If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it. If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, so please add it to your watchlist. Please click here to leave me a new message.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50 51, 52

Can you help me delete the redirect page Countess of Hainaut? I need to move Countess of Hainault to it.-- Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy ( talk) 00:38, 10 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Redirect deleted. — ξ ^xplicit 00:39, 10 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I uploaded this image under a fair use rationale, but after viewing the watch page I noticed that you had previoulsy deleted it upon your review of the fair use rationale criteria. Therefore, this is to request a speedy deletion per your review. Boxing Scholar ( talk) 18:17, 10 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Edit: Please disregard this request. Another administrator has already deleted the image noted above. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boxing Scholar ( talk • contribs) 18:48, 10 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi there Xplicit, just wanted to say thanks for stopping by with the welcome wagon at my user page. As you can see, I just recently joined in here, and was wondering if you could take a gander at my initial thoughts and proposed infobox on this article's talk page -- even if only to give me an indication as to whether I am approaching this in the best manner. Cheers, Carthan ( talk) 15:03, 11 October 2010 (UTC) reply

It appears that I'm too late for this? — ξ ^xplicit 19:13, 15 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks for being so kind as to follow up. I was able to get feedback on the above initial request from Antandrus on my talk page -- however your input in the direction of this more recent proposed paragraph revision would be much appreciated, if you have the chance to take a look at it. Kind regards, Carthan ( talk) 19:33, 20 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I'll give it a look either later tonight or sometime tomorrow. I'll be off to school in a bit and I'm stuck there until 10 pm. — ξ ^xplicit 21:43, 20 October 2010 (UTC) reply

The proposed addition seems reasonable, I don't see a problem in implementing it. — ξ ^xplicit 06:03, 21 October 2010 (UTC) reply

User:Lilian Diane Moore same interests. Secret ^account 20:42, 12 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Definitely worth a CheckUser, John Stewart 9087 ( talk · contribs) seems to be another sock. The fact that the two edit similarly and were registered on the same day is too much of a coincidence. — ξ ^xplicit 19:13, 15 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Yea I placed a checkuser request on all of them, and they are all blocked with the IP Secret ^account 01:08, 16 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Yikes, I didn't expect there to be more than those two. — ξ ^xplicit 01:37, 16 October 2010 (UTC) reply

In response to your deletion regarding the content being a list of products (you said it was essentially advertising).....

The list was not biased in anyway towards one maker or a another, so how could it be advertising. It was very good information, that otherwise is not available without paying $400 for a report created by NetWorldAlliance.

I think this was an improper deletion. Product comparison need not be anything more product features and although you could interpret that as advertising, its valuable information for people trying to compare these products. There are countless other software comparison charts in the wiki, why remove this one?

Please undelete!!!

Thank You, Jay —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.38.225.149 ( talk) 23:47, 12 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξ ^xplicit 19:13, 15 October 2010 (UTC) reply

In follow-up to your question here, please see Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion#Consolidated CFD nomination template. The template is finally ready for use (I was on wiki-break for most of the time). -- Black Falcon ^{( talk)} 20:43, 13 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hello Explicit!! I am writing you to request your help in resolving the continuous disruptive edits by User:OneInAMillion96. He has created the pages Aaliyah 2001 World Tour, Age Ain't Nothing but a Number World Tour, and One In A Million World Tour (and even though I have redirected this page to its' parent album, it is continuously reverted) which shouldn't even exist, and has continuously added this edit to One in a Million (Aaliyah album). Along with these edits, he has disrupted Janet Jackson releated articles as well. Can you please block this user already, thanks. Ga Be 19 22:28, 13 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I'm? No, I did not make the page Age Ain't not Nothing But a Number World Tour I saw that I had done, so i did One In A Million and Aaliyah 2001 World Tour. That in One In A Million was not me who did http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=One_in_a_Million_%28Aaliyah_album%29&action=historysubmit&diff=388381828&oldid=388338392 Just undid your edits because you were destroying.

Regards, User:OneInAMillion96

Well... the sockpuppetry case took care of this. — ξ ^xplicit 19:13, 15 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Could you possibly close this per WP:SNOWBALL? Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cannibal (EP)? - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 20:13, 15 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Thank you :) - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 20:24, 15 October 2010 (UTC) reply

No problem at all. — ξ ^xplicit 20:25, 15 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Please don't encourage people that create articles prematurely by disparaging the nomination. I was not suggesting a merge, I was proposing deletion, which is clearly the course suggested by our guidelines. It's bad enough to have an AFD overwhelmed by people that don't have any intention of reading or following the relevant guidelines without having the closing admin editorialize in favor of ignoring relevant guidelines.— Kww( talk) 20:48, 15 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Please don't belittle other peoples views and consensus simply because you don't agree with it. "It's bad enough to have an AFD overwhelmed by people that don't have any intention of reading or following the relevant guidelines" is very rude, simply because other editors didn't feel the article failed crystal or music theres no need to call their actions flawed or incorrect. Thank you. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 22:59, 15 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I'm sorry, but you clearly ignored the plain text of WP:MUSIC. I will agree to not hold this against you in other areas of editing, but the AFD result clearly violated applicable guidelines. If you believe the standard at WP:MUSIC needs to be changed, feel free to start a discussion, but ignoring it is never the correct thing to do.— Kww( talk) 02:14, 16 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hello, I saw you deleted File:Campbell-Christie House.jpg. Could you please comment here about whether you have checked OTRS for a license, and whether all the other images from the same source can also be deleted? Thank you. -- ChrisRuvolo ( t) 22:45, 15 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Files with proper permissions sent to OTRS would be tagged with {{ PermissionOTRS}} or similar. If it's not tagged with that template, there is no OTRS ticket for it. If other images hmdb.org are claimed to be released under a free license, but lack evidence of it, those would also need to be nominated at PUF. — ξ ^xplicit 22:51, 15 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I'm wondering if there are any OTRS tickets for hmdb.org images. If so, I would want to request one for this image as well. Can you check that? -- ChrisRuvolo ( t) 23:02, 15 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I can't personally check, as I am not an OTRS volunteer. VernoWhitney ( talk · contribs) is among several OTRS volunteers who can give it a look. — ξ ^xplicit 23:04, 15 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the reference. -- ChrisRuvolo ( t) 23:22, 15 October 2010 (UTC) reply

User talk:AtomicMarcusKitten has been blocked for civility before and hes really just becoming a pain. Please see comments ; User_talk:AtomicMarcusKitten#Civility, User_talk:Yvesnimmo#Why.3F and Talk:Kesha_discography#New_format_for_discography_page. Could you do something? Thanks. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 21:41, 17 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I'm not exactly seeing a direct personal attack after Chasewc91 gave him a warning a few hours ago. Granted, AtomicMarcusKitten's tone isn't great, but I don't see any blockable offense at the moment. — ξ ^xplicit 21:52, 17 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Fair enough, i just found "I do not want to discuss anything on any stupid page filled with snobs and airheads, as it gets you know where." rude. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 21:53, 17 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I found that to be a general statement to anyone who disagrees with AtomicMarcusKitten, personally, though I understand where you're coming from. Oddly enough, this user reminds me of Dillonmcallaway ( talk · contribs). — ξ ^xplicit 21:58, 17 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I know I mentioned it you before but some new coverage has come around... I've made the case for Nelly 5.0 → 5.0 here. You may or may not wish to comment -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 22:59, 18 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I was simply trying to learn how to archive and all hell broke loose! I am totally flummoxed! Please explain what I did wrong, and help me fix it. TY Namaste... DocOfSoc ( talk) 02:48, 19 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi. Basically, when archiving your talk page, you usually created User talk:DocOfSoc/Archive X, where X is the number of the archive. You created DocOfSoc/Archive 3 instead, without the user talk prefix, which means you created in the article namespace instead of your user talk namespace. Thorncrag ( talk · contribs) mistakenly moved it to User:DocOfSoc/Archive 3 and left out the talk part of user talk, and then rectified the problem. Hopefully that clears things up. — ξ ^xplicit 02:53, 19 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Thank you! ;-) Namaste...04:51, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Just doing my job voluntary work. — ξ ^xplicit 06:13, 19 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi,
I've restored File:Flag of the African Union 2010.svg because I don't see that WP:CSD#F4 applies to a non-free file with a valid rationale.
On a somewhat related note, how's your process when you clean out those categories? Are you looking at all files, or only those that Twinkle marks as "Disputed"?
Amalthea 11:31, 20 October 2010 (UTC) reply

F4 applies to all media files, as {{ di-no source}} contains a parameter which allows to indicate whether the tagged file is free or non-free. You've provided a source, so there should be no problem anymore. I do check every file when doing batch deletions with Twinkle, as painful as it may be. I just open multiple tabs at a time and review each individual file. — ξ ^xplicit 21:43, 20 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Yes, I was enlightened in the meantime. :)
I asked about Twinkle since I'm thinking about rewriting that batch deletion tool, for various reasons, and wanted to know whether I can make that job somewhat easier for you. For example, I remember that MBisanz once had an issue with clearing the category of unused non-free files ( WP:TW/BUG#309), so adding options to show additional information might be a good idea. Not so much with F4 images, probably, but maybe with other categories you clean?
Amalthea 10:32, 21 October 2010 (UTC) reply

There are actually three things that I would like to bring up. First, if there was a way for batch deletion to delete the file talk pages, that would be great. The talk pages usually stay lingering around for a bit after the file's deletion. If it could also take care of file redirects, like it batch deletion can with article redirects, that would also get rid of red-linked redirects right when it happens. Lastly, I'm pretty sure the "Unlink uses of this file" option stopped working a long time ago. Is this a known issue? — ξ ^xplicit 18:19, 21 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Heh, yes, talk page deletion was on my list. :) I'll look into problems with unlinking and file redirects (but was planning to merge the four batch tools anyway, so that should be covered).
I'm gonna ask you to be a guinea pig, if I ever manage to finish it.
Thanks, Amalthea 15:55, 22 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Squeak. — ξ ^xplicit 19:03, 22 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hello,

I am a touch confused at the basis you deleted the above referenced site. I do however know it has been useful for people being treated in such a manner, to help describe the therapeutic goals. I would therefore, at minimum like to know the grounds/background you have for deleting such an article

thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.79.216.106 ( talk) 13:56, 20 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi there, I know little of the subject, as I'm just the deleting administrator. Jmh649 ( talk · contribs) proposed the article for deletion, which went uncontested for seven days and was routinely deleted. You may want to consider contacting Jmh649, as that user may bring more insight regarding the subject. — ξ ^xplicit 21:43, 20 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi, I'm new here, and I Don't know edit. I see in the article of Aaliyah's debut album, that sold 74,000 copies in it's first week. You can put it in her article ? And, where I can learn to edit?

Thank you for the help. AaliyahAngel1 ( talk) 23:35, 20 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Looks like you got the editing and the socking down quite nicely. — ξ ^xplicit 06:03, 21 October 2010 (UTC) reply

An editor has asked for a deletion review of File:The Pendulum - Before The Duel .28small.29.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. Fiskeharrison ( talk) 05:02, 21 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Dear Sir/Madam,

I discussed this matter (5 jpg photos deleted) with ARTEST4ECHO. I informed him that before uploding the photos I did receive oral permission from the administrator of Rosemary Koczy's estate and I did not realize that this was not sufficient. I talked to the estate administrator today, and he will provide the certificate required. I will then e-mail the certificate to OTRS, as required.

Could you please undelete the images? ARTEST4ECHO provided the following instruction:

"... Ask him to tag the image with {{ OTRS pending}}. This will temporarily allow you to have the images back. However, if the e-mail below isn't received by the OTRS system it will end up deleted. If he asks tell him that the {{ puf}} tagger agrees to this undelete and ask him to see this page", see

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:ARTEST4ECHO#Possibly_unfree_File:Rosemarie_Koczy_Sculpture107_2002.jpg

It was not clear to me: should the estate administrator provide 5 letters (one for each photo) or a single statement that lists the 5 webpages containing the images?

Thank you for your help on this,

Emmanuel Yashchin Yashchi ( talk) 21:57, 21 October 2010 (UTC) reply

At this point, I think it's best to wait for OTRS to confirm that these files were released under a free license. They can be restored when that happens. — ξ ^xplicit 01:01, 22 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Thank you for the prompt reply. However, I need the complete links ("entire webpage address of image") to these files in order to submit the ownership statement through OTRC. Since the files are no longer on the web page - how could I get the links to these 5 images? Also, should one form be submitted for all 5 images, or do I need to submit 5 separate forms? Yashchi ( talk) 20:56, 22 October 2010 (UTC) reply

You would only need to send the URLs as follows:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=File:Rosemarie_Koczy_Drawing48_Book82_1997.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1
• http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=File:Rosemarie_Koczy_Drawing48_Book193_2007.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1
• http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=File:Rosemarie_Koczy_Painting156_1985.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1
• http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=File:Rosemarie_Koczy_Sculpture107_2002.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1
• http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=File:Rosemarie_Koczy_Tapestry_Torah_1977.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1

It's likely that the OTRS volunteer is an administrator, and administrators have the ability to view deleted articles and images. If the copyright holder licensed all the files under the same license, only one email is required, just make sure to include all the links above. — ξ ^xplicit 21:45, 22 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Minimum number I notice that you've added the music genres and reggae WikiProject banners to several categories that I have created. I think this is a good thing and I'm glad that you're doing it, but why are you adding the banner shell when there are only two banners? As a matter of pure aesthetics, I think that up to maybe four (and certainly two) banners is reasonable to display and the documentation suggests "WikiProjectBannerShell is normally used when more than two or fewer than six banners are present on the talk page." Of course, this suggestion and my personal preference are hardly a reason to change your behavior, but I figure it's something to bear in mind if you haven't already. If you have, and you still think that the banner shell is useful, then go for it. Thanks again for your tagging. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 03:55, 22 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Also On a completely unrelated note, this conversation is stagnant and at some point, I need an admin to say, "This seems like community consensus, so we'll close this discussion." I am not lobbying for you to vote (although you can, of course, leave feedback if you are interested), but you and User:Good Olfactory are the only two admins that I have bumped into on a regular basis in the past six months, so I figured I should mention this to you now. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 03:58, 22 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hmm, I read the documentation a while ago, I could've sworn it said at least two, so it looks like I read it wrong. Anywho, it's more of a matter of not making the talk page look too clutter, though I suppose it could be argued that's an aesthetic thing. Although I don't see it as a bi g deal, I'll make sure to use it only when there are at least three banners from now. I'll look over the AN discussion when I have the time. — ξ ^xplicit 04:08, 22 October 2010 (UTC) reply

In case you're really interested See here. Now it might be totally irrelevant and out of your hands, but it seems like the right thing to do to let you know how this progressed. Thanks. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 22:48, 24 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I think this may very well be out of my hands. Honestly, I know very little of ArbCom as I've never bothered to get involved, so I suppose it's best to await a response from them. On a side note, I'd like to direct you this comment I left at Good Olfactory's talk page regarding manual migration of speedy CfDs. — ξ ^xplicit 22:59, 24 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thought I'd let you know that I have recreated Category:Somali people that was deleted per this discussion. The confusion was over the ethnonym reserved for the Somali people ethnic group ("Somali") and the denonym pertaining to citizens of Somalia, irrespective of their ethnic origins (including Italian Somalians, Bravanese, Bantu, etc.). Now that it has all been sorted out and decided that the term "Somalian" shall be reserved as the preferred denonym (i.e. the national category is now titled Category:Somalian people), I have created a new Category:Somalian people by ethnic or national origin (similar to Category:Kenyan people by ethnic or national origin) that was previously missing, under which the country's various ethnic groups & naturalized citizens may be listed, including the numerically dominant Somali ethnic group that lent the nation its name. Best regards, Middayexpress ( talk) 15:04, 22 October 2010 (UTC) reply

No problem with that. I'm thinking a hatnote in Category:Somali people should be put in place to direct users to Category:Somalian people. — ξ ^xplicit 19:03, 22 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Good idea; I've just added one. Cheers, Middayexpress ( talk) 18:47, 23 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Just a note of appreciation for fixing that tangle. Thank-you! Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 21:50, 22 October 2010 (UTC) reply

No problem at all. — ξ ^xplicit 21:50, 22 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Could you please recover File:Commands in Archy.png that was speedy-deleted at Archy? I'd like to provide the required information to use it as wp:Non-free content, as it was highly valuable to illustrate that article. Thanks. Diego Moya ( talk) 22:51, 15 October 2010 (UTC) reply

 Done, go for it. — ξ ^xplicit 19:05, 23 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Txs! Diego Moya ( talk) 16:07, 24 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Confirmation of the Kalstar request http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk%3ALuffy_sogeking&action=historysubmit&diff=392527313&oldid=392526958 - just confirming :) - cheers Satu Suro 06:56, 24 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I had to look around before deleting the page, but yup, I saw it on the talk page. — ξ ^xplicit 06:58, 24 October 2010 (UTC) reply

OK over and out - cheers - thanks - etc Satu Suro 07:03, 24 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Dear Sir,

May I ask why you have deleted the Wikipedia entry for Binahian? I have visited Binahian on many occasions and know many of the locals there: unanimously, they approve of the article and find nothing offensive in it; and neither do I. have you visited Binahian? If you had I am sure you would realise that most of the villagers are related in one way or another, so what you believe is a family album is simply a collection of photographs of the villagers themselves: most contributed their photos for the article! It is a beautifully written piece and evokes the tranquility and history of a very small community in a very compassionate and understanding way.

I would ask, therefore, on behalf of the villagers, and those of us who have had the opportunity to visit and wish to look back with fond memories, that you re-instate this article

Many thanks

Matthew Wood mattw747@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.96.226.90 ( talk) 10:25, 24 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Explicit, can you please edit the deletion log enrty to remove most of the prod message per Wikipedia:Etiquette? -- Jeandré, 2010-10-24 t14:04z

I just would like to enquire about my article Binahian which I wrote in 2007 and just edited a couple of weeks ago.

It is already gone and I have no idea why it has been deleted with an excuse or reason of being horrible.

I thought that wikipedia is a free and people can use it to feature or write stuff that are not offensive or stating anything that is of that nature.

May entry can NEVER be in that category (offensive) as it was just featuring my little village in the Philippines.

Please let me know what happened. I would gladly appreciate any response from you. I know I followed your copyright policies regarding photos because the ones I used there were mostly mine and my cousins who allowed me to use it.

I don't often visit the site that's why I was caught unaware of its deletion and I am hoping you could assist me in restoring too. Admittedly, I am not a professional writer that's why I was so disheartened when my effort and time of writing my entry have gone to nothing.

Evelyn Samson Baylon-Wood 14:16, 24 October 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nyleve02 ( talk • contribs)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Jeandré, the deletion rationale isn't beautiful, but not eligible for revision deletion. — ξ ^xplicit 19:06, 24 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Just to let you know that I nominated the article for deletion ( Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Binahian) immediately after seeing it was restored. The article is truly horrible and does not belong on Wikipedia. It is now a candidate for speedy deletion but I'd rather not speedy delete it myself because, as I originally nominated it for deletion, it might be seen as a conflict of interest. JIP | Talk 07:27, 25 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Why did you only protect The DeAndre Way for two weeks when I requested three months because of the extremly long history of vandalism dating back to when the article was Dre (album). STATic message me! 23:48, 24 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I'm pretty sure there was no mention of the protection log of Dre (album) at the time you requested protection. I semi-protected it for two weeks based on the log of The DeAndre Way, which was only semi-protected twice, both for one week, and due to the fact that at least two weeks passed between each period it was not protected at all. — ξ ^xplicit 00:14, 25 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi there. I noticed you edited a category in WikiProject North America to fix an issue with the coding. I have no idea how most of this stuff works, so I was wondering if you could take a look at [[Category:Book-Class WikiProject North America articles]] and fix it. There definitely is a book, currently stuck in NA, and I can't figure out why Book won't show up at the class bar, and class=book in the talk page template goes to NA. Something might need to be enabled, but I have no idea as to how. If you could fix it, I would be appreciative. Sven Manguard _Talk 05:31, 25 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I have updated the project template code to enable the Book class. It may take a little while before all articles appear in the category because of job queue issues. __ meco ( talk) 08:33, 25 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Looks like meco beat me to it. I made a null edit to the book talk page in order make it show up in the category. — ξ ^xplicit 18:09, 25 October 2010 (UTC) reply

That's it, both of you are on the list. And Access Denied too. In the near future when I screw up the coding somewhere, I'm coming to you people. I know Clue when I see it. Sven Manguard _Talk 18:34, 25 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi Explicit! Since you seem to be quite experienced with categories, I thought I'd ask you about one I ran across earlier today that has me thoroughly confused. Category:Categories named after North American Class I railroads is the one, which is a subcat of Category:Class I railroads in North America. I can't figure out the extra layer of categorization here, especially since I've never seen another cat named "Categories named after Foo". Is there something I'm missing? Dana boomer ( talk) 21:35, 25 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi there. Well, it seems Category:Categories named after North American Class I railroads acts like a container category for eponymous categories; Category:Amtrak for Amtrak, Category:CSX Transportation for CSX Transportation, etc. Category:Class I railroads in North America, on the other hand, contains articles about class I railroads in general ( Class I railroad, List of Class I railroads and so on). As for Categories named after foo, there's an entire tree under Category:Eponymous categories — ξ ^xplicit 23:24, 25 October 2010 (UTC) reply

How fascinating. I guess I've never stumbled across any of those before. Well, thanks for the quick response! Dana boomer ( talk) 00:27, 26 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi there,

I understand why the page I put together was deleted - lack of notable references. However, there are many pages on Wikipedia that have no references, not even a "References" section, and they are not even noted for deletion. Here is one example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenIT This article has been online for over 4 years with no references and is still here. I don't see how it differs from the article I wrote? If possible, I would like some clarification on this matter. I appreciate your time. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nowy9 ( talk • contribs) 15:22, 27 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hello. First, I'd like to point out that other similar articles may exist, that argument holds little to no weight regarding the article's deleted. As for the actual article itself, it was proposed for deletion by another editor and went uncontested for seven days, which led to its deletion. From what I can tell, Vermis software failed to assert notability, which is required to merit inclusion on Wikipedia. — ξ ^xplicit 05:25, 28 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Could you please undelete these images? We have received OTRS permission for them. VernoWhitney ( talk) 20:42, 28 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Done and done. — ξ ^xplicit 21:41, 28 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks! VernoWhitney ( talk) 21:54, 28 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I don't care what your little message says, I'm still typing this because this is getting retarded. The first page of file uploads asks for a copyright explanation. IT IS NOT MY FAULT if that explanation, which you must fill out in order to upload a file, is not translated onto my pictures. STOP deleting my uploads, because as I just explained, they are all my own works and it is not my fault if the GFDL notes don't pass along due to a Wiki programming error!!!!! ToddC4176 ( talk) 13:21, 29 October 2010 (UTC) reply

There was no error with the upload form. The most likely thing that happened is that you simply forgot to choose a license to begin with. Additionally, with the notices you received, you had seven whole days to correct the issue or ask for help. There's absolutely no fault with the upload form or me, the deleting administrator. — ξ ^xplicit 18:29, 29 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi,

You deleted a page I created: The Brokerage Citylink as it was apparently non-notable. This organisation has had its work included in several newspaper articles (ie: http://www.independent.co.uk/student/career-planning/getting-job/city-slackers-how-the-square-mile-is-reaching-out-to-dropouts-1653856.html and http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/career_and_jobs/senior_executive/article756852.ece) and has won a Dragon Award.

Please can you reinstate this article. I'm happy to link it up to external secondary sources if necessary.

-- graham228221 ( talk) 13:50, 29 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Make sure to add these references in the article when you get the chance, before the article is nomination for deletion at WP:AFD. — ξ ^xplicit 18:29, 29 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Great, thanks for that! Will add the references asap. - -- graham228221 ( talk) 11:45, 1 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Can you look at the actual words in this discussion? I think there is a consensus. Vegaswikian ( talk) 01:02, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Y Baked. Err, I mean, done. — ξ ^xplicit 01:09, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

You may be interested in checking stuff tagged with {{ Short-Rationale}} and {{ Standard-Rationale}}.

The former is images that have some kind of an FUR, but it's not clear if all the points of WP:NFCC are met, The latter is images that are thought to meet [{WP:NFCC]] but which have a form of FUR that is non-standard or can't be detected easily by semi-automated tools and bots. As you are an experienced contributor, any efforts made in moving stuff from {{ Short-Rationale}} towards {{ Standard-Rationale}} by improving the FUR would be greatly appreciated. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 15:13, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I'll do what I can and try to make a dent in the number of files tagged as such. — ξ ^xplicit 18:05, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi, thanks for adding information to File:AmbroseMarechal.jpg. However, as I would like to transfer this file to Commons, the author or a specific production date is still missing. I cannot find it in the "source". Could you please help me? Cheers -- Saibo ( Δ) 21:43, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Eek, I found very little information from Google. Might be worth nominating the image at WP:PUF? — ξ ^xplicit 22:28, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

That one was not from flickr at all, it was already on wikipedia; I just cropped it to better show the siding. Can you restore it? Also, I'm pretty sure the other ones were fine for wikipedia; I just may have mistagged them here. They all showed up under the advanced search option of "Showing Creative Commons-licensed content for commercial use". That's how I've always used flickr to look for pictures I thought were okay for wikipedia. Daniel Christensen ( talk) 22:12, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Let's see, I'll list the files and their sources. File:The Duff River; County Sligo, Ireland Kayaking.jpg, source, attribution noncommercial share-alike. File:Duquesne brewing clock pittsburgh.jpg, source, attribution noncommercial share-alike no derivative works. File:Back of Colortrak 2000 Dimenisa compatible TV.jpg, source, attribution noncommercial. File:Allis-Chalmers Model G tractor.jpg, source attribution no derivative works. File:Sill plate.jpg, source, attribution noncommercial. All these files fall under the criteria for speedy deletion, F3: 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. — ξ ^xplicit 22:28, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

On the Model G one, how was putting it here a derivative work? I did not change it. It just required attribution. Daniel Christensen ( talk) 22:37, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Same with the sill plate one. Okay, on all the other ones but those two the license is wrong, but what makes those two wrong? Daniel Christensen ( talk) 22:39, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

So as I now understand images have to also be licensed for derivative works? I did not know that uploading them here was considered building on, adapting or modifying them. But apparently it is? Daniel Christensen ( talk) 22:44, 30 October 2010 (UTC) Oh yeah, and I had another image confused, the sill plate image was not already here. Daniel Christensen ( talk) 22:45, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

(Just responding here for clarity instead of having two separate answers about the same thing on both my and Explicit's talk) It does not mean that you are making a derivative of the work, it just means that others cannot make a derivative, which Wikipedia does not allow. -- Fiftytwo thirty ( talk) 22:48, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Please see WP:ICTIC, files licensed under Creative Commons must allow for derivative works, regardless if derivative works are made or not. This is similar to images must be licensed for commercial use, even if they are never used for commercial purposes. Note that license templates like {{ cc-nd}} and {{ cc-by-nd}} redirect to {{ Db-f9}} (it really should redirect to {{ Db-f3}}, but that's for later). On an unrelated note, I hope I don't run into another edit conflict for the 415124th time. Preview button, please? — ξ ^xplicit 22:51, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Could you please explain why you deleted the above image without any notification to to myself who had taken great time to improve the associated pages. The image in question was the lead image and the best fair-use image we had. The other image represented the character several years later in the programme. Having a lead image and then another to represent a character at a different era within the programme is not unheard of, indeed there are a great many precedents set. I feel you are undermining the work being done by taking this action without first consulting those who have spent a great deal of time labouring over the articles and trying to illustrate them appropraitely. Should you have felt there was any controvention of copyright regulations it would have surely been common courtesy to have some consultation with the users who have taken the time to build these articles.

Kind regards, Mtaylor848 ( talk) 00:40, 31 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Well, considering I'm only the deleting admin, the burden of notifying the uploader (you) would be that of the tagger, which was Angusmclellan ( talk · contribs). Contacting this user directly may yield better insight as to why the file was tagged to begin with. — ξ ^xplicit 00:49, 31 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Perhaps so. I am however intent on reuploading the image. Should it be felt that it should be deleted then I would have to request going to mediation with the issue as I don't feel there is any sufficient grounds for deletion. Mtaylor848 ( talk) 13:32, 31 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Why did you delete that page? You even admitted that you couldn't find any justification for doing so. Chris Martin ( talk) 18:24, 31 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Canon Johnson C.E. Primary School was proposed for deletion by another editor, which went uncontested for seven days and was routinely deleted. Although I don't think there is a specific guideline that states that primary schools are generally not notable, the subject should still meet the criteria listed at WP:ORG. — ξ ^xplicit 18:29, 31 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I spent weeks on my wikipedia page for Shortcuts.com and it was submitted for a speedy deletion for "copyright". I am the Product lead for Shortcuts.com at AOL and would like to update the page - Can you un-delete so that I can address the issue? Please sympathize:I spent weeks learning how to develop the page and drafting it. FerhaMirdawi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ferhamirdawi ( talk • contribs) 17:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC) reply

As far as I'm aware, I only deleted User:Ferhamirdawi/Shortcuts.com, which was a redirect to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Shortcuts.com. That was deleted by JohnCD ( talk · contribs). Due to legal matters, I can not restore material which was deleted as a copyright violation. If you hold the copyright to the text and would like to release it under a free license, please review our donating copyrighted materials page. — ξ ^xplicit 18:02, 1 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I am aware that you recently deleted this article. Perhaps you unaware that this actor had a lead role in television series called Just Deal in the 2000s and has guest starred in number of notable television series since. Which would allow the article to exist per WP:ENT. If main problem with the article lack of references or that the information was mostly recieved from IMDB all you had to do was add this tag: {{BLP IMDB refimprove|only=yes}} instead of simply deleting. I am requesting that you reinstate this article so that I work on it. Quasy Boy 17:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξ ^xplicit 18:02, 1 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi, you deleted File:Graffiti2-alphabet.png as a non-free logo. However, it does have a free-user rationale, but I guess it wasn't tagged. But also, I don't believe this image is copyrightable in the first place. Can you undelete it please? Ariel. ( talk) 19:22, 1 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Well, it actually didn't have a fair use rationale, but if you're going to claim PD-text, please be cautious about it. — ξ ^xplicit 19:29, 1 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I meant, it qualified for a rationale, but didn't have one listed. I am not sure about the copyright. Personally I think it's pd-text, but since I'm not sure I tagged it with multiple tags - is there someplace where I can ask someone to review it? Ariel. ( talk) 22:19, 1 November 2010 (UTC) reply

WP:MCQ would be a good start. Some text can't be subject to copyright, depending on how "simple" it is, while others can be protected by copyright. If I had to guess, I'd probably agree that this image falls under PD-text, but seeking further input at MCQ couldn't hurt. — ξ ^xplicit 22:25, 1 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi,

You deleted a page I created: MacroData NetDrive ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacroData_NetDrive) as non notable software. It is linked at Wiki NetDrive ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netdrive). MacroData NetDrive is widely used software and referenced in many web pages and articles. It is shown at top rank when searched as "netdrive" at Google.

Please can you reinstate this article ? Thanks,

Terranbin —Preceding unsigned comment added by Terranbin ( talk • contribs) 01:31, 2 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Please make sure to demonstrate how the subject meets the notability guidelines by citing your sources, as the article is still deletable through the articles for deletion venue. — ξ ^xplicit 03:02, 2 November 2010 (UTC) reply

FYI: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MacroData NetDrive. Delicious carbuncle ( talk) 12:38, 2 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Do I assume that Wikipedia is working towards a situation were [Category:American songwriters] can be largely upgraded to [Category:Songwriters from any US state] ? Is every state covered at present ? Will a bot be created to carry out edits to all existing articles ? The reason I ask is that I sometimes create new Wiki articles for American blues musicians, and I may therefore need to slightly adjust my category compositions. It's no big deal either way, but I await your thoughts. Thanks,

Derek R Bullamore ( talk) 11:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi there, the Category:American songwriters by state tree is a work in progress that I started. I've only created 24 of its subcategories and they aren't very populated... Category:American songwriters being populated by over 2,000 pages doesn't help, so this will definitely take a while. Feel free to jump into creating more categories where needed. — ξ ^xplicit 18:35, 2 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hello again. I have taken the liberty of editing those articles that I have created to help populate the 'tree'. However, there are now musicians awaiting said categories for Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Utah, Missouri, and West Virginia. Given my more recent work, I supect the Mississippi category will be, at least temporarily, one of the most populated ! Over to you for the category creations though, if only so we do not fall over each other. Regards,

Derek R Bullamore ( talk) 21:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I'll create those shortly. If you need others created in the future, feel free to drop me a note any time. — ξ ^xplicit 21:08, 2 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Iowa, Kentucky, Rhode Island, Colorado and New Mexico - please. I am adding to the tree (about 200 moved so far). Regards - oh, and North Dakota now.

Derek R Bullamore ( talk) 19:02, 4 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Will create them shortly. Thanks for your work so far. — ξ ^xplicit 20:11, 4 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I see that you deleted File:Hc-cover.jpg earlier, which I'm guessing was uploaded by NikS ( talk · contribs). Since then the user has uploaded several more files, all of which have been CSD-tagged. Perhaps you could have a gentle word as the user doesn't seem to get it. -- Biker Biker ( talk) 14:14, 2 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I'll drop the user a note shortly. — ξ ^xplicit 18:35, 2 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks for that. Roger and out. -- Biker Biker ( talk) 19:45, 2 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi. I realise that you have deleted this file. I'm afraid there is a discussion going on regarding these images here. I think I left a message on the file talk page regarding this. I might be wrong too. Cheers -- Wiki San Roze ^†αLҝ 14:26, 2 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hmm, looks like I missed that. From skimming through the discussion and reviewing the images in question, I'd say they are all derivative works from the original logos, and are still subject to copyright. As for the deleted image, it seems that Hammersoft ( talk · contribs) changed the license to {{ non-free logo}} and proceeded to subsequently tag it for lacking a fair use rationale. — ξ ^xplicit 18:35, 2 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Actually only the depictions of election commission of India could be covered by copyright not others. As I have shown in the bottom end of the discussion the electoral symbols can be and are depicted in any given form and hence those depictions can't be held as copyright of the Election commission. Isn't it? Cheers -- Wiki San Roze ^†αLҝ 08:17, 3 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Can you delete that file, it got moved to Commons, and its stint on the Main Page is done. Allmightyduck   What did I do wrong? 20:36, 2 November 2010 (UTC) reply

 Done. — ξ ^xplicit 20:38, 2 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Please delete http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kevios page. -- Somerwind ( talk) 00:54, 3 November 2010 (UTC) reply

 Not done, already declined by another admin. — ξ ^xplicit 01:44, 3 November 2010 (UTC) reply

You deleted File:Dadullah.jpg as lacking liscensing information. If the image was a work of Afghanistan it would be in the public domain, wouldn't it? Did the image have an URL associated with it? Geo Swan ( talk) 13:05, 3 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi there, the only thing that was added to the {{ Information}} template was the date, which was produced by generic tildes (~~~~~). Nothing more, I'm afraid. — ξ ^xplicit 04:37, 4 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi, I saw you added some images to MediaWiki:Bad image list. Were these images used for vandalism or it just a precautionary measure? Garion96 (talk) 11:49, 4 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi there, a user had emailed and asked if I could add the images to the list. I'm not entirely sure if they were used for vandalism, though. — ξ ^xplicit 20:11, 4 November 2010 (UTC) reply

What else can I say FUCK YOU.