request. It read:
Painting was made in 1962; Article 30 of Indonesian copyright law applies for 50 years after the publication of the work. Hence, taking a picture of the painting would be considered a derived work of a copyrighted image and not acceptable on Wikipedia. Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:16, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
As noted in the file's description, it is the work of Anak Agung Gde Sobrat, who died in 1992 and clearly could not have uploaded it himself. The uploader has claimed that since s/he owns the painting, taking a picture of it and uploading it would be acceptable; However, this is not allowed as the copyright is still owned by Anak Agung Gde Sobrat. The painting was finished (perhaps displayed) in 1962, meaning that Indonesian public domain law does not apply for at least another year. Could you take another look at it? Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:50, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted image
Hi. A quick question about your deletion of File:AWM 124957 PRIVATE LESLIE THOMAS STARCEVICH VC.jpg if I may. While there was no licence tag on the image, the contributing editor did make a good faith attempt to mark the image as public domain [72] and provided a link to where this could be verified (see [73]). Did you check this before you deleted the image or simply rely on the tag placed by the bot. I would ask that you restore the image and I will then add the appropriate licencing information. If not, I will take this to DRV. Many thanks. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 08:21, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- There was indeed no license tag on the file description page. I'll restore the page for you, but first, a word of advice: if you want someone to do you a favor, they're more likely to do that favor for you if you refrain from making supercilious assumptions and threats (e.g. "Did you check this before you deleted the image or simply rely on the tag placed by the bot...If not, I will take this to DRV"). Capeache? -FASTILY (TALK) 08:28, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
I noticed you had deleted the image listed above. However, in the discussion it was found it could be listed as in the public domain and so was retagged as such. The result of that discussion was not delete. Could you explain why you deleted the image? Harrison49 (talk) 12:40, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- Would you mind restoring the file? Thank you. Harrison49 (talk) 15:23, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- Done an honest mistake. -FASTILY (TALK) 16:40, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you. Harrison49 (talk) 16:44, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Full protection at 2011–12 United States network television schedule
The full protection seems a bit severe. The problem editor, Core2012 (talk • contribs), has been insisting that he has had some kind of personal conversation with John Quiñones of ABC's Primetime: What Would You Do?, and has "assured" everyone that Quiñones says the show has been renewed for the 2011–12 season. The edit including the program to the schedule contains no identifying source saying the program is even renewed, much less to the specific date and time he is trying to include it to the table. I have had a somewhat lengthy conversation with him on my talk page (that's where he came to me after I initially reverted him) about verification and reliable sources, but he seems to feel that his word should be enough for us, and that we are somehow disputing Quiñones's word by requiring further proof. This is not a content dispute as the content, if it were at all sourced, would be perfectly acceptable. The problem editor has already been 3RR warned by me, and will be reported to WP:AN/EW if he persists, so I ask that you not punish other editors following WP:VER because of one editor's actions, and lift the full protection on 2011–12 United States network television schedule. KnownAlias X 19:38, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- That seems reasonable. Unprotected I'll be watching the article; any sign of rampant edit warring, and I'll reprotect it. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:20, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- Understood. Thanks. KnownAlias X 21:21, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- He found a good source, and chatting again with him on his talk page, he seems content that I removed it from the schedule since I still finally added it to the list of returning series (which is all his source offered). I do believe the war is over. KnownAlias X 23:16, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- Understood. Thanks. KnownAlias X 21:21, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Request for clarification
I just started a new page yesterday afternoon. Went to the store and came back to a speedy deletion request. This is my first time trying to build an article and tried to put on information pertaining to the subject to get a base to build on. I would not expect such an immediate action but I guess that is just the way it goes sometimes. Upon reading information about the speedy deletion I posted in the discussion area concerning this situation asking for clarification as to what was wrong and what I can do to fix this problem. Instead of receiving a response of any kind the article was deleted. Is this common practice to new accounts? I think it is rude to treat someone this way. I cannot understand how it is policy to tell someone they posted something wrong and then when they ask for clarification as to what exactly is being cited as wrong and why they are only answered by a deletion. I am asking for someone to restore the article. I will be more than happy to remove or fix whatever information caused this action. I just would like to know what that is. If it is something about copyright as per the title indicated, I do not understand what the copyright infrigement was. Any information I obtained from an independant site was not only on a public viewable page but any quotes were directly cited given credit to the source. That is not copyright infringement. I would really appreciate some help here.--Sramana School of Thought (talk) 05:17, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
- It seems you copied text word for word from [74]. Copying text from websites is typically prohibited on Wikipedia, and are considered to be copyright violations. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:04, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
This is the reappearance of a long-time vandal who's sole purpose is to create these fake pages. They're always easily identifiable because they're based on existing programs and ALWAYS include Mario as one of the main characters. I wish I could remember some of the previous incarnations and/or the admin who usually deals with them, but it's been a few months since I've edited. 69.181.248.16 (talk) 06:42, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
- I'll keep an eye on them. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 07:12, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
You've got mail
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
—James (Talk • Contribs) • 5:30pm • 07:30, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Elizabeth II image
Stop flagging my Elizabeth II image ok? I'm flattered you don't think it's my work. Google me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rasiel (talk • contribs) 12:18, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
- See User talk:Rasiel#File:Elizabeth II coin.jpg for an explanation as to why I've just tagged it for speedy deletion again. Dpmuk (talk) 13:01, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
you can see in the history of this page that how much vandalism is taking place here. some edits were quiet bad and harmful for the reputation of this institute which was reported to me by many people. so please semi protect this page. it would be very helpful.--Garvitkamboj (talk) 14:45, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, I'm not really seeing the excessive "vandalism". Pages are not protected unless they are under a heavy, heavy attack from vandals. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:36, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
look at this edit [75] and see what is happening.Garvitkamboj (talk) 02:27, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Circumcision
Hello Fastily. Doc and I have agreed on a change to the intro while we hammer out specifics. Could you be so good as to implement it. You will see it proposed by Kyle in the -No consensus to change intro section- Thanks. Garycompugeek (talk) 16:17, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hi there. I had a look at the discussion and it seems that Doc and Jakew are unhappy with some of the changes. I don't want to implement anything on a fully protected article unless there is an unanimous agreement to do so. Let me know when there is consensus, and I'll be happy to make changes or lift protection all together. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:08, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- Sure Doc actually changed his mind and changed his edit saying he mis typed lol. I just though we just had a more neutral and closer to the original starting point. Thanks for looking in though. Garycompugeek (talk) 21:04, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- I know there are no right or wrong versions but you have locked it in the new proposed version of the intro that does not have consensus and is a violation of NPOV. The old intro has stood for years (and that does't make it right or uneditable) but should it not stand while we discuss changes? Garycompugeek (talk) 21:02, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
- Sure Doc actually changed his mind and changed his edit saying he mis typed lol. I just though we just had a more neutral and closer to the original starting point. Thanks for looking in though. Garycompugeek (talk) 21:04, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
The Empire Strikes Back Newsweek
Could you explain your rationale for the deletion of this image, there did not appear to be a convincing case for deletion and a strong argument against it. I believe the previous time it was nominated the decision was keep based on exactly the same argument. Wee Curry Monster talk 11:31, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- IMHO, after reading the discussion, I felt that the reasons presented to delete the file were more compelling than those to keep it. Sorry, FASTILY (TALK) 16:49, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- I'm curious - do you just count the ayes and nays and then hastily continue to the next deletion 106+ deletions in one hour!. To me a stalemate was reached, not an agreement. One of the delete arguments was that any close-up picture of a big warship will do, exactly what ship was pictured was pretty irrelevant (so an image of the Japanese battleship Yamato could easily have made the point??).
- I admit that to the majority of the readers, the Falklands War is a long forgotten war, fought with floating grey monotonous thingies, but for the occupational editors of the article it is important to convey the different aspects of the subject. The usage of fair-use images is always an assessment, and in a time of abundant media coverage, it might be difficult to comprehend the impact of a magazine front-page. --Regards, Necessary Evil (talk) 16:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
- I have restored and relisted the file so as to obtain clearer consensus. After reviewing the debate again, I agree, it was more of a stalemate. Hope that helps. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:14, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you. --Regards, Necessary Evil (talk) 19:11, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thank from me too, Regards. Wee Curry Monster talk 19:17, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you. --Regards, Necessary Evil (talk) 19:11, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
- I have restored and relisted the file so as to obtain clearer consensus. After reviewing the debate again, I agree, it was more of a stalemate. Hope that helps. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:14, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Reconsider
Please, reconsider this Ffd: Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2011_May_26#File:FARC-child-soldiers.jpg. The idead that we should use a non-free image to "document" a fact (as defended by both keep votes) have been refuted by me and JMilburn, and have been rejected on many previous FfDs. --damiens.rf 13:39, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Also, in this one, none of the problems pointed out in the nomination have been addressed. --damiens.rf 13:41, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
And this is also something I would as for a review. Sorry for being so critic of your voluntary work, but I sincerely believe these were not wise decisions. --damiens.rf 13:44, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
One more where I would like to see your interpretation of the discussion is this. All keep votes repeated the argument about how the image should be used because of its impact, which is simply something not covered by nfcc#8. --damiens.rf 13:48, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
C'mon! Are you really reading the FfDs you're closing? In this Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2011_May_29#File:RAF_Eastcote_1945.png you deleted an image after the discussion concluded it was free. All the concerns raised in the nomination had been properly addressed and I, the nominator, was happy with keeping the image. Your recent work in FfDs is too defective. Please, take a break! You're simply not being competent. --damiens.rf 14:58, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- Whoa whoa, you really need to calm down. Couple things:
- I do not claim to be perfect, as I am human. Bring mistakes to my attention, and I will correct them accordingly.
- I do not mind if editors protest my FfD closures in good faith, and I always will be happy to explain my rationale. However, if you're going to be a dick about it, well then you can gtfo.
- I do in fact read all the discussions I close, and when there is consensus, or no consensus to take action, I close the discussion as such. It is not my job, as the closing administrator to interpret policy, but rather, it is my job as closing administrator to interpret consensus. Whatever consensus mandates, I do. I realize this will not make everyone happy, but you're just going to have to live with that.
- Despite your disgusting and childish comments, I have carefully reviewed all the debates you have listed and re-weighed arguments, and apart from Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2011_May_29#File:RAF_Eastcote_1945.png, I stand by my decisions. If you still wish to pursue whatever deletionist agenda you have in mind, by all means, you are welcome to open WP:DR requests to your heart's content. If the community overturns my decisions there through consensus, that's fine, and I have no problems with that.
- Capeache? -FASTILY (TALK) 17:22, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- You're mistaken about your role as an admin. You do need to interpret policy. By not doing that, you give equal height to arguments in accordance and in ignorance of our polices. --damiens.rf 17:46, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- Um...Can you read? To quote myself: "I have carefully reviewed all the debates you have listed and re-weighed arguments". In case that wasn't obvious, I do take policy into consideration when closing debates. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:52, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- You are incompetent on this matter. You're doing a poor job on closing FfDs. It's obvious that you simply count the votes. --damiens.rf 19:38, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hahaha ok, believe whatever you want; I've made myself more than clear up above. I wonder, who really is the incompetent one, the guy who closes FfDs slowly and carefully, or the guy who blindly and rapidly mass-nominates files for deletion with terribly egregious reasoning. I would think that a couple of blocks and ANI threads would suffice in getting the message across to even the thickest of the thick, but alas, I stand corrected. Have a good one. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 21:17, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- What makes you believe I nominate things "blindly and rapidly"? I take time to analyze all of them and, outside of your incompetent judgments, they're mostly successful. Your mistake deletion of File:RAF_Eastcote_1945.png when even the nominator (me) has agreed that the image should be kept shows pretty much the amount of attention you devote to the task.
- I'll be posting these images for deletion review. Check the logs. --damiens.rf 20:54, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hahaha ok, believe whatever you want; I've made myself more than clear up above. I wonder, who really is the incompetent one, the guy who closes FfDs slowly and carefully, or the guy who blindly and rapidly mass-nominates files for deletion with terribly egregious reasoning. I would think that a couple of blocks and ANI threads would suffice in getting the message across to even the thickest of the thick, but alas, I stand corrected. Have a good one. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 21:17, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- You are incompetent on this matter. You're doing a poor job on closing FfDs. It's obvious that you simply count the votes. --damiens.rf 19:38, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- Um...Can you read? To quote myself: "I have carefully reviewed all the debates you have listed and re-weighed arguments". In case that wasn't obvious, I do take policy into consideration when closing debates. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:52, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- You're mistaken about your role as an admin. You do need to interpret policy. By not doing that, you give equal height to arguments in accordance and in ignorance of our polices. --damiens.rf 17:46, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Deletion review for File:FilipAndTal.jpg
An editor has asked for a deletion review of File:FilipAndTal.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. damiens.rf 20:54, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Disagree
I know it'll change nothing, but I disagree with your declining the 3RR on Delta. Hammersoft admits that what he wrote could be construed as a personal attack and policy supports the removal of those, even on other's pages. I don't see how that adds up to an exemption on 3RR.--Crossmr (talk) 07:52, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
- Well, FWIW, SarekOfVulcan did end up blocking Beta for awhile... -FASTILY (TALK) 18:35, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Deletion of Mark Sceurman
Earier today you deleted a page on Mark Sceurman because you felt he was not notable enough. However i have references that prove he may be notable and i would like to recreate the page, But before i do it said to contact you first.Vincelord (talk) 14:19, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
- That's fine, I say go for it. For easy reference: WP:GNG, WP:V, WP:CITE, WP:NPOV, WP:POV, WP:MOS, WP:ADS. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:17, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Request for Permissions
Hi Fastily. I have been interested in WP:RFP/R and I would like to help out there. I don't want to overreach, but I've been watching you in that section for awhile and I'd like to get my feet wet. I started off declining a request for rollback because the editor seemed to want to use it to assert ownership on his article. If I made a bad judgement call, please let me know. I felt this particular one was an obvious no is the only reason I was bold. I'll keep observing for now.--v/r - TP 17:50, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
- I had a look, and I agree with you. Good call, and an excellent first decline. Keep up the good work! All the best, FASTILY (TALK) 18:21, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Ping!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
-- Atama頭 17:55, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Position of characters
Parallax is the second main character of the film because he is the main villainMark (talk) 04:28, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
- Er, sorry, but could you please clarify what you're talking about? Thanks, FASTILY (TALK) 07:32, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
FilipAndTal.jpg DRV
I'd be grateful if you could clarify what seems to me the key point in this DRV, how you judged whether each of the !votes provided a substantive rationale for the image passing NFCC#8, and so how you weighted them accordingly? Jheald (talk) 09:35, 18 June 2011 (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 it 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, "
Dear Fastily, I think I should change my name to "Slowily" as it has taken me over a year to get around to this. Sorry about that! Please go ahead and check out my User subpage and see what you think of the article and if I have restored it in the way you'd hoped for. You can find the article here: User:KnownLoop/Stochastic resonance (book). If you approve, please go ahead and make it go live. If you don't like it, pls give me some feedback and I'll do my best to improve it. Sorry that the article it is rather short, but I think it is a starting point from which other editors can start adding more stuff. KnownLoop (talk) 13:04, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
- No worries, it looks great. I say turn it live. Have a good one. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:52, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Ok, but I'm not sure how to do that. Because it was a previously deleted article the "live page" presently has all those standard warnings etc, and I'm not sure how to override that. I think it might need your expertise. KnownLoop (talk) 23:05, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
- Looks like you were able to do it: Stochastic resonance (book). It's live at the moment. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:41, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Rob Todd RPP
Hi, please reconsider the Rob Todd RPP in light of continued removal, thanks. AV3000 (talk) 14:02, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
- No need, those SPAs and the underlying IP address are going to be dealt with: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Robertpercytodd -FASTILY (TALK) 19:53, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Record of range blocks
I find it hard to see how you justify this deletion as a G6. G6 is for non-controversial cleanup. Since I started the page it is inevitably going to be controversial with me at least. Your edit summary says IP talk page without any meaningful, comprehensible content related to Wikipedia. The information is a record of a range block inserted on the base page of the range I blocked. It is therefore undoubtedly meaningful and related to Wikipedia: my apologies if it was not also comprehensible. Without this, there is no easily found record that the range has been blocked in the past and the reason, which may be significant for any future block. This is really no different from placing normal block notifications on an IP user page. Will you kindly restore the page please. SpinningSpark 15:23, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
- Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do not believe it is standard procedure to leave rangeblock notices on IP talk pages, especially when this IP has never made a single edit to Wikipeida. Furthermore, leaving notices on orphaned IP talk pages is not useful to anyone; the odds that someone is going to find this talk page, read it, and take it into consideration when rangeblocking this IP again are next to zero, as we already have convenient access to past block records in the block log. If you can find a policy/guideline that explicitly requires a message to be placed on rangeblocked IP talk pages, let me know, and I'll restore the page, no further questions. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:05, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Bilderberg Group
Fastily, is it usual to lock an article with no discussion or warning on the article's talk page? --Nuujinn (talk) 19:23, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
can you close this edit warring report? (you already blocked the editors)
WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring #User:Jaume87 reported by User:Maurice27 (Result: ). Thank you. Jd2718 (talk) 20:44, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
![[5]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Piaśnica_mass_murder_execution.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![[21]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=&page=File%3ARust.png&year=&month=-1&tagfilter=){kind=link}
![[43]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Jim_In_Miami_w-Hat.jpg&curid=25394172&diff=381801517&oldid=381790789){kind=link}
![[52]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/12/Wikipedia.png){kind=link}
![[54]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Carnildo&oldid=382380706#small_water_fall.jpg){kind=link}
![[59]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Margaret_Teele.jpg){kind=link}
![[60]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PezzatiVermillionCliffs.jpg){kind=link}
![[72]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Undelete&target=File%3AAWM+124957+PRIVATE+LESLIE+THOMAS+STARCEVICH+VC.jpg×tamp=20110608111414){kind=link}
Kay Kristin Boutilier page deletion
Hey, You just deleted my page and I was wondering why-- I felt as though I had defended the content and had been (in the talk section) in discussion with the person who had tagged it for speedy deletion and had been editing it. Clarification would be appreciated. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki86420 (talk • contribs) 23:57, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hmmm, upon review, the article doesn't appear to be promotional; I've restored it and amended the deletion tag so that another admin can have a look at it. Hope that helps. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 02:10, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
About JCI Bangladesh
Hello,
JCI is a global organization keeping footprint in more than 115 countries with a membership base more than 200,000 and promoting young professionals and entrepreneurs as active citizen. As being affiliated with the global organization JCI Bangladesh is also continuing it's effort to facilitate the development of young communities through various endeavors. You can find more details on our website: www.jci.cc.
Need your support by publishing this page to promote active citizenship for the community.
BR, Mahib Ekram — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahibekram (talk • contribs) 05:12, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- User_talk:Mahibekram#Re:About_JCI_Bangladesh -FASTILY (TALK) 06:24, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
I could have sworn I just added a rationale template to that file. Are you sure it didn't have one? Thanks. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 14:06, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- It did. Now how could I have missed that... Hmmmm restored -FASTILY (TALK) 17:51, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Fastily, you know I hold you in the highest esteem but unprotecting Carl Hewitt without consulting SlimVirgin, Cenarium or myself was not a good call. It wasn't protected because GovCom decided to expand into rewriting policy, it was protected because we can't use level 2 PC (as a result of the RfC) and semi has been insufficient to keep out serious BLP issues in the past. Unprotecting it at the request of an inexperienced editor who clearly doesn't understand what's been going on was not a good idea and it's been standard practice to refer unprotection requests to the protecting admin for longer than I've had the bit. Sorry to have a go, but I was more than a bit surprised to see that on my watchlist. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:31, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- At the time, it seemed like a uncontroversial good faith request, so I went ahead and unprotected it. I blame my lack of familiarity with extant arbcom rulings. Thanks for letting me know. All the best, FASTILY (TALK) 20:21, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Bad_G8_of_a_non-trivial_talk_page_of_a_merged_and_redirected_article
Hello Fastily. You re-deleted Talk:Horror comics in the United States, 1947–1954. Your logged reason "Page dependent on a deleted or nonexistent page" doesn't match the bluelinked article/redirect. Did you read User_talk:Sphilbrick#Bad_G8_of_a_non-trivial_talk_page_of_a_merged_and_redirected_article? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:10, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Madeline Carroll
Hi... you've closed the image deletion request twice now without even engaging the argument I've made on the talk page. Could you at least address the point I made?—Chowbok ☠ 02:26, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- Damn, I thought the uploader was refuting your point. Thanks for letting me know I'm going senile. Deleted -FASTILY (TALK) 02:31, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
FFD question
Hi Fastily. Would these not be eligible for G5 speedy deletion? 28bytes (talk) 03:44, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Facepalm I completely forgot about G5... Would you like to do the honors? -FASTILY (TALK) 05:20, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for your understanding! --Commander (Ping Me) 04:19, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Block
As an administrator, you should give example. If you block someone, at least, you should take your time to read and answer to the unblock request. Who do you think you are to ignore that right since you were the one to block? I had already ask for a resolution to the 3RR noticeboard and you prevented me to reply to them. Who you think you are acting like this? I take the time to follow the path wikipedia explains... I warn the other user... I explain to him why he is not acting correctly... I take the time to write to the noticeboard... What for? If Mr. Fastily decided for its own... "Follow the rules but watch yourself, some admins won't". And sadly, I don't really believe you will answer to this message either... --Maurice27 About Me, Talk, Vandalize. 04:45, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- Per policy, I am not allowed to review your unblock request. Reverting contentious and biased material more than three times and/or being the first to file an AN3 report will not exempt you from the 3RR rule. I know you took time to post to WP:AN3, however, both of you did violate WP:3RR. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:27, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi,
I don't understand the close here. Isn't it just a lower-quality version of the now-deleted File:Stalin and Hitler.png? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 05:56, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- Meh, now that I think about it, it doesn't really make much sense to keep one and not the other. Deleted -FASTILY (TALK) 06:18, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Protection on International Socialist Organization
Hi, Fastily. Thanks for taking action on the edit warring on this article. Fwiw, the situation seems to have calmed down and all three parties who were involved in the content dispute are discussing it rationally (both at Talk:International Socialist Organization#Funding and at my talk page). (I am uninvolved, having reverted once while patrolling recent changes without realizing there was a dispute in progress.) I wonder if you'd consider reducing the duration of the page protection. Other sections of the article need work (the uncontroversial kind), and I don't think things will go south again. If I'm wrong, I am watching the page and will be the first to support locking it down again. Rivertorch (talk) 06:38, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- Sounds reasonable. I have reset protection to expire in 24h. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 08:31, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks! I'll keep an eye on it. Rivertorch (talk) 16:11, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Signatures
Hi there! I see you deleted the signatues I uploaded. I have a question. Why did you delete the files when the consensus was to mark them with the {{Do not move to Commons}} template. Do care to leave a talkback. GaneshBhakt (talk) 07:00, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hello there. From what I can see, consensus was strongly in favor of deleting the files. You seemed to be the only one who was really in favor of keeping them. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:14, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- First off, Zakir Hussain is dead. Second. The deletion proposition was on WP:BLPSIGN, a proposed policy, not a policy in effect. Third, there was no discussion after VW said that they can still be uploaded at WP so long as they are appropriately tagged {{Do not move to Commons}}. Now, unless you are strongly in favour of deleting files, you could have marked them as {{Do not move to Commons}} and kept them. And yes, I wasn't the only one who wanted the files to be kept. A better way was to mark them with the {{Do not move to Commons}} template. Do care to leave a talkback. GaneshBhakt (talk) 08:12, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- VW neutrally stated what could be done, he did not argue in favor of keeping the files; VW was effectively neutral in this discussion. The only other three participants in the discussion, Sven Manguard, Jayanta Nath, and Yoenit, were in favor of deleting the files and had valid rationale to support their position. Breakdown = 3:1 delete/keep. Consensus is clearly in favor to delete the files. -FASTILY (TALK) 08:52, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- First off, Zakir Hussain is dead. Second. The deletion proposition was on WP:BLPSIGN, a proposed policy, not a policy in effect. Third, there was no discussion after VW said that they can still be uploaded at WP so long as they are appropriately tagged {{Do not move to Commons}}. Now, unless you are strongly in favour of deleting files, you could have marked them as {{Do not move to Commons}} and kept them. And yes, I wasn't the only one who wanted the files to be kept. A better way was to mark them with the {{Do not move to Commons}} template. Do care to leave a talkback. GaneshBhakt (talk) 08:12, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- So you prove you are a deletionist and do not care about Wikipedia. You just see the Delete:Keep ratio and decide you action. Also Yoenit said that he supported deletions only if his two conditions were not met. But unfortunately they were met. So now, Yoenit's proposition turns 180, in favour of keeping all files. Sven Manguard said that all files should be deleted as copyvios as common law countries have low bars for what constitutes originality. But VW nullified his proposition saying that they should be marked with the {{Do not move to Commons}} template. So even Sven's proposition turns in favour of keeping all files. Therefore now the Delete:Keep ratio is 1:4. What do you have to say now? P.S.: First off, Zakir Hussain is dead. Second. The deletion proposition was on WP:BLPSIGN, a proposed policy, not a policy in effect. GaneshBhakt (talk) 09:06, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- Oh no, no, no, no. Adminship ain't so easy pal. You do an action, be ready to justify it. GaneshBhakt (talk) 09:22, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
I agree one of us is wrong. I think its you, and already gave the reason why [So you prove you are...Delete:Keep ratio is 1:4] therefore I believed your action was unjustified. Now I know you think I'm wrong. Give a reason. GaneshBhakt (talk) 09:37, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- How many more times must I repeat myself? I already told you why I deleted the files. The more you incessantly argue with egregious reasoning, the less likely I am going to take you seriously and reconsider my position. Please just go ahead and file that DR request. -FASTILY (TALK) 09:44, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- Done. With pleasure. Have anice day. GaneshBhakt (talk) 10:05, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Your speedy deletion
Since the otrs ticket gave the wrong site and you gave no indication of having read my comments on the talk page of the file, why did you speedy delete it? Here are the comments that I left there which reproduced a message on User talk:Moonriddengirl.[76]
- Hi. User:Taketa left this message on my talk page about this file:
- "Hi, via otrs ticket:2011062010001214 a complaint was received about the copyright of File:Cattell15.jpg. According to the email the picture is taken from [77] and has copyright on it. Also since it was a pic from 1920 it was not 100 years since the death of the author. As a precaution I have requested immediate removal of the image. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 06:17, 20 June 2011 (UTC)"
- Here is my reply on his talk page:
- "As stated on the file page, the image was taken from this source in this article (where it is marked "Cattell aged 15") and not the site mentioned in the otrs ticket. There was no mention of the photographer on the site I used. The picture was taken in England so I assume that the correct template is {{PD-US-1923-abroad}}. I remember a discussion on a similar issue here, where the 70 year rule for images taken in the United Kingdom was discussed. The expert on this is the administrator User:Moonriddengirl. It might be wise to ask her advice again. I understand that in real liife Cattell has been at the centre of an acrimonious controversy recently which has become the subject of a book.[78] Mathsci (talk) 06:33, 20 June 2011 (UTC)"
- Since the otrs ticket names a different source (not used by me), I am unable to tell what the copyright issues here are. Please could you help clarify this? Thanks in advance, Mathsci (talk) 06:58, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
I have asked Moonriddengirl do review your speedy deletion. But in the meantime please can you explain if in fact you read this message in detail before making the deletion. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 07:30, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- I had a look at the OTRS ticket and it is indeed a take down notice. Moonriddengirl will probably tell you the same thing. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 07:35, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- Ah, I see, you did not read the explanation or see that the image was taken from a different website. From past experience, I expect Moonriddengirl to give a more carefully reasoned response. Mathsci (talk) 07:51, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- "I had a look" as in I had a look before I deleted the file. -FASTILY (TALK) 08:32, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- I discovered in the meantime that the other more recent image of Cattell on wikipedia was obtained in 2008 by user:Howcheng, an admin here and on commons, through OTRS permissions from the Cattell family trust.[79] En route I found out that William H. Tucker, the author of the book I mentioned above, actually edits the article on Raymond Cattell as User:Wmhtucker, as he explains here.[80] An ex-colleague of Cattell also edited the article as User:Cattellbiographer. Mathsci (talk) 09:05, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info, but I can't see how it helps; I deleted File:Cattell15.jpg because an email was sent to OTRS by a Cattell family member, explicitly demanding it's removal. -FASTILY (TALK) 09:13, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, I had understood that was what happened. The Cattell family trust, presumably run by the same family member who made the otrs request, was previously approached about the existing image.[81] In looking at the article, the image was added at a time when a friend of the family, Cattellbiographer, was editing the article. They could presumably also be approached again about the other image. Independently of copyright rules in the UK (where the deleted image was taken), I can imagine completley understandable reasons why they would not give their consent for releasing either of the two images now. Mathsci (talk) 09:30, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info, but I can't see how it helps; I deleted File:Cattell15.jpg because an email was sent to OTRS by a Cattell family member, explicitly demanding it's removal. -FASTILY (TALK) 09:13, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- I discovered in the meantime that the other more recent image of Cattell on wikipedia was obtained in 2008 by user:Howcheng, an admin here and on commons, through OTRS permissions from the Cattell family trust.[79] En route I found out that William H. Tucker, the author of the book I mentioned above, actually edits the article on Raymond Cattell as User:Wmhtucker, as he explains here.[80] An ex-colleague of Cattell also edited the article as User:Cattellbiographer. Mathsci (talk) 09:05, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- "I had a look" as in I had a look before I deleted the file. -FASTILY (TALK) 08:32, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- Ah, I see, you did not read the explanation or see that the image was taken from a different website. From past experience, I expect Moonriddengirl to give a more carefully reasoned response. Mathsci (talk) 07:51, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
![[81]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Raymond_Cattell.jpg){kind=link}
Hey! You deleted the page without any prior notice. I request that you restore the page, so that we can improve whatever possible. Thank you. Shahid • Talk2me 10:55, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- Meh, it was an incomplete test page at best. I've appended the text of the deleted article below so you can work on it (click edit to view it). Resubmit the article when you're finished. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 00:58, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Goffs Oak F.C.
Hi, I had nominated Goffs Oak F.C. for speedy deletion as a copyright violation, and you deleted it. Apparently now permission for use of the copyrighted stuff has arrived; a note to that effect has been posted on the article's talk page. Could you please undelete it? Thanks, Huon (talk) 22:28, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! Huon (talk) 01:16, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Let me break the blockade just this once, because unfortunately the user Tia solzago lacks the truth. My actions have always been discussed on the talk page [82]. But, there is a group Italian users, adherents or supporters of the Lega Nord, who are trying to eliminate from the "infobox" and the introduction a text which they consider inadequate, but that is well referenced by several sources: BBC, Der Spiegel, University of Zurich, etc. Reaching an agreement between them, and excluding references and opinions presented by those who don't agree, stating that it has reached a consensus, wich is not true. Refusing to consider whether references or reasons [83]. In fact he has been reported by their hostile attitude towards those who have a different view from him.[84]. Have a nice day. GiovBag.--95.251.8.176 (talk) 13:35, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- I didn't protect the page. I believe Kuru is the admin you're looking for. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:59, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- Unfortunately you are more concerned about the manner than the substance, and thus WP lose neutrality. You blocked me without review the references, read the discussion and the article. You may blocked me if I committed a fault and it's right. You may even expel me for disruptive behavior if you feel I deserve it. But you can't be so lenient with a flagrant lack of neutrality. There are at least 9 serious references (of varying levels and origin) demonstrating the Lega Nord is a right-wing populist party. They clearly act as partisans relativizing and ignoring references and sources, trying to "improve" the party's image, without gives a single proof that shows otherwise. With the negligent complicity of some users and administrators of WP, who are more concerned to punish behaviors that monitor the content of the article. Maybe I should have developed a "smarter strategy" to counteract the Lega's' propoganda as they do, using relativism and agreements between them (always the same 4 or 5 users who have controlled the article in the WP in Italian and English) to give an "image" of consensus, formally respecting the rules of WP, but violating its principles. I mistakenly chose to call things by their name directly, presenting references and acting accordingly. Some of they, more cunning, made the changes and reversed the edits taking turns and used my previous bad behavior against me. Bye. GiovBag.--95.250.212.4 (talk) 11:21, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
File:The empire strikes back newsweek.jpg
Hi, about File:The empire strikes back newsweek.jpg I'm not quite clear about your rationale in closing this (relisted) FFD. Obviously, in a situation where there are already substantial votes on both sides, a mere retraction by the original nominator doesn't automatically justify a "withdrawn" keep closure. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:55, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- IMHO, when the nominator withdraws the nomination from an FfD discussion in apparent good faith, it should be withdrawn. Of course, if you think otherwise, I have no problems with reopening it. Let me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:05, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
File:Paleo-Hebrew.PNG's original redirect contents
Hi Fastily, please restore the page you deleted at File:Paleo-Hebrew.PNG, the reason for its contents was in the edit sum: Its history needs to be traceable for derived files on commons, whose renaming is currently being debated. If you think the information belongs on the discussion page, feel free to move it there. Or is there a better way to provide the reference? Best would be to restore the original redirect that was generated with the file's move. Dan ☺ 23:30, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- The proper place to note that would be on the file description page at Commons. For your convenience, I have appended the text of the deleted page below. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:10, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, Dan ☺ 16:26, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
2011 Pan American Games medal image
Hi!, I notice you recently deleted this image of Wikipedia. However, I have stumbled upon more information that justifies why it should be used on the article. According to this source, [85] (it is in Spanish, I translated the page) the medals are shaped in away that symbolizes the agave tree which the region is famous for. I plan on putting this as the rational "To illustrate the medal design used during the 2011 Pan American games for educational purposes, and to display for readers the symbolism used in the design". Your concern was that a free equivalent can be found, but its not likely, because when the medals were released the media covered it (and so far no images that are free have been found). The event will not be covered till October when new images will be taken and the pictures which will not have a clear of shot of the medals (only the medalists with the medals they won). I hope you consider this. Thanks! Intoronto1125TalkContributions 00:46, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- This really isn't negotiable, Intoronto, and our wikiproject's members have told you as much. Please drop the stick. StrPby (talk) 01:02, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- There is a different rationale for this request though. User:Hersfold agrees with the rationale, however I need to get permission from the deleting administrator. Again, during the last version of the games in 2007 there was not a single picture (of the medal) [86] that was free to use, but there was images from the said event. That is unlikely to change this year. Intoronto1125TalkContributions 01:04, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- Anyways, whats your opinion on this Fastily? Intoronto1125TalkContributions 02:00, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- Well, for starters, could you link the deleted image here? And could you also provide a diff where Hersfold supported you? Thanks, FASTILY (TALK) 02:35, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- [87]. Also, Hersfold and I had a conversation over at Freecode IRC, I guess you'd have to confirm with him. Intoronto1125TalkContributions 03:07, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- From what Intoronto has told me, it sounds as though it should be possible to use this image under fair use, provided that a reasonable rationale can be put forth. We have copyrighted images of Olympic medals in use (ex. File:Beijingolympicsmedals.jpg) and this seems like a very similar case. I suggested the rationale Intoronto mentioned above, but then noticed that the concern leading to deletion was criterion 1, the "no free equivalent" one. If you feel it's reasonable to assume that a free equivalent could be found, I certainly respect your opinion on that, however.
- Intoronto1125, just for the record, the name-dropping isn't entirely appropriate. Strange Passerby's comments lead me to think you've already tried to discuss this with others and were turned down. If that's the case, I had no knowledge of that, and do not appreciate being used in an act of admin-shopping. If there is a firm consensus that this image should not be used (and especially if the consensus was formed by editors actually interested and knowledgeable about the matter), then whatever I have to say about the matter is moot, which you should have known. Hersfold (t/a/c) 06:12, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- I did mention before I began the discussion that an image previously had been deleted and discussed (if you feel otherwise, I am sorry). Secondly, the rationale for the image has changed which I believe makes the discussion void. Intoronto1125TalkContributions 14:31, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- [87]. Also, Hersfold and I had a conversation over at Freecode IRC, I guess you'd have to confirm with him. Intoronto1125TalkContributions 03:07, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- Well, for starters, could you link the deleted image here? And could you also provide a diff where Hersfold supported you? Thanks, FASTILY (TALK) 02:35, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- Anyways, whats your opinion on this Fastily? Intoronto1125TalkContributions 02:00, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- There is a different rationale for this request though. User:Hersfold agrees with the rationale, however I need to get permission from the deleting administrator. Again, during the last version of the games in 2007 there was not a single picture (of the medal) [86] that was free to use, but there was images from the said event. That is unlikely to change this year. Intoronto1125TalkContributions 01:04, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
![[87]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:2011_Pan_American_Games_gold_medal.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Patriot Strategies deletion
Greetings,
I am wondering why a page I created on a prominent PR firm entitled "Patriot Strategies" was deleted. I merely reported on what the company was, its major clients, and its founder. Please reply. Mikerob92 (talk) 03:38, 21 June 2011 (UTC)mikerob92
- User_talk:Mikerob92#Re:Patriot_Strategies_deletion -FASTILY (TALK) 06:17, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
F7
Hi, I know expecting you to provide a rationale for your admin actions is a bit much, but could I ask why you feel that this image should not be speedily-deletificated? Best, ╟─TreasuryTag►estoppel─╢ 07:30, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- Facepalm I knew I was forgetting something! The file does not explicitly fail F7, and after untagging it, I meant to list it at FfD... Sorry about that. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Deletion question
Hi Fastily, just saw that you deleted File:Ray Willaim Johnson.jpg, which I'm fairly sure I tagged for deletion. Anyway, must admit I rarely venture into file territory, so I'm just wondering if my tag was correct or whether you deleted it under a different rationale to which I tagged it. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 07:47, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Deletion of File:ForeclosureRescueAd.jpg
You did not explain why you deleted File:ForeclosureRescueAd.jpg. I would like to know why you deleted it before I proceed to deletion review. Hellno2 (talk) 13:26, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- At the PUF discussion, you only made a statement of fact, neither arguing to keep nor delete the file based on it's copyright status. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:15, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- If I had said "keep" beforehand, would you have closed it as a keep? That is what I intended to do. If you would have closed it as keep on this basis, you should change the closure to a keep. If you would have relisted it on the basis of the small number of comments, you should go ahead and do that, restoring it in the process. If you would have deleted it, please let me know, and I will take it to deletion review. Hellno2 (talk) 03:45, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Actually, upon another review, I'm restoring the file because the sign consists of text, which is common property and cannot be copyrighted. Furthermore, the sign is of simplistic design, and therefore ineligble for copyright as an original work. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 08:19, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- If I had said "keep" beforehand, would you have closed it as a keep? That is what I intended to do. If you would have closed it as keep on this basis, you should change the closure to a keep. If you would have relisted it on the basis of the small number of comments, you should go ahead and do that, restoring it in the process. If you would have deleted it, please let me know, and I will take it to deletion review. Hellno2 (talk) 03:45, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Userpage of deleted article
You deleted Jono: The Musical but I see that the user still has the same page as a user page here. Should it stay or go? BTW, good to see you are active again. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 22:49, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hiya Ww2censor, good to hear from you :) I don't think any action needs to be taken on that page - it is a draft in the userspace and is not causing any damage there. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 08:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Protecting SBW page
Hello Fastily. Could you please once again protect the page Sonny Bill Williams as you did on the 8th June. It appears not long after your initial protection expired that un-autoconfirmed editors are once again vandalising and reverting edits like before. Thankyou very much.58.106.224.69 (talk) 01:46, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- That's a shame. Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Thanks for letting me know. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 08:24, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Dankie. Thankyou very much again. Best to you too.58.106.224.69 (talk) 09:52, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
File:NikolaiGres.jpg FfD closure
Please reconsider your closure of Wikipedia:Files for deletion#File:NikolaiGres.jpg. Did the keep !vote by Materialscientist just 1½ hours before closure influence your decision? If so, let me point out: 1) The !vote was based on irreplaceability (NFCC#1), but the nomination was based principally on no significant increase in reader understanding (NFCC#8). 2) The photo is in fact replaceable by a photo already in the article. —teb728 t c 08:57, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- I reviewed the debate again, and I agree with your reasoning. Deleted -FASTILY (TALK) 20:33, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Baker House 1885 - Please restore
Dear Fastily- My home, Baker House, was built in 1885 by Robert Hall Baker and so I named our restaurant and Hotel after it Baker House 1885. I created all the user content on my site BakerHouse1885.com so would like to have it reflected in Wiki. Can you let me know how to go about UnDeleting the entry? Cheers- Andrew (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.bakerhouse1885.com/history.html) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BakerHouse1885 (talk • contribs) 16:13, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- The page was deleted as a Copyright violation; we generally cannot accept text that is copied word-for-word from external websites. Since you appear to be the owner of this establishment and its website, you have two options: you can either recreate the article, in your own words, or, you may donate the text of the website to Wikipedia under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL by sending an email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Let me know if you have any questions or are in need of assistance. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:27, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Please restore
Please restore this talk page, as it is accidentally deleted. We use it as draft for the page in dispute, Vojsava Tripalda.
Thanks you for cooperation. --WhiteWriter speaks 16:18, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Already done, thanks anyway! :) --WhiteWriter speaks 16:55, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Verify author of deleted file
Hi, Fastily. Could you verify the upload history of File:NewAHLmap.png for me, please? The Commons version of the file has only incomplete references to the original and I want to make sure the authorship and uploader information there is correct. Thanks! Powers T 16:20, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- How embarrassing... I reviewed the deleted file description page, and there appears to be a problem with some of the attribution details. I'm not sure why I deleted this in the first place. I have restored and added the appropriate tags to the file. Thanks for letting me know. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 20:11, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi, could you protect it again, please? Had to set the article back to last good version by Hullaballoo Wolfowitz because it was too much undetectioned IP vandalism in it. Thanks.--Ben Ben (talk) 17:49, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- No vandalsim has occurred since I protected the page. I'll keep an eye on it though; if the vandalism picks up again, I'll reprotect the page. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:12, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
This file was incorrectly deleted. Permission was sent via email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org by the copyright holder. The email was verified by (user name submitted was Kevin Morgan) a contact form submission on Mr. Corrales' official website (www.cesarcorrales.weebly.com). I am the site administrator for Mr. Corrales' as well as the individual in charge of creating professional publicity and etc. for him (ie. resume, Portfolio, etc). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Booth088 (talk • contribs) 18:02, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- I found the email Mr. Corrales sent in the system and have restored the file accordingly. It would be helpful if you could add a description of the file so others will know what is being depicted. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:20, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
IP editor
Hi, I'm a little concerned about this warning. The IP was listed on AIV, but it appears he was listed as a result of a content dispute with User:Lighthead. I'm not sure those edits count as vandalism. -- Selket Talk 21:58, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Meh, I don't see a content dispute, but I do see two things. Either the IP is engaging in subtle vandalism (But I wouldn't know because I am no expert on topics relating to drums) or is a misguided newbie. All the same, in hindsight, a 4im warning does seem harsh. Warning redacted. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:41, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thanks for the link, I'll keep it handy. There's so much this and that here on Wikipedia that I don't even pretend to know it all exists. But like I said, thanks. Lighthead (talk) 22:00, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Did you change your mind?
You've closed DR for File:NikolaiGres.jpg as no consensus, leaning to keep and then deleted the file. Did you change your mind or just a misclick? Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 22:24, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Materialscientist, see my post about 8 sections up. —teb728 t c 22:40, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Let us continue here. Could you clarify "The photo is in fact replaceable by a photo already in the article" please, namely "photo already in the article"? Materialscientist (talk) 22:47, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Alexandrov Ensemble soloists#Nikolai Timofeyevich Gres shows a PD photo File:Nikolay Timofeyevich Gres.jpg which shows the same person as the non-free File:NikolaiGres.jpg. —teb728 t c 23:54, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. I misunderstood the fair-use rationale, and it was indeed thin. Fastily, you might need to correct the DR resolution for the sake of the image uploader. If you want me to change my vote (given this discussion), you can reopen and then reclose it. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 00:10, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
- Alexandrov Ensemble soloists#Nikolai Timofeyevich Gres shows a PD photo File:Nikolay Timofeyevich Gres.jpg which shows the same person as the non-free File:NikolaiGres.jpg. —teb728 t c 23:54, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Let us continue here. Could you clarify "The photo is in fact replaceable by a photo already in the article" please, namely "photo already in the article"? Materialscientist (talk) 22:47, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
please restore ... as user page at least ... thank you!
RIGHT! What's all this then?!? (Monty Python ref)
Instead of releasing the page in the custody of the parent, one of your bobbies clubbed my page to death without reading the content of my contest (below).
Please dig my page up out of the mass grave or drag it off the pile and restore it ... as a user page, at least ... thank you!
vvvvvvvvv | content of my contest | vvvvvvvvvv
This page should not be speedy deleted because... --Democracy207 (talk) 19:23, 22 June 2011 (UTC) while it references the page specific to the Mayoral election, this page goes beyond it to the broader context of the general election which deserves its own article and does not yet have one ... for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_general_elections,_November_2011
While I sincerely appreciate diligence and vigilance in protecting the integrity of Wikipedia, in all honesty, my experience in the brief time since I have begun participating as an editor borders on inappropriately rapid vigilanteism!
The key to the success of the Wikipedia phenomenon, co-equal with conscientious discipline & maintenance of integrity, is the social culture which grows the community of editors & users and cements the strength & long-term sustainability of Wikipedia as an historic institution contributing mightily to the development a global culture of humanity, by humanity, and for humanity!
As a community organizer and a father, I understand the burden of leadership - especially real & true leaders who care deeply about their responsibility and its vital importance. Add to this the volume of the work given Wikipedia's popularity, and this equation yields harsh, terse communication. However, if we include a growth factor from positive socio-emotional dynamics, then the community grows and the burden per editor eases, thus strengthening Wikipedia.
I have carefully read the "speedy deletion" criteria and it does not apply. I have made most of the improvements I had originally intended to make. Upon careful review of the page, it should be clear that it stands alone by itself. The other races deserve inclusion and citizens deserve the ease of access to information afforded by Wikipedia - its very essence.
I find myself wondering, was the "speedy deletion" tag automated? I promptly contested the tag with my reasons. I have received no feedback. I know you are busy. I am clearly working to learn the rules & practices. I have improved the page and expanded my response to the "speedy deletion" tag. I would hope to hear back soon!
thank you!
Hi Fastily, I see that you have deleted the subpage i posted Friday. I originally meant that to be a draft for review, as I have been working with other adminstrators on ways to make the page ready for posting. Did I post the page in the wrong spot? Peridon suggested a practice user subpage titled draft. How would I go about doing thaT? thanks! Greatink (talk) 14:12, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- Looks like you forgot to remove the deletion tag when you created the userspace draft. I interpreted it as an author requested deletion. I've restored the page now and removed the deletion notice. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:02, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi, ok thank you. How will I know when it is administrator approved, ok to put up as an actual article? thanks! Greatink (talk) 13:32, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- I would recommend you request feedback on the article at this noticeboard. There are many editors there who are willing to review your draft article and give you feedback on it. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Wonderful, thank you for your quick responses and accurate help! Greatink (talk) 19:30, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi there. We are on the limits to have another edit war again. Since I ain't convinced with user:Jaume87 edits in the infobox, I've placed a tag in the lead of either Valencian Community and Balearic Islands about the neutrality of the article being disputed. I opened a section at Valencian Community's talk page to solve this matter. The tag clearly states that we should "not remove this message until the dispute is resolved".
Since, anon users 31.96.10.14, 178.103.128.109, 178.111.133.82 and 178.111.155.48 (who are clearly identifiable as sockpuppets of User:Jaume87) are constantly deleting the tag. Something close is happening at Balearic Islands.
This time I will prevent myself from falling again in 3RR, but I ask this user to be investigated (as per wikipedia:Sock puppetry) to see if a block is necessary.
Again I'm trying to follow the rules and I'm asking for your help. thanks. --Maurice27 About Me, Talk, Vandalize. 23:56, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Sockpuppet investigation. Maybe you are interested... --Maurice27 About Me, Talk, Vandalize. 00:14, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like the IPs have been blocked, and Valencian Community has been semi-protected. Kudos to you for being the better man and refraining from edit warring. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:53, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
The image was tagged as orphaned fair use, but as it is redundant as well I replaced the tag with {{db-redundant}}, which doesn't have the 7-day waiting period - is this not the right thing to do? ninety:one (reply on my talk) 21:29, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
- You flagged File:Cyprus police logo.jpg as redundant to File:Cyprus Police.svg (which has since been deleted as a copyvio - Commons cannot accept non-free content). In order for a file to be eligible for deletion under F1, both files (the original and it's redundant copy) must of the same file format, no exceptions. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:59, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Headsup - Reply
Hi there FASTILY, VASCO from Portugal here,
thanks for the headsup, mate! What particular edit do you mean? --Vasco Amaral (talk) 22:05, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
- Regarding your verdict after a user asked for page protection on that article: with all due respect, but the page was vandalized this whole day (23/06), that's pretty recent. Attentively - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 23:26, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Declined Speedy Deletion nomination for Bhaag D.K. Bose
I have declined your nomination because it does not meet the criteria for A7: the article is about a song, not a person, group, etc.
It would also not meet A9 as there is an article about the artist.
I am going to remove the lyrics in the article, though, as that would be a copyright violation .
Regards, PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 01:06, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- I wouldn't know anything about A7; definitely not my area of expertise. Rather, I interpreted this tag as A7. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 01:08, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Elathur, Sirkali
Hello Fastily, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Elathur, Sirkali, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to villages. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 01:39, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Sinusoothe
You have deleted my page because it is unambiguous advertising and promotion however it was never intended to be any of these. The page was meant to be informative about the brand. Do you have any suggestions on how the page could be re-worded or anything else so that it could be reinstated? Other brands have been included in Wikipedia and I assume it is the way I have constructed the article that has contributed to it's deletion, not the article subject itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frederik73 (talk • contribs) 12:20, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- User_talk:Frederik73#Re:Sinusoothe -FASTILY (TALK) 18:01, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
please restore ... as user page at least ... thank you!
RIGHT! What's all this then?!? (Monty Python ref) One of your bobbies clubbed my page to death without reading the content of my contest (below). Please dig my page up out of the mass grave or drag it out of the pile and restore it ... as a user page, at least ... thank you!
vvvvvvvvv | content of my contest | vvvvvvvvvv This page should not be speedy deleted because... --Democracy207 (talk) 19:23, 22 June 2011 (UTC) while it references the page specific to the Mayoral election, this page goes beyond it to the broader context of the general election which deserves its own article and does not yet have one ... for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_general_elections,_November_2011
While I sincerely appreciate diligence and vigilance in protecting the integrity of Wikipedia, in all honesty, my experience in the brief time since I have begun participating as an editor borders on inappropriately rapid vigilanteism! The key to the success of the Wikipedia phenomenon, co-equal with conscientious discipline & maintenance of integrity, is the social culture which grows the community of editors & users and cements the strength & long-term sustainability of Wikipedia as an historic institution contributing mightily to the development a global culture of humanity, by humanity, and for humanity! As a community organizer and a father, I understand the burden of leadership - especially real & true leaders who care deeply about their responsibility and its vital importance. Add to this the volume of the work given Wikipedia's popularity, and this equation yields harsh, terse communication. However, if we include a growth factor from positive socio-emotional dynamics, then the community grows and the burden per editor eases, thus strengthening Wikipedia. I have carefully read the "speedy deletion" criteria and it does not apply. I have made most of the improvements I had originally intended to make. Upon careful review of the page, it should be clear that it stands alone by itself. The other races deserve inclusion and citizens deserve the ease of access to information afforded by Wikipedia - its very essence. I find myself wondering, was the "speedy deletion" tag automated? I promptly contested the tag with my reasons. I have received no feedback. I know you are busy. I am clearly working to learn the rules & practices. I have improved the page and expanded my response to the "speedy deletion" tag. I would hope to hear back soon! thank you! Democracy207 (talk) 12:16, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- Although I want to thank you for contacting me, part of me is screaming, "Run away! Run Away!" (Monty Python). Sorry, I couldn't resist! LOL I realize that the deletion of your article must be frustrating. In all reality, once an article is flagged for deletion, the page may be deleted at any time, if it unquestionably meets the speedy deletion criteria, or if an explanation posted to the talk page is found to be insufficient. While I personally don't agree with this, no response from the deleting administrator is required. I have to be honest, I read your rationale on the talk page and fully expected the administrator to agree and simply move the article to a proper title. He must have seen something that I didn't. I apologize for any frustration that may have resulted from my initial flagging of the article. That said, please go to the talk page of the editor that deleted your article. Here is a link: Fastily. Make your petition known there. In all sincerity, while the humor is welcome, I would suggest saving all the rhetoric and simply request that the editor userfy your article. When you are finished with your article, contact him again for feedback before considering moving the article to the mainspace. Anything less may end in the same result as this last version. If you need additional assistance or have questions, please feel free to contact me. Best regards, Cind.amuse 13:12, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- Sounds reasonable. Done at User:Democracy207/Portland Maine general election November 8 2011 -FASTILY (TALK) 23:46, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- Sounds reasonable.
Deletion review for Steven Crowder
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Steven Crowder. 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. 5minutes (talk) 00:23, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi! I am sad about the Wes Cowan deletion
I saw the History Detectives show on PBS, and wanted to find out where Wes Cowan was from. I started at Wikipedia, but his article was deleted. Fortunately, IMDB had his bio. I don't know why he got deleted, and I'm sure you meant well, and I am a nobody, but I think he may deserve to be reinstated. He's been on a bunch of episodes, and it seems like any time I want to find an obscure comic book character that appeared once or twice, I can find them on wikipedia. This was the first time I tried to find someone when they didn't show up. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.11.66 (talk) 02:07, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
- I'm sorry to hear you were disappointed the article had been deleted. Although he may be a public figure, it appears Mr. Cowan did not meet Wikipedia's general notability guideline, essentially our benchmark for topical inclusion. Sorry, FASTILY (TALK) 19:37, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
I tagged this file for speedy deletion as F6, but then noticed that that only referred to files with boilerplate fair-use tags. I then re-tagged it as F9, since the claim of "I (user_name) created this entirely by myself" was blatantly incorrect, as the image was of Time Warner's Lola Bunny. I'm now uncertain as to whether that applies either, as I don't know if it was copied from anywhere. So what would you suggest? Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:33, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hi there. You were right to tag the file for deletion under F9. Lola bunny is a trademark and/or copyrighted character of Warner Brothers. Regardless of whether the user drew this image themselves (In which Lola bunny would still be under copyright as a derivative), found it on a website, or scanned it from an offline source, a copyright violation, broadly defined, exists on Wikipedia when a user claims someone else's work as their own, or when a copyrighted/non-free file is uploaded under a free license. In this case, both these conditions have been met and a copyvio exists. Hope that helps to clarify things. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 18:46, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks! That does help clarify things! I don't really do image work, but I saw the file and knew it needed to be dealt with. Reaper Eternal (talk) 23:18, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Deletion of Media Diversity Institute page
I'd appreciate some guidance as to why you consider this article to be unambiguous advertising. It is an accurate description of the organisation and its work, complete with references where these exist. Moreover, the MDI or MDI projects are referenced in other Wikipedia articles - for example the link if the the article on the International Federation of Journalists references the Institute for Media Diversity (actually the same organisation) and links to a joint IFJ-MDI project, Media 4 Diversity, http://www.media4diversity.eu/.
If you can indicate sections of the article that you conclude are unambiguous advertising, I will be happy to consdier rewriting or removing them. But I have been very careful not to include any normative statements in the article. It describes the background to the MDI, its history, its aims and what it does.
I can find no sources for criticism of the organisation but would be happy to include any that you can direct me to.
Gherman317 (talk) 16:01, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
- User_talk:Gherman317#Re:Deletion_of_Media_Diversity_Institute_page -FASTILY (TALK) 19:33, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
I wonder if, as you did for some previous articles, if it is possible to make a semi-protection on some other vandalized articles : [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] [98] [99] :s :s
I know that there are too many articles, but that seems to be the only way to stop this guy...
Regards,
--Omar-Toons (talk) 19:28, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
- Indeed, I'm not particularly apt on semi-protecting that many articles, because it also prevents good-faith contributors from making useful edits. Tell you what, report any sockpuppets (both IPs and usernames) to my talk page, and if the behavior matches, I'll block them, no further questions. How does that sound? On a side note, would you find the rollback tool helpful in reverting this vandal? -FASTILY (TALK) 19:46, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
- I see, thanks for the answer :)
- Omar-Toons (talk) 21:02, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi
Hi, thanks for blocking Anton Abele so some sensible discussions can be held instead. Could you if you have the time please check out user ENCRYPTMATRON IP for any connection with previously blocked vandals. I having a gut feeling that the user has some connection to previous vandalism of some kind. You find the user on the Anton Abele article edits. Thanks!--BabbaQ (talk) 20:42, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
- Am looking into it, noticed it on another user's talk page. Amalthea 21:01, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Undrinkable Water
Why did you delete that article called Undrinkable water? I was going to use that article for a link for the section, "See also" in the article named, "Drinking water"
Eric567 (talk) 21:11, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
- That was explained here. Let me know if you have any specific questions. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:02, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Steven Crowder
The page was deleted again. However, the recreated page included several improvements to the sources and general editing to Wikify the article a bit better. Crowder has sufficient acting credits to qualify as a notable person, and one would think that his widely recognized political punditry would add to that. Exactly what needs to happen for this page to be left alone? 5minutes (talk) 21:20, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
- The page was originally deleted at WP:AFD via community consensus. You may request that the community's decision be reversed at WP:DR. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:05, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
- Actually, the community consensus, at least in the talk area, was that the page should have stayed put and been improved. I'm not asking for a dispute resolution - I am asking you to identify what specifically was wrong with the page you deleted in terms of notability, sources, etc. 5minutes (talk) 23:50, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Fastily, can you please restore the above file, seeing that its rationale passes now? Also I have developed it, in my sandbox here, which has a detailed analysis of the sample. Regards, — Legolas (talk2me) 12:49, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Gewis
You recently deleted a redirect, Gewis, because it pointed to a User page. This was only the case because the User in question had changed it a few hours earlier. Prior to that it was a legitimate redirect, and should have been reverted, rather than being deleted. It's page history and discussion must be preserved as part of a merge, so please restore it. Agricolae (talk) 01:57, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
- Looks like it has been taken care of. Thanks for letting me know. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:27, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Deletion Reasoning Bert Mizusawa
You deleted the deletion discussion for this page and failed to state your reasoning for deleting. The reasons the page was deleted previously are not longer relevant. You should read the deletion discussion with the original deleter and comparet the new and old articles before you delete. You did not even open the floor up to debate. What is your reasoning behind deleting this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Missclark (talk • contribs) 22:13, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
- This looks quite relevant to me. You may request that the AfD decision be overturned at WP:DRV. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:18, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
- I did. Thank you! Missclark (talk) 23:42, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
- Wait...are you saying the deletion discussion is relevant? Or rather the page is relevant? Assuming the former, from what I could tell back in June of 2010 (not 2011 so over a year ago). It looks like during this time it was deleted due to WP:COI because the individual was running for political office; but even at that time he would have been WP:N for WP:MILPEOPLE. He is not running for political office, and has received additional awards since that time. Why is it not WP:N? Thank you. Missclark (talk) 03:10, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- Just posted: I never received a determination on the deletion review of Bert Mizusawa which was deleted without cause by User:Fastily. User:Fastily deleted the article without reading it based on a discussion that took place over a year ago. The article Bert Mizusawa is WP:N per WP:MILPEOPLE. I request a review of the article that dates back before User:Fastily's groundless deletion on June 26 2011. Not the discussion that took place in June 2010. User:Fastily also deleted the talk discussion associated with this page for no reason. Thank you. Missclark (talk) 22:37, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- Do you have anything to justify your deletion besides irrelevant information from over a year ago? If the article in some way does not meet WP:MILPEOPLE it would help if you stated why instead of "Look at this that occured last year on a completely different article." Missclark (talk) 22:37, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- Just posted: I never received a determination on the deletion review of Bert Mizusawa which was deleted without cause by User:Fastily. User:Fastily deleted the article without reading it based on a discussion that took place over a year ago. The article Bert Mizusawa is WP:N per WP:MILPEOPLE. I request a review of the article that dates back before User:Fastily's groundless deletion on June 26 2011. Not the discussion that took place in June 2010. User:Fastily also deleted the talk discussion associated with this page for no reason. Thank you. Missclark (talk) 22:37, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Dignity Therapy
Fastily,
I'm not clear why you deleted the post on "Dignity Therapy". It's a specific form of therapy for patients with Advanced/Terminal cancer, and has been validated and published in multiple peer reviewed journals, including the Journal of the Amererican Medical Association (JAMA). I provided 10 references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tedwardspharmd (talk • contribs) 00:54, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- User_talk:Tedwardspharmd#Re:Dignity_Therapy -FASTILY (TALK) 07:01, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Deletion of Burra Record
Hello Fastily, I would like to query why you deleted the page Burra Record for copyright infringement when the discussion page of the article showed that the copyright holder had given permission for the text to be used. I had followed the process explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The copyright holder of http://www.samemory.sa.gov.au/site/page.cfm?c=2616 is the State Library of South Australia and I am a librarian there. Kind regards Joannalibrarian (talk) 04:53, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- This was explained to you here. Let me know if you have any specific questions. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:02, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Picture of Bobby Kimmel
You had previously deleted a picture of Bobby Kimmel - which I had uploaded with vague license info. I have since contacted the subject through their website and have received written permission to post the graphic under the CC Free Use with attribution license. I tried to re-upload the graphic, but it seems to be blocked. BobbyKimmel.jpg
Thanks, Ellis408 (talk) 05:37, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- Try reuploading the file again. Be sure to check the box for "Ignore any warnings". If the problem persists, let me know and I'll see what I can do. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:03, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Deletion of: Tiger IT Bangladesh Limited Page
Hi, The company information (of Tiger IT Bangladesh Limited) that was added was done in neutral way stating the facts. Please let us know what changes you require for the page to exist. It's is the pioneer in the field of biometrics application in Bangladesh, and till today this is the only Bangladeshi company to accomplish that. This is a noteworthy achievement for a software company in our country. More importantly, many of its competitors have their entry in Wikipedia, whereas, Tiger IT ranks number one in competition. All claims about rankings were provided with detailed and accurate references for verification as well. This is also the company that had a historic contribution in running the country's first software based voter registration system in 2007-2008. A company that performed AFIS matching in 80 million records is very rare and had the largest database of this kind at the time of this achievement (in 2008). These are milestones set by not just a company, but a country.
Furthermore, if I.R.I.S. corporation can have their entry, we must allow Tiger IT's article to be here as well. Not to mention, Tiger IT's competitors NEC, SAGEM, Cogent Inc., also have their Wikipedia entries. Please rather share with me how we can make this article better, or if you need to see sources of all the facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Freeway360i (talk • contribs) 05:41, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- User_talk:Freeway360i#Re:Deletion_of:_Tiger_IT_Bangladesh_Limited_Page -FASTILY (TALK) 07:04, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Goldstein Hill and West
Hi Fastily, I have posted the link for review on the page you showed me. How long does it typically take for an admin to get back to me? Thanks! Greatink (talk) 12:53, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Why
Why delete my article when they are other articles like it?
Goldblooded (talk) 17:41, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- That was explained to you here and here. Let me know if you have any specific questions. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:44, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough. So are you going to delete the others? ive already tagged one of them for deletion ; Although i think the Genocide episode should be kept, the others arent nessarary however. Goldblooded (talk) 17:46, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Westphal Invitational
Why delete this page when there are others like it. it was deleted in claims that it was for promotion when this claim is false. rather than delete, help make the page acceptable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Westphalbrock (talk • contribs) 18:15, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- User_talk:Westphalbrock#Re:Westphal_Invitational. On an unrelated side note, copying the first line of the section above is not very helpful to your cause: WP:OTHERSTUFF/WP:OSE. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:25, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Guidence needed on a conflict of interest issue
I tagged this article XRumer for NPOV and initiated a dicussion on the talk page. User BotmasterLabs removed another user's comment that was not supportative of his position. After reviewing BotmastersLabs and Bl00dsh0t6 contributions, XRumer is the only article that they has been involved in. Would you (or anyone else) mind reviewing the article, the article talk page and BotmastersLabs talk page? I'm looking for guidence on how to procede as well and a review of my actions so I can learn from them. I think I'm on solid ground in the direction I've taken, but I'm not real comfortable in proceding further without some advice. Thanks, Chris W4chris (talk) 19:53, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- I had a look, and I agree with your assessment. There is indeed some questionable activity going on at XRumer. That said, does this look right?. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:42, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- I'm somewhat confused. looking at Sockpuppet Investigation page shows the below line
- The following are Confirmed matches to each other, but all Unlikely to be BotmastersLabs.
- Does that mean that all the user names mentioned below that line are the same user with different accounts? Other than one or two unrelated edits, those users have kept themselves to the XRumer page.
- Should Mpcmpc be added to that list as well? W4chris (talk) 21:21, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- Well, according to the checkuser report, neither Mpcmpc or Botmasterlabs are socks/socks of each other. Nonetheless, I've blocked Bl00dsh0t6 and his socks. If Mpcmpc and/or Botmasterlabs become(s) a problem, drop me a line and I'll deal with them accordingly. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:32, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Jeff Current and Against All Will photos
I notice that you critiqued my photos for "Jeff Current" and "Against All Will". I am not very well versed in Wikipedia, and I think that these photos are satisfactory for this article. Do you have any suggestions for either providing rationale or replacing the photos? Non-copyrighted photos of this band are difficult to come by.--Jax 0677 (talk) 19:56, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- Could you please indicate the titles of the images? It's not clear what you're referring to. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:20, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- The two files in question are File:Jeff_Current_Photo.jpg and File:Against_All_Will_band_photo.jpg, posted on the Against All Will article--Jax 0677 (talk) 21:22, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- You need to fill in all parameters of the {{Non-free use rationale}} template on each of the files' respective file description pages. Once you have done that, feel free to remove the deletion tags. If you need help, let me know. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- The two files in question are File:Jeff_Current_Photo.jpg and File:Against_All_Will_band_photo.jpg, posted on the Against All Will article--Jax 0677 (talk) 21:22, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Care to explain your close on this file?
TT's arguments clearly did not reflect policy, and I thought I had demonstrated that. Jheald (talk) 07:37, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- When closing the discussion, I felt that the reasons given to delete the file were more compelling than the reasons given to keep it. Despite both carefully reading the article and considering your !vote, it is still unclear to me as to how the file is actually relevant to a reader's understanding of Evolution of the Daleks. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:45, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- Fastily's invited me to join this discussion, but I'm really not sure what I can say beyond, "I agree with the close." Jheald says my arguments "clearly" do not reflect policy. I would (obviously) disagree with this proof by assertion. Moreover, I would say that his arguments clearly do not reflect policy. Given that we were the only two people to participate in the deletion debate, and took opposite sides, this is hardly surprising. What is surprising is the fact that Jheald has chosen to complain about the closer's decision merely because he dislikes it. ╟─TreasuryTag►directorate─╢ 08:53, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- The question here is whether the understanding that the picture adds about the topic of the article -- this 45-minute TV episode -- is significant. Fastily evidently does not share my view that it is, so I was trying to explore the basis of his different perception. The points I have made for its significance are essentially objective, not subjective: that it was the major new creature design the story introduced, and as such it represented the most conspicuous and memorable aspect of the episode's production design, which it adds to reader understanding to actually see the realisation of. My understanding of the closing admin's role is to weigh the argumentation presented in the light of policy. As TT did not address these points about significance at all in his comments, I would have expected this FFD to have been closed either as "no consensus" or as "keep". Jheald (talk) 16:14, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- An FFD in which only two opposing editors participated. You would expect the closing admin to have agreed with your position. Is that it? ╟─TreasuryTag►Counsellor of State─╢ 17:50, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- The question here is whether the understanding that the picture adds about the topic of the article -- this 45-minute TV episode -- is significant. Fastily evidently does not share my view that it is, so I was trying to explore the basis of his different perception. The points I have made for its significance are essentially objective, not subjective: that it was the major new creature design the story introduced, and as such it represented the most conspicuous and memorable aspect of the episode's production design, which it adds to reader understanding to actually see the realisation of. My understanding of the closing admin's role is to weigh the argumentation presented in the light of policy. As TT did not address these points about significance at all in his comments, I would have expected this FFD to have been closed either as "no consensus" or as "keep". Jheald (talk) 16:14, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
CBMR deletion
Hi Fastily,
Can you explain specifically which portions of the page conformed to the G11 deletion policy? I wasn't aware my writing style was that of promotion or advertising but if so I apologise! Is it possible to revert the page to I may rectify this? Or have some guidelines on how to rectify the tone of the page? Regards, JStopford (talk)
- User_talk:JStopford#Re:CBMR_deletion -FASTILY (TALK) 16:12, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Thankyou for your response Fastily, is it possible to revert my page to its last status but transfer it somewhere out of main circulation so I may edit it without fear of deletion? Regards, JStopford (talk) 16:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- Certainly, I have created a userspace draft for you at User:JStopford/CBMR. Feel free to move it to the articlespace when you're finished working on it. -FASTILY (TALK) 16:18, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Re: Katherine Jefferts Schori
Why is it that you feel that I am vandalizing the KJS page. It is as if none of you even read what I have stated regarding the edits I have made. I am not doing anything anonymously, I registered so you would have more than my IP, and I have given rationale for my edits each time. You folks just change things back and offer no real rationale for why my edits are not acceptable nor why the article the way it is should be allowed to stand.
I am not trying to be a vandal. Nor am I trying to be partisan.I am seeking an alternative to present the material that KJS's detractors feel mightily should be included, but in a manner less disruptive than just inserting their material. Why is a new section that tries to address the fact that the controversy exists a problem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hermano Dahveed (talk • contribs) 16:46, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Controversial/questionable changes to an article should first be discussed on the talk page of the article in question so as to obtain consensus to make such changes. Otherwise, you may find that your edits are reverted as vandalism/POV pushing. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 16:50, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
AIV, RFPP, etc
Hey. Just wanted to toss you some kudos for your work on AIV, RFPP and others. It's good to know that someone with such prolific contributions is taking the time to thoroughly investigate every report before acting. Thanks. --causa sui (talk) 17:01, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hey, no problem, just happy to be able to help. I've seen you around doing excellent work as well, and I'd like to offer you the same thanks for what you've done. Have a good one. All the best, FASTILY (TALK) 19:13, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Deletion of my User Page
Hi there I am not particularly bothered, but was wondering why my user page was marked for speedy deletion and then deleted before I could contest it? I seem to have annoyed some rather vexatious wikipedians. I recal having left a draft article on there perhaps by mistake as it was not meant to be visible. Is that it? I have no interest in making my own page as it were really. But don't want to be tarred with a spammy brush undeservedly because some do not like my views or honesty (I post under my real name). Any guidance would be appreciated.--JaySorrels (talk) 17:46, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- All userspace content is visible to all editors, and promotional material is dealt with in the userspace as it is in the article space via deletion. Unless you plan to re-post the deleted promotional article on your userspace, you should have nothing to worry about. Let me know if you have any other questions. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:21, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Steve James Sherlock
Hi - Sorry to see you have deleted a stub for musician Steve James Sherlock on notability grounds. Steve has contributed to 2 major music acts - being The The and Marc and the Mambas (among others). He is indeed notable and worthy addition. Please can you reconsider this decision. Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.44.186.36 (talk) 18:44, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- The article was deleted via the WP:PROD process. This means that I can restore the page for anyone who requests it. However, I do not recommend requesting that PROD'd article be restored unless you plan to work extensively on the article yourself to address the issue for which the article was originally deleted, as, without improvements, the article may be Re-PRODed, or listed at WP:AfD. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:25, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello again - Many thanks for your helpful suggestions. Please could you restore the page? On a more practical note - How long do I have to work on the article myself before deletion occurs again? Thank you - people like you make Wikipedia Great — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.44.186.36 (talk) 19:41, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- Restored As long as you're working on it, it shouldn't be deleted. For your reference: WP:YFA, WP:CITE, WP:ADS, WP:MOS, WP:V, WP:NPOV, WP:POV, and WP:GNG. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 19:47, 28 June 2011 (UTC
Kind regards - I need to get to work on expanding the article
Indefinite block for 1007D
Hey, I saw that you were involved in blocking 1007D indefinitely. I was wondering if you could maybe help me out with him. His contributions to the article on The Downward Spiral are absolutely atrocious and have basically ruined it. His contributions elsewhere are also really terrible. Although he is blocked, my concern is that he may be unblocked for some reason relating to his vandalism and remain able to continue ruining articles non-vandalously. Do you know where I can bring this up? I've dealt with vandals before but not people serially ruining articles with poor content. Thanks a lot, LuftWaffle0 (talk) 21:12, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- WP:ANI would be the place to do that. Feel free to drop me a line if someone unblocks him and he continues disrupting the project. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 23:28, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Conditional unblock on user you blocked
I have proposed a conditional unblock at User talk:1007D and would like to have your opinion on it. Thanks, -- DQ (t) (e) 00:29, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- Works for me. Feel free to adjust the block length/unblock as necessary. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 00:31, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
c3controls (deletion)
Hello. I am new to Wikipedia and I've been having some trouble getting a page posted (and to remain) on Wikipedia about c3controls.This was the message you left:(G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of https://www.c3controls.com/c3-history.cfm)
I don't understand how this is considered a copyright infringement when I deleted the in-question text. I am in the process of approving the "history" material via the copyright owner and I understand why it was flagged. Once I deleted the information flagged for copyright infringement, why was the whole site deleted? Eedelst (talk) 19:22, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Aaron Rodgers
If you read the logs, you'll notice the page has actually been protected for nearly three years [100]. The person who requested unprotection was materially wrong on the facts. We can try this, but I suspect it will be a very short experiment, as the reason the page isn't being vandalised currently is because it was protected. Courcelles 21:31, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- I see. I have watchlisted the page; at the first sign of heavy vandalism, I'll reprotect the page. -FASTILY (TALK) 04:48, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Deletion of Burra Record
Hi Fastily, I came back to your talk page to see if you had responded to my question about the deletion of the article about the Burra Record newspaper, but it looks like you have deleted my question. I'm just trying to understand why content that a copyright holder have given permission to be reproduced on Wikipedia might have been deleted - I would like to contribute more articles based on information that is already published on my website, but I will not do so if they still run the risk of being deleted even with the permission. I'm a new to Wikipedia and am just trying to find my way around the principles/expectations of the Wikipedia community. kind regards Joannalibrarian (talk) 06:06, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry Fastily, I see your answer to my question above now - not sure how I missed it previously!
- Sorry but the explanation isn't sufficient because I had followed the process of donating copyright material and the discussion page reflected this. I realise that after the nomination for speedy deletion occured I could contest the nomination but the page was deleted so soon after the nomination (and I think this all happened in the middle of the night my time) that I did not have the chance.
Joannalibrarian (talk) 06:11, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Deletion review for File:FARC-child-soldiers.jpg
An editor has asked for a deletion review of File:FARC-child-soldiers.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. damiens.rf 14:18, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Talk page abuse
[101] Island Monkey talk the talk 18:08, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
ANI
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:03, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Hey, just an FYI, I was just about to decline the speedy when you deleted the page, oops. I looked at the other site here and that info was posted June 21, after it was already on Wikipedia. The other site copied the Wikipedia article, not the other way around, so it shouldn't have been a copyvio. Not that I'm 100% sad to see the article go, but it shouldn't have been a G12. Just dropping you a note, if you want to leave it deleted I definitely won't raise a stink! Thanks. :) -- Atama頭 00:22, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
- How embarrassing... Restored Thanks for catching that. I just saw two identical texts and deleted the page. Facepalm All the best, FASTILY (TALK) 00:27, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Spam on Wiki pages by one user
Can you review the recent contributions of user: 74.105.124.68? Looks to me like spam. Thanks, Chris W4chris (talk) 00:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
- Looks like a spammer to me. That said, I've given the IP a final warning. All the best, FASTILY (TALK) 00:29, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
- Cool, All of his edits have already been reverted except one and i'll get that one. Thanks, Chris
Tag-team threats from user:TreasuryTag and admin:Fastily
Ola;
Respectfully, if you don't want people "exaggerating/drawing unintended meanings from [your] words" then put a little bit more care into them. As an administrator you're commonly perceived as a "wikipedia policeman." When someone with authority, be it weight or height, badge or block button, says "be careful" it's almost always threatening to the person on the wrong end of the power dynamic.
And "Capisce?" is a mob reference to the vast majority of the English speaking Americas, mate, particularly when it's spelled wrong and other-wise out of context. I don't know what made you use that particular word at that particular time, but again you've left yourself open to interpretation,
Anyway, I'll get back in my box now. - Aaron Brenneman (talk) 01:37, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the note. I'll be sure keep those things in mind, particularly the "Capisce". Just proves it's been all too long since I saw the Godfather. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 02:23, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
rachel wade mugshot
Why was the mugshot for Rachel Wade deleted? Was it because I didn't link the source? There are numerous mugshots on criminal's pages on wiki...
I have re-uploaded the image with the source and author.
The source is http://www.dc.state.fl.us/ActiveInmates/detail.asp?Bookmark=1&From=list&SessionID=448422803
I now did the same thing as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tiffany_Cole.jpg
KING OF WIKIPEDIA - GRIM LITTLEZ (talk) 01:38, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
- In short, you failed to supply a valid license tag. That's why I deleted the page. Feel free to re-upload your files, but be sure to include a valid license tag on the file description pages. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:25, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Aveos Fleet Performance Inc. (deletion)
Hello! I am here to ask for some help. Few weeks ago, you deleted a page named Aveos Fleet Performance Inc. This company is in relation with the Air Canada Airline. I made a lot of research and I rewrote the article that was deleted. I was wondering if you could give me some feed back and let me know if it's ready to be published. Right now it was created as a user page, and the pictures are not uploaded yet, since I am waiting for the copyrights from the creator, I don't think there's any rush to upload them. User:Alfred ban/Aveos Fleet Performance Inc. I also have a french version in progress. Thank you for any help you could give me. Alfred ban (talk) 15:41, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- I hate to tell you this, but your draft reads like an advertisement. A few suggestions:
- Remove the section titled "Services"; this is purely promotional in nature, and will not add significantly to a reader's understanding of the subject.
- Revise all sections under "History" to make them less promotional in nature.
- For your reference: WP:YFA, WP:ADS, WP:GNG, WP:CITE, WP:N, WP:V, WP:MOS, WP:NPOV.
- Feel free to let me know if you have any other questions. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 16:32, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for the information, I will make some changes and if you don't mind I would love to get some feedback from you again.Alfred ban (talk) 17:01, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hello Again, so I made a few changes and someone from the outside (no name, IP adress) also made a few suggestions. If you could let me know what you think, so I could upload my contribution! User:Alfred ban/Aveos Fleet Performance Inc. Thank you so much once again, it was very helpful and I am now more familiar with Wikipedia! Alfred ban (talk) 12:27, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- Looks much better. Good work! Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 17:36, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- Awesome! my first article :) Do you think it would be possible to remove the template unreviewed article? thanks Alfred ban (talk) 17:42, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- Looks much better. Good work! Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 17:36, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
deletion of picture of gerald m steinberg
why did you delete it? it is mine. i said it was mine when i first put it up and again when the delete discussion came up. but now it is gone. any idea? thanks. Soosim (talk) 12:21, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- Can you provide the title of the file in question? It's unclear what you're referring to. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:34, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- Gerald M Steinberg.jpg - that was the picture.
- If you are indeed the copyright owner of the photo, send an email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, identifying yourself as the exclusive copyright holder, and choosing a free license to irrevocably release the file under. For more detailed instructions, you may wish to reference Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. Once you have sent that email, let me know and I'll restore the file for you. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:52, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Talk:Hebron rfpp
Hello Fastily, you declined to protect the Talk:Hebron page as the user accounts had been blocked. Please see this for continued disruption. Obviously the account should be blocked, however the user in question, Runtshit, has no problem making more accounts (a look at Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Runtshit should establish that). nableezy - 18:36, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- I see. User(s) blocked. and Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:47, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Apparently the user also has some sleeper accounts with which he was able to make the needed edits to become autoconfirmed. See here. Could you please keep an eye on this page, or provide suggestions on what to do here? nableezy - 20:03, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi Fastily, a new sock has appeared ([102], [103]. nableezy - 20:36, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
ANI notice: Bluerules
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Bluerules. Thank you. Erik (talk | contribs) 04:33, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
- Well, FWIW, if he violates 3RR again, report him to WP:AN3 or leave a note on my talk and I'll deal with him. -FASTILY (TALK) 17:12, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
YGM
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
--The Σ talkcontribs 06:56, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
File:ErnestLucasGuest.jpg
Please could you let me know why you chose to delete this file? The result of the discussion was 'relisting' not 'delete', so I'm somewhat befuddled. Thanks, FunkyCanute (talk) 16:35, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
- I used the old link to delete the page. My bad. The more up-to-date discussion is at Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2011_June_15#File:ErnestLucasGuest.jpg -FASTILY (TALK) 17:08, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks
Just thought I'd say a quick thank you for doing all the work with the speedy deletes and page protection. Always good to see my work on NPP reaching fulfillment! Reichsfürst (talk) 16:58, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
- User_talk:Reichsfürst#Re:Thanks -FASTILY (TALK) 17:11, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
This article which you just deleted has been recreated. PLease delete the same. Cheers! — Abhishek Talk to me 17:58, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
- Done Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 18:48, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
- Would a create protection be applicable for the page? — Abhishek Talk to me 18:49, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Your deletion of Sonny Graham:
Thanks for taking care of that. There is an AFD that was underway when the hoax became clear. I don't know how to close AFDs, so if you wouldn't mind doing it, I would appreciate it. LHM 00:30, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Image
Hey Fastily. I'd nominated this image for deletion as it is now redundant, however only the page was deleted. Can the image be deleted as well? Thanks!--Gordonrox24 | Talk 01:07, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
- Certainly. I've nominated it for deletion at Commons. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 01:09, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
- Oh crap it was on commons? I missed that one. I dropped the ball. Should have never been on commons in the first place. darn. Sorry!--Gordonrox24 | Talk 01:17, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Deletion of Meetplansolve
I posted a page for the project manager meetplansolve. This was marked for deletion under G11 as advertising. Please let me know how I can correct this. There are plenty of software products and websites on wikipedia, so advise as to what the difference is. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jas891 (talk • contribs) 03:26, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
- User_talk:Jas891#Re:Deletion_of_Meetplansolve -FASTILY (TALK) 09:26, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
FYI
MikeSchinkel left you a message about your deletion of Wistia on Talk:Wistia. I deleted the talk page because it was orphaned, but I thought you might want to read the message left to you. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:32, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
More than 7 days?
[104] 09:00, June 30, 2011 Fastily (talk | contribs) deleted "File:Emblema tavr2.png" (Deleted because "F5: Unused non-free media file for more than 7 days". [105] Latest revision as of 02:09, June 30, 2011 last I checked 7 hours is not 7 days. I'd wanted to check the rationale on the previous image for consistency regarding the new image, which I should have been able to do.--Crossmr (talk) 08:01, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
![[104]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Upload&wpDestFile=Emblema_tavr2.png){kind=link}
shach
where can i get a free one? Chesdovi (talk) 13:01, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
- Pardon? -FASTILY (TALK) 17:06, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
possibly libelous statements
Can you check out Sorenson's Ranch School, the Controversy section really sounds libelous and the references cited do not seem to be credible sources. Thanks, Chris W4chris (talk) 22:23, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
- Textbook libel is libel, regardless of how many sources it has. I've gone ahead and removed the offending section. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 23:34, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
- Um, it isn't libel if it's true. Truth is an absolute defense against libel in American law, which is the only law that matters for our purposes. This is an abstract comment — I have no idea whether the allegations in question are true. --Trovatore (talk) 23:44, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
- The section that you removed as libelous was replaced. I've reverted it. Would you consider putting a semi-lock on editing by unregistered users? Thanks, Chris W4chris (talk) 20:38, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
- Certainly, Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:44, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
- Certainly,
- The section that you removed as libelous was replaced. I've reverted it. Would you consider putting a semi-lock on editing by unregistered users? Thanks, Chris W4chris (talk) 20:38, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
- Um, it isn't libel if it's true. Truth is an absolute defense against libel in American law, which is the only law that matters for our purposes. This is an abstract comment — I have no idea whether the allegations in question are true. --Trovatore (talk) 23:44, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
"Truth is an absolute defense against libel in American law", Is wikipedia under American law? if this subject has controversy, it has controversy right? Do you want proof that this has controversy? you just removed that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.223.53.70 (talk) 18:28, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, Wikipedia is under American law. Specifically the law of the State of Florida. No law outside the United States is binding on Wikipedia, although it may be binding on individual editors. --Trovatore (talk) 18:30, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your response, sorry to hear that (European Dutch here, we have freedom of speech). I read and spoke to a lot of people about this school and they broke human rights, but US, well if you bring enough money there is a way to allow that kind of behaviour. Sorry to bother you and (mis)use your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.223.53.70 (talk) 21:38, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
- I am not really following your point, or perhaps you didn't take mine. I was responding to Fastily's claim that the statements were libel. My point was that, under American law, they are not libel if they are true. I do not know whether they are true, and I expect that Fastily does not know either, though I suppose the latter proposition is one for which I have no direct evidence, just the indirect evidence that it would be quite a coincidence if he did know this rather obscure thing. --Trovatore (talk) 22:07, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Saimir Pirgu
Did you notice when you deleted Saimir Pirgu that part of the article had been rewritten since it first appeared? As for your assertion of "unambiguous copyright infringement": please note that there are not many different ways to enumerate a subject's past performances and the list of opera houses and conductors of her/his career. Lastly, shouldn't a speedy deletion be announced with a notice?
The subject seems notable to me and the article should be restored. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 08:45, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
- I have requested comment from the user who originally tagged the page. -FASTILY (TALK) 09:33, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
- Without having the article available to show comparisons, all I can say is that I felt it was obvious that the rewrite simply moved words around in from a copyrighted text. The similarities were completely outside of any list of performances. The Duplication Detector picked up enough of a comparison, in my opinion, to delete the page but it missed a large amount of comparable text due what looked like an issue with accents and abnormal characters.
- @Michael Bednarek, are you arguing that the article should be restored because it wasn't a copyvio or because the subject is notable. I made no assumption about the subject's notability, the speedy had nothing to do with notability, and Fastily didn't delete the page because of notability. Lastly, Twinkle should have placed a notification on the author's talk page. If it didn't, I can't really speak to its error but I can apologize to WP as I do agree with the strong consensus that authors should be notified. I primarily patrol a large backlog of new pages and I don't generally worry about Twinkle performing properly as I feel it's incredibly less important when weighed against the danger of Wikipedia committing copyright violations or allowing advertorial pages to be created.
- I'm going to be busy today but I'd be happy to continue this discussion if needed. OlYellerTalktome 11:56, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
- (My raising of notability was a red herring and I shouldn't have.)
- As to procedure: I never saw a G12 speedy notice, only a banner which flagged a possible copyright issue and provided a link to the toolserver for a textual comparison. This made me start to reword the article; as I had only dealt with the first two paragraphs or so, I left that banner. Next thing I noticed was that the article had been deleted.
- As to the assessment of "simply moving words around from a copyrighted text": my point is that lists of past performances etc. will inevitably be very similar. Back to my original question: Did you notice when you deleted the article that it was no longer in the originally flagged state? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 09:27, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Picture licensing issue
Hi, would you mind looking at the page File:CirrusField-color.jpg? It seems that a tag has been applied which requires that the initial image description page be examined to look for whether disclaimers had been added. As the original page is now deleted, I cannot see it. Would you mind taking a look for me. By the way, this is what prompted the question, so I thought I'd ask the expert! (It's also why if I ever become an admin I don't plan on doing image work—the copyrights are so confusing! ;) ) Reaper Eternal (talk) 10:41, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
- I've adjusted the license appropriately. All the best, FASTILY (TALK) 05:57, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks! Reaper Eternal (talk) 10:28, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Coin images
I just hda a question about some deletions you did regarding American coin images. There were several that appeared ti have as many or more editors voting to keep it than there were to delete it indicating that the deletion was against consensus. Do you have some additional justification to validate the deletion of these images? --Kumioko (talk) 18:47, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
- Could indicate the title of the image in question? It's unclear what you're referring to. -FASTILY (TALK) 05:58, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Milly Dowler image
Hi Fastily, I see that you deleted File:Milly Dowler.jpg. Could you let me know what information would need to be added to a replacement file? Licensing info obviously, but I was a bit unsure of exactly what else needed to be on the file beyond what was there. Thanks, --BelovedFreak 20:34, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
- I have restored the file and made the appropriate changes. You should be good to go now. -FASTILY (TALK) 06:01, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Adminship
Is there a need for additional admins to accomplish mundane tasks (such as your deletion per my request of my user talk sub page)? And to do mundane things that regular users can't? I ask because I have the time, I've been a Wikipedian for 7 years now and know that admins do a lot of things behind the scenes to help things go along smoothly. I haven't made the unofficial 2000 edits requirement (though including IP edits I probably do), but have certainly been around long enough to see there's a lot of backlogs; I've gotten so much out of Wikipedia (meaningful contribution and use) if needed I'd like to help spread the workload.
Regards, --TimL (talk) 07:03, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Angel Air Records
The article was previously deleted as per this. It is a recreation. --Russavia Let's dialogue 07:18, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
- Ah, well, in that case, I recommend you re-PROD the article. G4 only applies to WP:XfD discussions, not PROD deletes. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:35, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
File redirects
You are checking the redirect aren't linked from project/userspace and so on? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:50, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
- It isn't a problem as long as there are no links to the mainspace. Did I miss any mainspace links? -FASTILY (TALK) 17:59, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
- I hadn't checked :) Thanks for the clarifcation Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:21, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
A cup of coffee for you!
|
To keep you awake analysing all those NFUR's :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:22, 2 July 2011 (UTC) |
RfA Decline
Declined, Candidate has tendency to apply policy with 'liberal' interpretation, has tendency to botlike action, and has been cited as being uncommunicative in the past ( see their talk page archive for further details), It should also be noted that that said user has been previously blocked over certain edit behaviour and it should not be policy to 'reward' actions that lead to blocking. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:42, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
- Alright, no worries. If you ever change your mind in the future, don't hesitate to let me know; I'm sure I'll still be happy to nominate you. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 20:53, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
For future reference, WP:LTA/MG states that MascotGuy socks' userpages shouldn't be touched; I've tagged it for deletion. No one has managed to get any response from him yet, and he's apparently been at this for 7 years. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 20:34, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
RE: Read me!
Thank you for considerate me for be an admin, but I decided that in the upcoming two or three years I do not like to be an admin. The main reason is that I do not speak English very well, it may not be a problem, but I do not want to block somebody because I misunderstand their edits. Also, some of my editing may not be welcomed to some users, and it's needed to be an admin. I really liked that you were the first admin who officially liked my editing for been an admin, but I'd like to grow-up (I'm almost 20) before be one. When I believe it is time, I'll create my RFA. Thank you Fastily. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 21:33, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
- No worries, go for it when you're ready! If you change your mind in the future, and would still like me to nominate you, don't hesitate to let me know. All the best, FASTILY (TALK) 22:33, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Your deletion of William Denys, knight redirect page
In performing the above action all the pages which linked to that article, previously moved to William Denys by another editor, have now lost their link. Surely there must be safeguards before such redirect pages are deleted. Should you have made sure that the links would be preserved before you made the deletion? How did this happen? (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 22:21, 2 July 2011 (UTC))
- It's been resolved. Thanks for letting me know. -FASTILY (TALK) 22:35, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for your speedy response. Something very odd is happening to another article I'm involved in, of a similar nature - Maurice Denys. It has been moved, (from Maurice Denys, knight), apparently without any log in the edit history???. Again, links to the newly titled page have been lost, presumably because whoever did the move then deleted the old redirect page. These old redirect pages must be retained, else all the links must be re-created if they are to be deleted. This has got to stop. Can these links be restored? I can't remember now which articles linked to the former page. A lot of work has been lost. Who is doing this? If it continues great damage will be done to the links to many other articles. Am extremely concerned. (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 22:53, 2 July 2011 (UTC))
- It appears no content ever existed at Maurice Denys, knight. We're losing any content/page history at that title so there's no need to worry about it ;) Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 01:33, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for your speedy response. Something very odd is happening to another article I'm involved in, of a similar nature - Maurice Denys. It has been moved, (from Maurice Denys, knight), apparently without any log in the edit history???. Again, links to the newly titled page have been lost, presumably because whoever did the move then deleted the old redirect page. These old redirect pages must be retained, else all the links must be re-created if they are to be deleted. This has got to stop. Can these links be restored? I can't remember now which articles linked to the former page. A lot of work has been lost. Who is doing this? If it continues great damage will be done to the links to many other articles. Am extremely concerned. (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 22:53, 2 July 2011 (UTC))
Something shiny for you.
|
|
The Admin's Barnstar | |
| For your solution(s) to the troublesome Because You Left vandal and for being one of the most efficient admins I've experienced on the site. Thanks. That Ole Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 22:50, 2 July 2011 (UTC) |
Your Deletion of Curry Center
Hi, I noticed you've deleted the article Curry Center on the grounds that it was "exclusively promotional" (G11). I believe that as a restaurant, it deserves an article of its own. To the best of my knowledge, the article contained neutral information from a purely academic point of view. It was by no means "unambiguous advertising or promotion." Upon placement of the speedy deletion tag in the article, I contested it in the talk page, but the article was still deleted without any further notice (though I was away for a while and could not see the talk page during the time; I'm judging that it was deleted "without any further notice" by the fact that no message has so far been left on my talk page after I contested the speedy deletion tag). I would like to kindly request you to undo your deletion of the article, or at least specify how exactly you see the article as having been "exclusively promotional" so that we may improve it and iron out any chinks. Thank you :) Krandine (talk) 00:04, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
- User_talk:Krandine#Re:Your_Deletion_of_Curry_Center -FASTILY (TALK) 01:31, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
I don't get it
By your own closure, the decision at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2011_May_26#File:Duke_and_Duchess_of_Windsor_meet_Adolf_Hitler_1937.jpg was keep. What's going on?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 12:21, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
- [106] -FASTILY (TALK) 17:57, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
- Got it, fixed it, thanks!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 04:42, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
![[106]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=&user=Fastily&page=File%3ADuke+and+Duchess+of+Windsor+meet+Adolf+Hitler+1937.jpg&year=&month=-1&tagfilter=&hide_patrol_log=1&hide_review_log=1){kind=link}
Deletion policy
What is the policy about new users setting up articles for deletion? User:German Music only 3 edits is nothing other than trying to delete the Norman Langen article. Do you think it's possible that he is a sockpuppet? The fact that this user is familiar with how to delete articles is a clue that this is a possibility. Kingjeff (talk) 01:38, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
- Hi there. I consulted with a checkuser, but they were unable to find any socks associated with User:German Music. I'm afraid we can't do anything unless we know who the sockmaster is. Sorry, FASTILY (TALK) 04:07, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Deletion of Everybody's Free (To Feel Good) and Rozalla
Hi Fastily! It's a big surprise for me when seeing these pages have been deleted with the reason "Vandalism". They have been in my watchlist for a long while, and I don't know exactly why they consist of vandalism. Is the deletion a mistake? Thanks for your reply and sorry for my bad English! --Europe22 (talk) 06:52, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
- Looks like the pages were vandalized and then tagged for deletion. I could have sworn I checked the history before deleting...but alas...no? Restored and vandalism reverted. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:03, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi!
My recently made page, Maharishi Vidya Mandir, Chennai has been deleted to you, and the reason being cited is "advertisement". I am a student of the school and have no role in advertising. Nevertheless, since there exist so many articles on schools and colleges, could you please tell me how to write effectively next time, without "advertising"? And could you kindly point out where exactly did my article seem to have words/sentences which seem to "Advertise"? I don't mean to offend you but in my belief that whatever I posted was just what most other school articles would have, including facilities, etc. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbanskota08 (talk • contribs) 07:45, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
- User:Fastily/E#G11 -FASTILYs (TALK) 08:23, 3 July 2011 (UTC)