User talk:Explicit/Archive 14

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10 ← Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 → Archive 20

File:Paul_E._Kingston.jpg

Hello,

You were the Admin who made the call to keep File:Paul_E._Kingston.jpg, see (here). Another user is attempting to hide this by removing your {{Rk}} tag and put it up for deletion. I would appreciate it if you could comment at the [Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2011_November_17#File:Paul_E._Kingston.jpg|Files_for_deletion]] page for this file. Additionally I have noticed that the user is removing the {{Rk}} to hide the fact that an admin made the call already.--ARTEST4ECHO (talk/contribs) 20:48, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Question

Hi, I was wondering if a user talk page can be speedy deleted, as you did in User talk:MehranVB/Archive1 ?! In fact 09:46, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

I see you have been inactive for more than 40 days. I am going to ask for undeletion. Regards, In fact 14:09, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of 'The Rej3ctz' page

Dear Wikipedia Administrator,

I represent JRH Entertainment Group, the management company of The Rej3ctz. We recently created a Wikipedia page, titled 'The Rej3ctz,' that was deleted for reasons concerning G12: Unambiguous Copyright Infringement from their Myspace page. We are the original writers/owners of the copyrighted information and request to have The Rej3ctz bio and photo on the Wikipedia page restored.

Rej3ctzNWO (talk) 23:10, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Christian Natividad JRH Entertainment Group 1542 Cassil Place, 2nd FL Hollywood, CA 90028 P:(323) 784-3890

Happy holidays

Happy holidays.
Best wishes for joy and happiness. Hope you have a great one! Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 00:15, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Hope you have a good one! Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 06:29, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Please restore ""File:Badwareunderinvestigation.png", improperly deleted.

You deleted File:Badwareunderinvestigation.png for lack of a fair use rationale. That file was licensed under a Creative Commons license and thus was ineligible for deletion under that criterion. See the permissions information at File:Badwarecaution.png. Please restore the file. Thank you. --John Nagle (talk) 20:25, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Reloaded file from Internet Archive. No further action required. --John Nagle (talk) 20:55, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

CYMA Systems deletion

There has been no follow up on this since I inquired in July. Can you undelete / unblock 'CYMA Systems' and I will either remove the offending citations or revise with new information? This is a legitimate business and we have been in existence for 30+ years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.191.115.39 (talk) 15:15, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Gerry Matatics

Hello, I noticed you deleted Gerry Matatics. I would like to get the content back because I contributed a lot to that article and would like to post the information on my personal website.

Paula Mairer

I am disappointed you deleted a page last September. I agree it probably needs more work. I feel that the page was more than notable enough to re-create it. Someone who sets 6 world records in running surely merits a page.Abichal (talk) 22:35, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

RavenDB article should be restored

It is quite notable software at this point. Here's an article in MSDN Magazine: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/hh547101.aspx

This page references it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Document-oriented_database — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rachkovsky (talk • contribs) 15:07, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Critical commentary on cover art and FFD closes when speedy deletion intervenes

Thank you for your remarks on Fastily's talk page (permanent link[1]) and I have replied there. I would be interested in your reaction but maybe Fastily's page (which has a very rapid turnover!) is not the best place. Both the problems I mentioned are common at FFD and are not specific to Fastily although his lack of feedback exacerbates the situation. Thincat (talk) 10:34, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I have left a response on Fastily's talk page. — ξxplicit 03:42, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. That was fine. I'll wait a bit to see if anything further happens and then go to WT:NFC. Thincat (talk) 09:15, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Deletion review for File:Reg cox civvy.JPG

I have asked for a deletion review of File:Reg cox civvy.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. --George Ho (talk) 03:14, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

You know... an image deleted under F5 doesn't need to be restored via DRV. A simple request here or at WP:REFUND would have done the job if the parent article gets restored. — ξxplicit 03:42, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

GA Thanks

On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to thank you for your contributions to Lupe Fiasco, which has fairly recently achieved WP:GA status.

This user helped promote Lupe Fiasco to good article status.

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:50, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Ted Robinson

Hello,

My name is Vitali Zatroutine, and I am a New Media student at Ryerson University, in Toronto, Canada. I work on media projects, and for one of my final exams, I have been instructed to create a false identity for educational purposes only. This is to help me develop skills on narrative, and to fully understand authenticity of an identity online. You deleted my page on Ted Robinson, an identity i created for a supposed "Invisible Person". This page was created entirely for my final examination. I understand you are very strict on creating a trustworthy community of information, but I do not plan on displaying anything offensive, or anything that might interrupt the flow of other pages. This is strictly educational. I would highly appreciate the opportunity to work on my assignment, and create a page for my false identity (even temporarily).

Thank you so much, this means a lot to me.

Vitali Zatroutine, New Media student at Ryerson University — Preceding unsigned comment added by LoadingShoe (talk • contribs) 02:33, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Grown-Up (EP)

The DYK project (nominate) 08:32, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of File:Biarritz.jpg

I noted this deletion this morning:

(Deletion log); 00:06 . . Explicit (talk | contribs) deleted page File:Biarritz.jpg ‎(Deleted because "F11: No evidence of permission for more than 7 days". (TW))

Despite what is reported here, I did send an email 7 days ago:


Subject: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/21/Biarritz.jpg

From: Brad Face <bradandelisabeth@yahoo.com> Date: March 14, 2012 4:42:47 AM EDT To: permissions-en@wikimedia.org

To Whom It May Concern:

I am the owner of the Dewis Collection, LLC.

I am the owner of this painting.

I am the creator of this image of this painting.

I am the owner of www.dewis.com, which also shows an image of this painting.

I give my permission for this image to displayed on Wikipedia

Brad Face, Owner Dewis Collection, LLC


I don't know what else I could have done.

I thought I was fully complying with the request. Ruedetocqueville (talk) 12:49, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Has OTRS followed up on your email? The wording doesn't specifically state which license you release your work under, so you should have received a response asking you to clarify that. If you haven't, it would be a good idea to email them again pointing to the deleted file and specifying exactly which license you have chosen. — ξxplicit 19:29, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
I received no response. I will re-send the email. Ruedetocqueville (talk) 01:59, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Zynga With Friends

I am curious why you moved Zynga With Friends (capital "W") and all its game titles (Words With Friends, Chess With Friends, Hanging With Friends, and Scramble With Friends to page titles with a lower case "w". If you check out each of the game titles in their respective app stores, you'll see they all have a capital "W". The Zynga With Friends website also indicates the proper studio title has a capital "W". I hope you'll consider reverting the page move.NinaSpezz (talk) 15:17, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Those articles were moved in accordance to MOS:CT. Because 'with' is a preposition, the first letter of the word should not be capitalized. This takes precedence over the way the game developer stylizes its game titles. — ξxplicit 18:49, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
I understand it's a preposition, but the MOS:CT in no way indicate it takes precedence over the composition creator's stylization. If that is the case, perhaps the MOS:CT should be revised?NinaSpezz (talk) 19:21, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia would have a lot of whacky article names if we started making exceptions to observe the stylization of the creator's work; SHINee instead of Shinee, the GazettE instead of The Gazette, DJ OZMA instead of DJ Ozma, or even worse, /\/\ /\ Y /\ instead of Maya. If you feel that MOS:CT could be reworded a different way that would better help other users in future cases, consider raising the issue on its talk page. — ξxplicit 19:46, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Lydia Simmonds (Margaret Tyzack).jpg

I saw that the file was deleted under F7 (violates non-free use policy). However, I wonder if you can restore the image back to one article that was rationalized; GSorby or other uploader may notice. --George Ho (talk) 02:58, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

 Done, and re-added to Margaret Tyzack. — ξxplicit 03:38, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Woods & Ether deletion and recreation

I created a page under a username that presented a conflict of interest issue. I deleted the page myself in order to recreate it under a appropriate username that represented no such conflict. Thank you for reading. Pocommunicate (talk) 01:15, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Avvasi Deletion

Hi there, in regards to the Avvasi page that was deleted this morning, I'm wondering how it a non-notable company and therefore deleted? Thank you (Kelliott14 (talk) 19:40, 26 March 2012 (UTC))

The text that was left on the article's talk page was as follows: "Article needs a little work, and I will see if I can clean it up a little later. Any other help would be good. The article *does* need better citations, from reliable sources. All the current citations do not establish notability by themselves. Won't tag for notability now, figuring (hoping) I can find some better references to add." — ξxplicit 23:47, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
Would it be possible to put this article back into draft mode, or Articles for creation so work can be done to improve the citing? Thank you. Kelliott14 (talk) 19:39, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
 Done, moved to User:Kelliott14/Avvasi. Please make sure to address the prod's concern before moving the page back into article space. — ξxplicit 21:51, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Explicit. You have new messages at Drmies's talk page.
Message added 18:25, 27 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
  • One more thing, Explicit. You got 40 archives, and that looks really impressive, but for the record I want to state that I may have fewer archives than you, but the individual archived pages are longer. I think we should have some standards here, so that this eternal popularity contest can be run in a fair manner. Toodles, Drmies (talk) 18:27, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
    • I've actually been meaning to clean up my archives. I had the habit of adding 25 threads per archive, but I want to start archiving about 50–80 bytes per archive. I wouldn't want to go any higher because I would probably end up having five archives. I can't look that unpopular, either. :( — ξxplicit 19:17, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Wow!

How on earth did you manage to clear that SD backlog in one millisecond? Magic? Jared Preston (talk) 19:28, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

With the help of my magic wand, anything is possible! — ξxplicit 19:32, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

But why did you leave all the talk pages? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:29, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll go back and delete those shortly. Unfortunately, Twinkle doesn't delete talk pages in batch deletions. — ξxplicit 19:32, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Reply

Hello, Explicit. You have new messages at SlimVirgin's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SlimVirgin (talk) 20:44, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Yukon Optics

I see you have just deleted Yukon Optics and related redirects. The company is a highly notable Belorussian, former Soviet optical equipment maker. I ask you to restore the article. (and take it to AfD if needed). -- Petri Krohn (talk) 05:11, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

 Done, the article and its redirect have been restored. Please make sure to address the concern, as it may still be nominated at WP:AFD. — ξxplicit 19:40, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. My original stub had a number of references. They were all lost when the article was edited by someone who seems to have a relation with some distributor. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 22:37, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

why did you delete Rome Area Museum?

why did you delete Rome Area Museum in dishonoring of Rome, Georgia history? you want to delete Chieftan Museum and Smithsonian too because you hate history and your own generation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.166.215.6 (talk) 00:54, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

That must be it. — ξxplicit 00:59, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Deleted file: File:Katparsonsviperroom.jpeg

Hello,

I finally got permission from the original owner of this image to display it on the Kat Parsons Wikipedia page, but as it took longer than 7 days the image was deleted. Sorry I didn't contact you sooner, I meant to but I forgot!

Here's the e-mail I got from Robert Peate, who owns the photo:

From: Robert Peate (rpeate@gmail.com) To: Sebastian (skmalm@gmail.com)

Hi, Sebastian. I took the photo in question, and I give permission for its use in the Kat Parsons Wikipedia article.

Robert Peate NLPhotos http://nlphotos.imagekind.com

Feel free to contact him to verify if you'd like!

Do I need to re-upload the image or can you bring it back somehow?

Thanks,

-Sebastian (SkrymSay)

SkrymSay (talk) 02:16, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi there. Unfortunately, that permission is still insufficient to allow use of this image on Wikipedia. At Flickr, the image is licensed under noncommercial use, which would make the image a candidate for speedy deletion under our speedy deletion criteria. Files licensed under a Creative Commons license must allow attribution and/or share-alike. Noncommercial and No Derivative Works are not suitable licenses for use on Wikipedia. — ξxplicit 20:41, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of File:Coat of Arms for H.E. Archbishop Christoph Card. Schönborn.svg

Salutations!

You recently deleted the image of Christoph Cardinal Schönborn's Coat of Arms. The reason for doing so was that there was no evidence of Permission (F11). The Editor (Mlpearc (Please note that the name of the person (and file) is incorrect. We were both talking about Schönborn and not Collins) who nominated the picture up for deletion. I informed him that:

  • I had put a request for permission at permissions-en@wikimedia.org as he requested.
  • I made that image in question. Any files that I used to make the coat of arms were listed in the information info box and sourced. I also verified in their licensing that I was allowed to modify their files without having to ask for explicit permission.
  • I asked if this was standard procedure as I have uploaded similar files on both Wikipedia and (especially) the Commons.

His response was simply that the matter had been resolved. Since I never had any problems with the other files, I assumed it was just an overeager editor who didn't read the info box and tagged the file. I waited for a response from Wikipedia Permissions but I never received one.

Can you please assist me in the correct way to proceed? I believe that the file does not deserve to be deleted and I would wish you can enlighten me on any errors in my logic/proceedings.

Thank-you very much.

Jonathan Ng 吳家明 16:21, 3 April 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ng556 (talk • contribs)

After taking a second look, it seems that I had misread the description of the image. There seem to be no copyright issues, so I have restored the file for you. Apologies for any inconvenience. — ξxplicit 19:01, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Pierre Vogel

You deleted the article of the german islamist preacher Pierre Vogel because of a lack of nobility. That seems quite strange for me, as this man is the most active german islamist and extremely popular among young muslims, especially among those who recently converted to islam. He is often interviewed in the german press as "the evil islamist" and is believed to be one of the most influential radical muslims in germany, according to the german security authorities. Maybe he is quite unknown outside germany, but that should not be a reason to delete the article. From Germany, --Antemister (talk) 13:27, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

I think you mean lack of notability, not nobility. Anywho, prior to the article's deletion, two users agree on the talk page (before it was deleted) that the individual did not seem notable per WP:GNG. If you'd like, I can restore the article if you plan to work on it so it can meet the general notability guideline. — ξxplicit 23:54, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Thought a correct the numerous spelling errors of my english... Anyway, I do not know the quality of the article, but deletion only because a lack of notability was not right.--Antemister (talk) 19:49, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Okay, I went head and restored the article. — ξxplicit 21:50, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Montauk Yacht Club image

Hi... Concerning the image of the Montauk Yacht Club: I do have permission from the owner of the image to use it, so I have re-uploaded the image complete with the emailed approval notice, per Wikipedia's guidelines. Please let me know if there are any issues with this. Thanks!Tbenzinger (talk) 19:36, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, if you could, please forward the email sent by the copyright holder of the image to permissions-en@wikimedia.org so it can properly be verified. — ξxplicit 21:50, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

About photos at the article of Nirman

Hi. I have seen that all the 4 files are deleted. I hold the copyright of the photos and I had donated those files to wikipedia. I had even written so in the description. What other procedures i should follow so that the photos will not get deleted? Thanks Abhijeet Safai (talk) 05:39, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

I have written this mail, as I saw your response to the earlier query.

from Abhijeet Safai abhijeet.safai@gmail.com to permissions-en@wikimedia.org cc amrut bang <amrutabang@gmail.com>, "sayali(nirman)" <sayali.tamane@gmail.com> date Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 12:08 PM subject Fwd: Photos deleted on Wikipedia mailed-by gmail.com hide details 12:08 PM (1 hour ago) Dear Sir / Madam, I am forwarding herewith 5 images. I herewith declare that they are being donated to Wikipedia. I am aware that these can be used for private or commercial use. The owners of these photos have no objection for that. I am forwarding the mail which permits the use of these photos.

Kindly let me know the further procedure if any to be able to upload these photos. Thanks

- Abhijeet Safai - Hide quoted text -


Forwarded message ----------

From: amrut bang <amrutabang@gmail.com> Date: Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 11:50 AM Subject: Re: Photos deleted on Wikipedia To: Abhijeet Safai <abhijeet.safai@gmail.com> Cc: "sayali(nirman)" <sayali.tamane@gmail.com>


Dear Mr. Abhijeet Safai,

Find the photos attached with this mail for the article about NIRMAN on Wikipedia.

It is permitted to use these photos for Wikipedia.

Regards, Amrut Bang Project Coordinator - NIRMAN. Cell: +91 9422501496

-- "There are no passengers on the Spaceship EARTH. We all are crew."

Abhijeet Safai (talk) 08:13, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Abhijeet Safai, the files you uploaded were deleted because you failed to provide proper license tags. Without them, it was impossible to determine which rights of your work you relinquished. — ξxplicit 22:29, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, I will provide proper license tags this time. Thanks for guidance. After putting these files, I would ask to have a look at it if you have time. Thanks Abhijeet Safai (talk) 05:12, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Mephisto Award Deletion

I feel that it's a bit insulting to have a criteria as "Does not appear to be a notable award". Kodansha is a well respected and established publisher in Japan, so I would think that an award given out by one of it's magazines would be considered as legitimate. Not to mention the award itself has paved the way for a lot of famous Japanese detective novelists since it's an award given for their rookie status at the time. At the same time, after going over the articles for deletion, your claim of "Does not appear to be a notable award" doesn't fall anywhere underneath the accepted guidelines and as the article creator, I would have at least liked a message on my talk page so I wouldn't have to find out and get blindsided like I did just now. I realize that the page was a bit sparse, but that alone is no grounds for deletion, especially when the page is young and I was waiting for help with the translation of the Japanese Wikipedia page. 1Q84 (talk) 07:17, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

The deletion was not meant to devalue the magazine or its award in any way. An editor (not myself) proposed that the article be deleted under the rationale "Does not appear to be a notable award". That person was responsible—but not required—to notify you of the article's pending deletion. As the proposed deletion went uncontested for seven days, it was procedurally deleted. If you'd like, I can restore the article upon request. — ξxplicit 22:29, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

I would appreciate if you could restore it very much. 1Q84 (talk) 14:44, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

 Done, the article has been restored. — ξxplicit 23:03, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

deleting templates per G6

Regarding Template:Fb team Cultural Leonesa, Template:Fb team Gaziantep BB, Template:Fb competition 2008-09 Prva HNL relegation play-offs, Template:Fb competition 2007-08 Prva HNL relegation play-offs, Template:Fb competition 2000-01 Prva HNL relegation play-offs, Template:Fb competition 2006–07 Prva HNL relegation play-offs, and Template:Fb round 2007 Copa Libertadores 1S: Could you either restore or orphan these? I agree the system is a mess, but we need to fix the articles before deleting them. 64.134.156.208 (talk) 14:04, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

I restored these whilst looking through the DB report, talk pages also restored. The Helpful One 15:54, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Shouldn't these deleted templates have been replaced with text instead? — ξxplicit 23:03, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Enzo Martinez

Hey I'd like some reason as to why you deleted the Enzo Martinez page. I see "your rules" for deleting an article and I think the Enzo page met them. It had plenty of sources for the content and was still in the process of growing and getting better. I hope you rethink this and know that I will be a constant editor of his page so that it adheres to Wikipedia standards. Thank you and please let me know because there are plenty of pages on European, South American, African, etc. footballers who have less content on their articles and no sources. Please reconsider. Rupert1904 (talk) 14:21, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξxplicit 23:03, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Enzo Martinez restoration

Hi, I saw you restored Enzo Martinez after the PROD was contested by the article's creator. However, his contention only came after it was deleted; does a challenge not have to be established before the seven day period has lapsed? Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 23:08, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Contesting a prod can be done before or after the article is deleted. The last line of WP:CONTESTED reads: If the article has already been deleted', please go to Requests for undeletion. It will be undeleted automatically on request, though it may then be nominated at WP:Articles for deletion. — ξxplicit 23:10, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of The world is a beautiful place & I am no longer afraid to die

I'd like an explanation as to not only why this article was deleted but why it was ever even considered for deletion. This group of musicians is extremely well documented and can be found everywhere from music publications and online sources as well as youtube. Removal was done I suspect due to personal dislike, is highly irresponsible and reckless. I'm not sure what you're playing at here by removing this article. A five-second search on the Internet will show you proper documentation. The article as well was very well documented. user name inhighspeed i'm not sure what else you want as far as i.d. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inhighspeed (talk • contribs) 00:49, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

The World is a Beautiful Place & I Am No Longer Afraid to Die was proposed for deletion by another editor with the rationale: No significant coverage found in independent reliable sources; does not appear to meet WP:BAND or WP:GNG. From the quick Google search I did, I saw very little coverage of the band and several just drive-by mentions; insufficient for the band to merit an article on Wikipedia at this time. — ξxplicit 23:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Your Final Judgment Thusfar

You are least in the kingdom of God. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.224.180.93 (talk) 11:42, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Uhh... okay. — ξxplicit 23:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

TopTenWholesale

Hello Explicit,

I received notification from my office yesterday that not only our wiki page for TopTenWholesale.com was removed by you, but also a wiki page that was done on me - Jason Prescott. Yes, I am more than familiar and have read the wiki guidelines. There should have been no reason for the pull-down. This has been very embarrassing to me and our staff. After scouring around wiki, I was just shocked that there are pages that exist like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinavasion , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kole_Imports , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alibaba_Group. With ease, I could submit to you 100's of wiki's that are in clear and blatant violation of the TOS. It was rather humbling to see someone post wikis on our organization and my personal achievements. It was also shocking to see wikipedia take down content and referenced material that is / was valuable, factual, significant and credible.

It is understood that mistakes happen. If you would please re-consider posting the entries back up and make live - it would certainly be appreciated.

The wiki entries were on Jason Prescott and TopTenWholesale.com

Best

Jason TopTenWholesale (talk) 19:47, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi there. As far as I can see, I don't think I deleted any of these articles. TopTenWholesale.com, JP Communications, LLC, Jp communications, Top Ten Wholesale, etc., were all deleted by other administrators. Most of these deletions occurred in 2007, long before I was an administrator myself. — ξxplicit 23:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello and thank you for the fast response. OK, so here you can see the page was pulled down April 8th : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jason_Prescott - and this image / file http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:JasonPrescottLA.jpg belonged to the wiki on Jason Prescott that was pulled down. I can also see that 2 other admins pulled down the page on TopTenWholesale.com that was up for 2 months: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TopTenWholesale.com - It just baffles me how any admin could make this error. All it takes is few strokes in google to confirm our significance and credibility. Can you please give me a hand to get this corrected? Thank you, in advance.

j TopTenWholesale (talk) 13:58, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I deleted User:Jason Prescott because it was a red-linked redirect after DGG (talk · contribs) deleted the target article Jason Prescott. The image File:JasonPrescottLA.jpg works just fine, it just isn't currently used on any page. It seems that TopTenWholesale.com was deleted as it was written by Expewikiwriter (talk · contribs), a user who was engaging in paid editing, which is strictly forbidden on Wikipedia. Although the company may be notable, its article was written in a promotional manner, which met the criteria for speedy deletion as unambiguous advertising or promotion. In order for TopTenWholesale to merit an article, it must meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles concerning companies. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Once that happens, then there should be no problem with creating the article. — ξxplicit 23:19, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much for this info. Yes, of course we have a zillion' notable references about Jason Prescott and TopTenWholesale.com - I am not aware of anyone paying a writer for a wiki. I'm sure someone has a screen shot of the wiki on Jason Prescott and TopTenWholesale.com . Can we resubmit to you and get this taken care of? Thank you.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasonpress123 (talk • contribs) 22:58, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

If you can, you could start a draft of the articles in your userspace at User:Jasonpress123/Jason Prescott and User:Jasonpress123/TopTenWholesale.com. Once you finsih up with that, I can take a look at the pages and see if they are fit to be moved into articlespace. — ξxplicit 23:28, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

And when the dawn came

You deleted this before the page was patrolled. What do we do? Bearian (talk) 00:14, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Someone else fixed it; never mind. Bearian (talk) 00:15, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Iron Range Ironheads vs Flyers.png

Least in the Kingdom of Heaven?? LOL... what did you do? Anyways... I've been trying to get help with this and no one has helped me, at least usefully. I uploaded this image (that you just deleted) and a bunch of others (one of which is listed for F11 deletion on the 15th) with permission from the author of the photo to post to commons on Wikipedia. The conversation was over facebook. I put the conversation on the permission part of the template and it didn't seem to be an issue for months. A week ago an OTRS admin puts the image up for deletion and tells me that my conversation with the guy isn't good enough... I have to prove I'm not a thief or something. I contact the guy on facebook again and ask him to e-mail permissions @ OTRS and tell them I have permission... a couple days later he tells me he did on the 4th... which should have kept the image safe from deletion... it's the 10th... it got deleted... as far as I can tell, I've shown due diligence that I am not violating any copyright laws with these images... can you help me rectify this situation? It seems like a shame to put in all this effort for nothing. DMighton (talk) 00:26, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I deleted tons of one user's subpages. I have become horribly unpopular with that IP. :( As for permission of the image, after reading the conversation, it seems that the author didn't specify which license exactly they released the images under. Stating "Creative Commons" by itself is insufficient. Creative Commons license#Original licenses lists the possible licenses, and only Attribution and Share-alike are free enough to be uploaded on Wikipedia. The other two (Noncommercial and No Derivative Works) would make the images eligible for deletion under F3 as unacceptable licenses. So, what needs to be done now is to have the author specifically state which Creative Commons license(s) she is willing to release her work under. If compatible with Wikipedia, that statement can be forwarded to OTRS and things should be sorted out shortly after that. — ξxplicit 00:38, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Ok thanks. Hopefully he hasn't had enough of this license stuff... to people not associated with Wikipedia, they seem to find it confusing and alien. I've personally taken to just taking my own photos just so I don't have to deal with these "hoops" to jump through... but when the subject is too far away to take a pic myself... my hands are tied. Thanks again. DMighton (talk) 00:55, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Files pending OTRS deleted

It seems that you deleted some files pending OTRS. Not sure if it was correct or not, but a user complained on my talk page. For your information, I've asked about them here: WP:OTRS/N#A user sent an OTRS e-mail but the files were deleted. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:03, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I have responded at the OTRS noticeboard. — ξxplicit 22:58, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Mohmand abdul.jpg

Hello. You have deleted File:Mohmand abdul.jpg because "F7: Violates non-free content criteria #1". (TW). I want to know why are these (File:Massoud 2000.jpg and File:Massoud and Qadir 2.PNG and File:Ahmad Shah Massoud.jpg) allowed under the same rationale and the one for Mohmand abdul not allowed?--TAzimi (talk) 12:44, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I have nominated two of the three images for deletion. One can be kept because this certain individual is deceased, and no free images appear to be available. Additionally, please note that other stuff exists; that does not make the original deletion any less accurate. — ξxplicit 01:20, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
For all of your work deleting files at CSD, FFD, and PUF, and for picking up where others unfortunately left off. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 00:04, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! It has been a while I've gotten a shiny gift. — ξxplicit 00:06, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

You deserve it. Probably deserved it a long time ago. I've only recently (for a few months) noticed your contributions as I mostly deal with files these days. Thank you for handling the behind the scenes work required from those of us who nominate everything under the sun. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 00:44, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Kim bed rest.jpg

How does it not meet the criteria? It was added as a joke, it serves no useful purpose, was previously deleted, and then readded. What does WP gain by hosting this image? ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 02:52, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

F10: Files uploaded that are neither image.... Already failed the criteria by being an image. If you'd like to see the file deleted, please nominate it at WP:FFD. — ξxplicit 23:33, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

File:David Domoney.jpg

Hi, Permission for this file was sent on 4th April. There is evidence of a license! Bobby987 (talk) 15:35, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Evidence of permission has yet to be verified. You may want to double check with OTRS to make sure they have received your email. — ξxplicit 23:33, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Could you please tell me how I contact OTRS? Bobby987 (talk) 09:12, 18 April 2012 (UTC) Thank you.

You can email OTRS at permissions-en@wikimedia.org. — ξxplicit 23:40, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Digital Bounce

The DYK project (nominate) 16:21, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Eric Gemna

Hello! I am extremely new to wikipedia and wanted to start editing a while ago. I created an article about myself for practice but not realized it was not a sandbox article. The article in question is here here and I have tried to delete it myself but it still appears in searches. I was wondering if it is possible to either permanently delete or make it not appear in searches. Egemnator (talk) 00:27, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Hmm... I'm not entirely sure how, to be honest. I tried to look for something helpful at WP:NOINDEX, but I'm not sure anything on that page addresses the issue. — ξxplicit 23:40, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Amet Han Sultan.jpg

Hey there,

The deletion review page of wikipedia suggested that speak to you concerning this file(File:Amet Han Sultan.jpg), thus I really want to ask; how come despite an argument made against the deletion of the file was it deleted without a viable reason? I find this to be unreasonable at best.

Thanks The Night and the Silent Water (talk) 21:46, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Your keep argument on the discussion page didn't really address the nominator's concern. The file was tagged with a non-free license and violated WP:NFG. Whether a deceased photographer would care about the copyright didn't really matter, as it's the copyright laws we're trying to abide by. Although you did assert that the image may be in the public domain, you did not verify that it was; as you argued to keep the file, the burden of proof to verify its copyright status was with you. — ξxplicit 23:44, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Ryad Boudebouz.jpg

Hi Explicit, you deleted the file I uploaded because of reason F11 (no permission). However, I emailed the permission letter to permissions-en@wikimedia.org and tagged the article with pending (meaning I sent the email in and I am just waiting for permissions to process it), so that it does not get deleted. However, you still went ahead and deleted it. Please restore it and give "permissions" time to approve/reject the picture. Thanks. TonyStarks (talk) 09:11, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi there. This specific image was tagged with {{OTRS pending}} for two weeks, and said tag does not make a file exempt from deletion. If OTRS can confirm permission, it will be restored on the spot. — ξxplicit 04:57, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, I guess I'll follow up with them. TonyStarks (talk) 06:23, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Article "List of trains run by Indian Railways" is long, unreferenced and links to several external internet sites

Hey, quick question for you. Should List of trains run by Indian Railways exist in its current form? It is somewhat indiscriminate, long, unreferenced and links to hundreds of external internet sites. I would like a second opinion before recommending to AfD. Thanks!--Jax 0677 (talk) 00:26, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

That article definitely a mess as it stands at the moment. This could probably be classified as an indiscriminate collection of information, and I can't really see this list being turned into a suitable encyclopedic topic. — ξxplicit 00:35, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2012 April 10 / File:Ladewlight

I am contacting you in reference to the recent deletion of File:Ladewlight. You wrote simply "the result was delete." You did not explain why you deleted it. There had been a discussion going on, one that I had participated in, in which various options were being considered. I may take this to deletion review. But I would like an explanation. Sebwite (talk) 01:57, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Various options were considered, but none were implemented. The file was infringing on the Ladew Gardens' copyright as long as it remained licensed under the public domain, and was deleted as a result. If you have a fair use rationale and non-free license ready to put up, I can restore the file so you can rectify the problem. — ξxplicit 21:49, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Request to undelete NE LHIN page - evidence of notability was intact (citations and links were shown) as per the other LHIN wiki articles.

RHaworth had restored the page because of those revisions being made...why did you then delete the page? We are finding this introduction to Wikipedia a significant challenge, as we had copied the other LHIN formats which already exist as links from LHINs.

We respectifull request that you restore the link as it was at the time you deleted it, complete with all the links and citations done according to Wikipedia conventions. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.75.130.84 (talk) 18:43, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

It seems that RHaworth has already moved the content to User:Kbain/sandbox. — ξxplicit 21:49, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

you destroyed someone else's work unnecessarily

Explicit: you deleted a disambiguation page I created. While admittedly it was not the most important disambiguation page on Wikipedia, it definitely wasn't wrong for it to exist, and I can't believe you haven't got more important things to do than deleting other people's work when it doesn't need to be deleted. If you want to discourage people from contributing to Wikipedia, go ahead, you're doing the right thing. And if you're going to destroy someone else's work unnecessarily, you should at least clean up your mess and not leave broken links on other articles. Azylber (talk) 03:02, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Rio Turbio (disambiguation) was deleted because it was an unnecessary disambiguation page with only two items. Because these types of disambiguation pages are generally not needed, they can be speedy deleted as such. In fact, there's even a speedy deletion template for it: {{db-disambig}}. I hadn't noticed that it was also linked at Rio turbio (film), as disambiguated pages generally don't need any hatnotes. I will go ahead and remove that link now. — ξxplicit 23:28, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
You're still missing the point, but it's explained very clearly in my previous message, so it's a waste of time for me to type it again. And apart from that point you're missing, you're also missing yet another point: how do I add the other entries I want to add to that disambiguation page, now that you've deleted it? If I want to add more entries, do I have to retype the whole page just because you decided to rush and delete it? Azylber (talk) 14:27, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm not missing the point. The disambiguation page you created was tagged for speedy deletion by another user. It remained tagged for nearly eight hours. It met the speedy deletion criteria and was deleted as such. It's very straightforward. If you feel discouraged from editing because of one deletion that was well within policy, that's unfortunate. Should pages never be deleted in fear that it will "destroy" someone's work?
Is there any other entry on Wikipedia that currently exists besides Turbio River that would need to be disambiguated? If not, adding {{Distinguish}} or expanding the hatnote already on the Río Turbio will suffice. If more pages with the same title are created in the future, the disambiguation page can be restored upon request. — ξxplicit 22:54, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
You're still missing both points, but nevermind, it's all clearly explained above anyway. I've done my best to explain it to you, but I'm giving up now.
Also note that 8 hours is not enough time for a deletion to be contested by the author. Unless you edit wikipedia as a full-time occupation...
Afaik there are a total of 4 articles (1 unwritten) that need to be disambiguated. But I can't add them because you rushed to delete a page that didn't need to be deleted.
Azylber (talk) 09:43, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
I've now re-created the page and added all 4 entries. Azylber (talk) 12:06, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

WP:files for deletion/2012 April 19‎

There are discussions still open, yet many files, including File:Jaleel White Steve Urkel.jpg, were deleted. Do you have sufficient time to give rationale for each discussion? --George Ho (talk) 03:28, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Since there is a bot that closes the discussions for us, admins rarely need to manually close it themselves. However, if you feel that I should leave a closing rationale for File:Jaleel White Steve Urkel.jpg, I can make one. Would you like me to provide one? — ξxplicit 03:32, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Bruce Herman File Deletion

Why was a photo that I took with my own camera, with permission of the subject, deleted? Also, when I posted a dispute as directed, no one did anything to contact me (either through my talk page or on the page for the file)... what is the point of having dispute functionality if it gets ignored?ReformedArsenal (talk) 03:04, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

The file you uploaded was tagged with a non-free license which, because the subject is a living individual, violated the first point WP:NFCC and was deleted as such. Unless you release the image under a free license, such as the public domain or a Creative Commons license, your image can not be used on Wikipedia. Additionally, because a copyrighted painting was also part of the picture, that would constitute as an unacceptable derivative work. — ξxplicit 06:26, 29 April 2012 (UTC)


Thanks.

Thanks for the speedy delete. VanIsaacWScontribs 06:47, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Thank you for the cookie. — ξxplicit 06:53, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

File copyright question

What is the general believe (if you may know) about photographs of paintings. I cannot figure out one way or another if the photo of a painting (one done in the US anyways) is allowed to be PD, or if it falls under the original painting's artist's copyright. I do not know if any of that makes sense, but hopefully you can help. Thanks -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 23:52, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

I believe you mean if it's an acceptable form of a derivative work. It depends on who created the painting, when it was painted, and when it was published. If it's a recently created painting (~70 years), the painting is likely still copyrighted. If it's older, it would depend on the aforementioned information. — ξxplicit 23:58, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Another question: The file File:PBB Protein UBADC1 image.jpg and many others like it are listed with the source: [2] and as {{{PD-release}}. The only information on the site that I could find in reference to this is at [3]. No where could I find the words Public Domain on the website. And I do not believe that the criteria of their conditions (see [4] would really allow them to be Public Domain, but alas, I do not know. There are over 20 of these files uploaded by User:ProteinBoxBot which has two operators. What would you suggest? -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 00:19, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Under the Usage Policies header, the text states "Data files contained in the PDB archive (ftp://ftp.wwpdb.org) are free of all copyright restrictions and made fully and freely available for both non-commercial and commercial use. Users of the data should attribute the original authors of that structural data." As such, the images uploaded by this bot seem okay to me. — ξxplicit 00:49, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Madonna album covers

Can you restore File:AmericanLife2003.png, File:Ray Of Light.jpg, File:Truebluealbum.jpeg, File:Madonna - Music (album).jpg, File:I'mBreathless.jpg, File:Madonna - Like a Prayer.jpg? VernitaG (talk · contribs) removed it without a good reason, and his/her behaivour reminds me to BlondeBaller (talk · contribs). Also, the files were removed yesterday, not seven days before. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:42, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

All files restored. VernitaG decided to disruptively date all the {{di-orphaned fair use}} tags with April 22, 2012, instead of the date it was actually tagged. Apologies for any inconvenience. — ξxplicit 19:52, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Greg Klazura

Just wanted to check if Greg Klazura now qualifies as a notable player. He started for the Vancouver Whitecaps today in the 2012 Canadian Championship, which I believe counts under the condition: "Have played in a competitive fixture between two fully professional clubs in a domestic, Continental or Intercontinental club competition." The Canadian Championship I imagine is considered a domestic club competition.

Seems that someone recreated it before I could get to it. Still, I restored the history that was previously deleted. — ξxplicit 05:26, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Can you permanently delete the date of birth from "Dan Johnson (musician)" history?

Can you please permanently delete the date of birth from Dan Johnson (musician) history?--Jax 0677 (talk) 13:34, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Is there any reason to do so? — ξxplicit 19:35, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Prevention of identity theft, and Johnson's birthdate is not published anywhere (that I can find).--Jax 0677 (talk) 08:51, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
I went though the page history and I didn't find the subject's date of birth in any of the revisions. At most, I just saw the page being categorized under Category:1970s births and Category:1980s births, which itself is unsourced. As such, the best option would simply to remove that category from the page. There doesn't seem to be anything that would require revision deletion. — ξxplicit 09:16, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
Actually, this page shows Johnson's date of birth.--Jax 0677 (talk) 23:46, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Ah, I see. The revisions have been hidden from public view. — ξxplicit 23:49, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Another Question

I tend to make mistakes sometimes, like my FFD nomination here: Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2012_April_26#File:GJNLOGO.jpg where I withdrew it. Am I allowed to close the discussion since I withdrew it, or does an uninvolved party? -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 20:46, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, you can close a nomination you withdrew, as well as close nominations withdrawn by others. Just remember to remove the deletion notice from the file description page and tag the talk page with {{Oldffdfull}}. — ξxplicit 23:34, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of File:Derek Flores actor improvisor and comedian by Sarah Andrews.jpg,

Hello,

I'm Rachel I uploaded the file. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Derek_Flores_actor_improvisor_and_comedian_by_Sarah_Andrews.jpg Sarah Andrews then sent and email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org from sarahandrews2313@gmail.com using the template we found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CONSENT.

She heard nothing back.

On the 2nd of May the warning was still up, So I sent and email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org following up. No response.

How can Sarah give her permission? She is not currently a Wikipedia editor. Please let us know what our next course of action should be.

Kind regards Rachel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rat.bat.cat (talk • contribs) 22:25, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

permissions-en is currently experiencing a backlog, so receiving a response from them may take a bit. I'll come into contact with an OTRS member and see if they have received an email from Sarah Andrews. — ξxplicit 23:34, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Just after I posted this message I got an email from Stephen Philbrick who restored everything. Brilliant. Cheers. Keep up the good work. R. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rat.bat.cat (talk • contribs) 13:37, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Austin Berry (soccer)

Please reinstate the article Austin Berry (soccer) which you deleted earlier per WP:NFOOTBALL. Not only Berry started tonight with Chicago Fire earning his appearance in a professional league, he also scored his first Major League Soccer goal. — Khvmty (talk) 04:08, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξxplicit 04:17, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, but there was a mistake

Thank you for cleaning up my user pages. However, there was an transclusion error on a couple of pages that caused the {{db-self}} template to be displayed when it shouldn't have been. Could you please do me the service of restoring the following pages?

Thanks again,

--Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 01:30, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done, sorry about that. Those tricky transclusions sometimes get the wrong pages deleted sometimes. This can be avoided in the future by surrounding the deletion template with <includeonly></includeonly> tags. — ξxplicit 01:40, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
I should know better by now. Thanks again! --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 01:43, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

J.X. Williams Article Deletion

Dear Explicit,

When consulting for a retrospective on the films of J.X. Williams, I was very alarmed to find the entry on his Wikipedia page to be deleted. Though Williams has been the subject of some controversy, I published a book with Noel Lawrence on the director in 2010. This book contained essays from nearly 20 film scholars and critics on Williams' contributions to cinema.

Here's a link to the book from which most of the article had been sourced: http://www.camionnoir.com/?p=detail_livre&ID=152

I'll be happy to share a PDF copy with you for your review. The book also will be coming out in a German edition next year.

Finally, I should mention Paul Cullum. He wrote the NY Times article on J.X. Williams back in 2005. If you would like to see it, I have a videotaped interview with him where he recants many of his previous statements in that article.

Please let me know how we could proceed on this discussion most productively.

Williams has endured undeserved obscurity for too long so I'd be very grateful if we could rectify this injustice.

You can contact me at je.deluxe1970@gmail.com and I'll be happy to provide extensive details on the life and work of this filmmaker.

Best, Jean-Emmanuel Deluxe — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.58.147.52 (talk) 18:38, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξxplicit 23:41, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Miscellany for deletion/Alexander Timirev

Saw this. Would you mind looking at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Alexander Timirev and the editor who made the MfD request and see if you can figure out what is going on. Thanks. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 07:12, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

I deleted Aleksandr Timirev via prod, and Alexander Timirev was deleted as a redirect to a nonexistent page. Not quite sure why the MFD request was made... but I'll go ahead and close that. — ξxplicit 07:26, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Just as a clarification...

You declined the prod on The Warriors (gang). Did you consider the prod from when it had a totally different title and focus to be a previous nom? There were some moves in therem, and my view would be different title, different article. Doesn't matter much, as prods don't need a reason for removal, but I was just wondering. MSJapan (talk) 21:20, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

The article was previously deleted under that same title, see the log. The deleted version shows that it was about the same subject that was written nearly identical to the current page. Per WP:PROD, an article may be deleted via prod only once. — ξxplicit 23:38, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Actually, an article that has survived PROD cannot be prodded again. This one did not (and was in fact recreated by an SPA), but it's not going to kill anybody to AFD it. MSJapan (talk) 06:50, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale

I have seen you tagged some album covers for being disputed like this. Could you tell me how to know a disputed one. I'm new to Wikipedia so I don't know very much. Thanks in advance--Morning Sunshine (talk) 09:25, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

I tagged alternate covers uploaded by Chikazuku as disputed fair use in compliance with the non-free content criteria, as Wikipedia's mission is to produce as much free content and to limit the amount of non-free content used in articles. Alternate covers from Japanese singles and albums are usually used for differing editions, like CD-only editions, CD+DVD editions, etc. My rationale points to these image violating the eight point of this criteria, which reads Contextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. In removing these covers, the reader does not lose any essential information, as it's still understood in the text of the article that multiple editions were released. If an alternate cover is subject to critical commentary from secondary reliable sources (for example, the alternate cover of Lady Gaga's The Fame Monster), then it may merit inclusion. But these covers don't have that, and they hardly ever do, which is why I tagged them for deletion. — ξxplicit 22:57, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Request to un-delete images

Hi Xplicit,

Can I please ask you to un-delete the following files :

File:Olivi (1942).jpg File:Baptismal Font in St. Peter, Rome (1915).jpg File:Winter In Piemonte (1960).jpg File:Autoritratto del pittore con la sua famiglia (1939).jpg

Massimo Calabretti, the director & appointed representative of the G. M. Aicardi Foundation (owned by the daughter of the painter) has sent an e-mail to en-permissions through m.calabretti@gm-aicardi.com to give permission for use of all the images listed above. I understand there might be a backlog but we are currently setting up the foundation, the website and wikipedia page for the painter G. M. Aicardi and we have a lot of investors that are waiting for all three to go live so we can start the ball rolling on our project. I do appreciate your help and co-operation on this one.

Maximo98 (talk) 21:09, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Once an image is deleted for lacking evidence of permission, I'm not too keen on restoring it until OTRS confirms permission. As an example, an email for evidence of permission for File:Saint Paul's Cathedral 2012.jpg was also sent to en-permissions, but ultimately, the license was not suitable with Wikipedia and was deleted. I'm not sure of what the email says exactly, but I prefer to err to the side of caution when it comes to copyright. If the permission checks out, it will be restored on the spot. — ξxplicit 22:57, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
There was a minor issue, which I am not at liberty to discuss, ironically resolved when I saw this note.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 17:41, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale

Hi there! I'm here regarding the files File:Wae Ireoni.jpg, File:BoPeepBoPeepVersionB.jpg, File:YayayaVersionB.jpg, File:YayayaVersionC.jpg, File:T-araRolyPolyVersionB.png, and File:T-araRolyPolyRegular.png. Though I agree with the reasons why they should be deleted, I feel like the limited-edition single covers (E.G. Bo Peep Bo Peep version A and B) should only be removed and that the regular edition covers (File:JapanBoPeep.jpg, YayayaVersionC.jpg, T-araRolyPolyRegular.png) should be kept in the articles because it creates consistency and well, because they're the regular covers; the limited-edition singles are produced in a limited quantity. I've also created the article for the single "Wae Ireoni" which was released before Temptastic but uses the back-cover of the album. Best regards, Chikazuku (talk) 01:29, 10 May 2012 (UTC).

I, too, use the regular edition covers for Japanese releases (like Let It Go! and Neverland (song)). If you'd like, you can just go ahead and remove the limited edition covers from the articles and move the regular edition cover to the lead infobox image. The cover for "왜 이러니" seems fine now, though it should still be removed from Temptastic. — ξxplicit 05:53, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

ANI notice

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. Thank you.

This is in relation to something on your page, but not related to our discussion. MSJapan (talk) 03:47, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 April 21#File:Frontier Series - .24100_front.jpg

Hello. I urge you to reconsider this close as there is no free equivalent to these files, they are encyclopedic and enhance the article by showing how the bills look like and greatly increase the readers understanding of how the bills resemble. The reason why I provided the article on Australian banknotes was because I am attempting to model this article after that article and people have had no problem with providing a visual representation of the banknotes on that article (since ~2006). Thank you. ----Addihockey10 e-mail 02:05, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Due to the low number of participants in this discussion, I'll go ahead and relist it. Per WP:NFCCE, please remember that "it is the duty of users seeking to include or retain content to provide a valid rationale". — ξxplicit 05:05, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Image Removal- Dispute Copyright

Hi Explicit,

You recently deleted File:Criterion Economics.jpg citing F9 (copyright violation without fair use permission). I'm not sure how it is a copyright violation. Can you please explain? I am the photographer and I am wondering how to go about verifying without sending you a photo archive. Thank you.

econoedit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acrowley00 (talk • contribs) 14:26, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Criterion Economics.jpg was deleted as a copyright violation because it appears the image was taken from this website, under the 'My Photos' section. If you are indeed the copyright holder of the image and would like to release it under a free license, you can follow the steps given at WP:CONSENT. — ξxplicit 20:30, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Talk pages

Please review On the documentation to {{Talk header}}, it says to not use the template unless needed. Edits such as this add it somewhere that is unjustified. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:58, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll go ahead and remove those additions. — ξxplicit 21:01, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

CoD: BlOps 2 characters

Hi Explicit,

Sorry to bother you, but concerning your revert on List of characters in Call of Duty: Black Ops II, in what way has Jmdarsenal "contested" my proposed deletion? The banner states that: You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to deletion for any reason. However, please explain why you object to the deletion, either in your edit summary or on the talk page. - which Jmdarsenal hasn't done in the last two days. It's not an argument, but considering that those edits were the first in nine months, and the one before that a year prior, my guess is that Jmdarsenal simply stumbled upon the article and decided it should stay. I'm not hell-bent on getting that article deleted, but I would like to know what the correct procedures are. Thanks, and happy editing. --Soetermans. T / C 10:48, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I removed the prod tag in compliance with WP:CONTESTED, which reads: If anyone, including the article creator, removes a {{proposed deletion}} tag from an article, do not replace it, even if the tag was apparently removed in bad faith. Solely removing the prod without any explanation is in itself contesting the deletion. — ξxplicit 21:36, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Requesting administrator intervention for a couple of issues

Given that you are an administrator, I wished to request your comment on a couple of incidents an incident.

The first incident occurred here, where my eye was caught by one of the most suspicion-causing things which I see on Wikipedia recent changes patrol, and that is an unestablished editor reverting edits by an established editor. I removed the content in good faith given that there was considerable disagreement over it, especially given that a credible editor disagreed with the content. Somebody reverted my edit, apparently in good faith, mistaking my edit as vandalism. I did not revert again as I did not wish to engage in an edit war. This issue was already resolved.

The second incident occurred here, where I made valid edits, which accurately reflected Wikipedia policy, and, another IP editor reverts my edits in bad faith, claiming that I was gaming the system. I reverted that edit in good faith, given that I have edited Wikipedia for considerable time and I am familiar with at least most of the policies. If the other IP editor reverts my edit, I will not revert it again to avoid edit warring, although, as I stated, I am requesting some administrator input on these issues. Additionally, that editor also placed an attack in the sandbox against a living person, and tagged his or her talk page for speedy deletion likely in an attempt to hide my warning.

Thanks in advance. 70.248.182.33 (talk) 22:59, 13 May 2012 (UTC), modified 23:05, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

The case with Wikipedia:Misuse of the sandbox, it seems that the other IP editor disagrees with your additions to the page. They may either disagree with your edits or may have misinterpreted what you wrote. The first step, of course, would be engaging in discussion with the user. Explain your edits and ask why this user disagrees with your additions. Try to come to a consensus if possible, and try other venues if that falls through. — ξxplicit 23:55, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
The way the editor seems to be behaving, it is unlikely that (s)he would be willing to speak to me. Is it possible for you to review his/her edits and revert them at your discretion? (S)he reverted one of my edits to the page in question on the first incident as well. 70.248.182.33 (talk) 23:56, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
I feel that the editor is attempting to portray my edits as bad faith as an act of retaliation for taking action in response to his or her attack at the sandbox. I do not even believe those venues are worth trying. It will only heat the dispute more. May I kindly request intervention either by you or (an)other administrator(s)? Thanks in advance. 70.248.182.33 (talk) 23:58, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Update: The user also abusively added a warning template to my talk page for an edit which obviously did not constitute edit warring if one reviews the edit summary. I had even discussed the matter with the user who reverted my edit, who confessed that he had mistakenly reverted my removal, therefore, I had reinstated my removal. 70.248.182.33 (talk) 00:09, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I have left the user a note on their talk page, which I suggest you read as well and will watch what happens from here. If page protections or blocks are required for this dispute, they will be used when appropriate. — ξxplicit 00:24, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I just wish to inform you that I have never intentionally edit warred. I never reverted more than once, and, I will never revert pages more than once. I have always edited Wikipedia in good faith. If I have done anything wrong, please inform me. I fight vandalism almost every day and I strive to make constructive edits to Wikipedia. Thank you. 70.248.182.33 (talk) 00:35, 14 May 2012 (UTC), modified 00:36, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Update: (S)he removed your warning and blatantly refuses to communicate. I would never behave in such a manner. I believe that this should be taken to the next step. That is what I figured would occur. Thanks in advance. 70.248.182.33 (talk) 00:38, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Edit warring isn't always intentional, but it happens to all of us every once in a while. Even if the other user seems unwilling to communicate, at least attempt to, and ask for intervention when your efforts are ignored. You can also always ask other uninvolved editors to look over the situation at the dispute resolution noticeboard.
The user is free to remove messages from their talk page as they please, so no action can be taken at this time. If they continue to edit war, consider reporting that user either to me or at the administrators' incidents notice board. — ξxplicit 00:53, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I understand that all users reserve the right to remove messages from their talk page, however, it is making it obvious that the user is refusing communication and is in bad faith. In that case, I'm requesting that somebody else review his or her reverts, and undo them if they are unfounded. My main issue is that I have made good faith edits which have been reverted, and the user refuses to communicate with me. I wish to ask if these reverts should be undone by another editor until they are explained more adequately. I do not appreciate my good faith contributions being maliciously destroyed. 70.248.182.33 (talk) 01:19, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
The edit war going on at Paternoster is not something simple administrator intervention can solve, as that edit war has has been going on since late 2011 and involves several editors, including administrator SchuminWeb (talk · contribs). As far as your edit to Wikipedia:Misuse of the sandbox is concerned, I personally don't see any issues with it. If the other administrator you contacted shares that same sentiment, I'd have no problem restoring that bit myself. — ξxplicit 01:38, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your response. I'll wait for discospinster's input. Not to vilify you, but, what bothers me slightly, is that in your post to the disruptive IP's talk page, you seemed to imply that I was also involved in bad faith editing, and I just wish to ensure that it is clearly known by all involved parties that I never make bad faith edits to Wikipedia, and always strive to edit constructively. Under the circumstance that I commit a wrongdoing, I encourage others to constructively criticize me for it. That IP editor seems to have a goal of portraying my edits as bad faith to strip me of credibility, likely in retaliation for issuing a warning for his or her edit to the sandbox. Thanks. 70.248.182.33 (talk) 01:50, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
In regards to the edits to Paternoster, I was unsure if it was actually multiple editors involved or some socks, but SchuminWeb's statement for removing the content was reasonable, and, in my opinion, the content should remain off the page until the issues are resolved at the corresponding talk page. Thanks. 70.248.182.33 (talk) 01:53, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
My post did not imply that your edits were made in bad faith, but that the ensuing edit wars across multiple pages were disruptive, even if it was unintentionally so. As I state above, it's best to try to communicate with the user you have a disagreement with, even if it seems they are unwilling. That's the first and best approach, and other forms of remedying the problem should come after the failed attempts.
In the reverts that happened at Paternoster, there was also another editor who reverted SchuminWeb's content removal. As such, a consensus should be reached by editors to appropriately deal with the content. If consensus agrees to remove the content and the content is restored by the IP editor again, then it would be more likely for the editor to be blocked, or the page to be protected if several IPs engage in edits made against an established consensus. — ξxplicit 02:07, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Please restore Innovation Journalism

Dear Explicit - can you please restore "Innovation Journalism"? It is a field of journalism, similar to business journalism or science journalism, which both have Wikipedia entries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dnordfors (talk • contribs) 01:54, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξxplicit 01:57, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! I will clean up the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dnordfors (talk • contribs) 02:43, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Deletion

I have to delete one. Break a few. Silence is the 0th one. Nemesis45 (talk) safe — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nemesis45 (talk • contribs) 04:23, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Carbohydrate chemistry‎: Thanks for the revdel!

Thanks! Allens (talk | contribs) 04:28, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

No problem at all. — ξxplicit 04:36, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

F(x) (band)

Just found out that someone is try to move the F(x) (band) article to "F(X)", which I agree with User:Lpmfx that the article should not be moving to a new page. If you also agree please vote against on the Talk:F(x)_(band) page. thanks.--ILuvSunshine (talk) 15:40, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Merging The Hangman (2005 film) with The Hangman (2010 film)

Hi,
Please help me merging the article: The Hangman (2005 film) with the article:The Hangman (2010 film). This movie was slated to release in 2005 but due to some problem the release got postponed several times and finally released in 2010. Both the movies are same.
Thanks,
tausif(talk) 10:40, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done to some extent. Due to parallel revisions, I could only merge some the history. The remainder that I couldn't remained at The Hangman (2005 film), which I have redirected to The Hangman (2010 film). — ξxplicit 23:05, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

please help me with some pictures

hey there will you help me wit sum pictures i posted in the graphics lab i need the watermark to be removed. i noticed you did the same to others that's why i ask that you please help me. pictures --Lil'Monster Heart (talk) 17:43, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll look into it when I have some time. — ξxplicit 23:05, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Archive 10 ← Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 → Archive 20
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Explicit/Archive_14&oldid=1190269886"