User talk:Conscious/Archive6

/Archive1 /Archive2 /Archive3 /Archive4 /Archive5

thanks

for fixing my user page. Paul 18:59, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Conscious, I don't know how to add pics to artivles (yet... I'll figure it out eventually!) but I would like to award you a special barnstar. The special barnstar is a barnstar for doing something that doesn't exactly fit in another catagory. Givving me a vandalism warning.

Not me personally, my school IP adress. My professor discovered this not yet having an accout. Now Wikipedia has been blocked because someone must not have been paying attantion in class! Even if it was two months ago, the proffesor discovered it last night- the "New Message" banner was there because he had never seen the messages before. I'm giving you an eFInger!

________________ i received the note from conscious and have written a note to the45th surg@the45thsurg.freeservers.com>to inform them that my article is available under GFDL That website is written by several different veterans and I don't know what action I will get from my email. In the past I have asked them to post other information and it has not been posted. But again, I am 84years of age with short term memory loss and early Parkinsonism. Because of this it is difficult for me to write much and difficult for me to remember some things. I have tried to upload pictures of the officers of my old outfit without success. I know that Captain Dardas' picture is some place on Wilkipedia as is Captain Mainella. I know that because when I run a search for them, their pictures come up. I would like some help with the pictures but if my article is going to be deleted, it is a waste of time to do so. I have read some of the nasty messages to you because of the work you do on Wilkipedia and I apologize for them. Incidentally I see you have visited Urbana Illinois. I live about 45 miles from Urbana.

It is almost midnight and I have been working on this note to Conscious for almost 3 hours. It takes me that long to type and correct my mistakes. I can't continue to try and get this information on Wilkipedia So if my little bit of knowledge of the first 45th PSH is not acceptable, just delete it and forget that I tried to give a little history from my memory. P G Theobald MD (retired) Pgtheob 05:42, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I need you to upload file picture here

___________________

Conscious,

You left a message for me on my talk page. Let me respond. I find it arrogant that you would hold yourself up to be judge of what is fit and not fit to be published on Wikipedia. Now because of you, Wikipedia has no entry on Eugene Guth, despite his significant contributions to several branches of physices, and his pioneering contributions to polymer physics.

You say "The copyrights of the journal articles belong to those authors." Are you an idiot? Don't you know people for 2,000 years have quoted from texts of journals and books -- putting the material in quotations with proper cites -- and never violated any copyright provisions?

You are a graduate student in Russia. Do you know anything about American copyright law? I seriously doubt it, based on your statement.

I have a mind to go to every contribution you have posted on Wikipedia and see if there are any asinine comments. My guess is that you are great to criticize contributions that others make, but your own contributions are shallow.

You might want to learn about the "fair use" doctrine of quoting materials that are copyrighted without reprinting substantial portions of the article. You are wrong to believe that authors of journal articles hold the copyrights to those articles. You must not have many journal publications yet in the field of physics. But that did not stop you from holding yourself out to be an expert judge of my scientific biography.

I cannot believe Wikipedia allowed a bozo graduate student in physics to veto and pull from its publication a scientific biography of a significant physicist. That speaks volumes about Wikipedia, don't you think? {above added by User:Mikeguth)

I received a very similar reponse from this user as I commented about his COI on writing about Eugene Guth as the subject's son back on December 13. This however was not in relation to the article on his father but on a bunch of his father's publications added to List of important publications in physics. I have replied to him on my talk page and reverted his removal of the copyvio tag you put on his father's article. I suggested he started again, read the policies and guideline and became more civil. We will see. --Bduke 06:28, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm another guy wh agrees entirely! Fuck you!

ASUE

Hello, Conscious/Archive6 and thank you for your contributions on articles related to A Series of Unfortunate Events. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject A Series of Unfortunate Events, a WikiProject aiming to improve coverage of A Series of Unfortunate Events and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out and participate, please visit the project page for more information. Thanks! <3Clamster 20:01, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Move

Hi. You correctly moved Fatima Zahra to Fatimah per talk page, but somebody undid your move [1]. Could you please repeat the move? Thanks. --Striver - talk 01:42, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

New England map is part of a series

I have no objection to the map being replaced by an svg version, or with the png being deleted, because svgs are replacing the png format and png maps are already available on Commons. However, I do object to the map touted as a replacement. The New England map is part of a the US region map series maintained by a wikiproject which creates the maps based on research and consensus. Regional definitions of most US regions can be very controversial, and have lead to edit and NPOV wars in the past, so I think it would be a dangerous precedent for a unilaterally drawn map to replace one made by consensus, as people have tried to tout one definition over the other in the past by redrawing the maps to suit there own opinions. I am largely retired from en.wikipedia, and only pop in to add pictures from commons, wher I am still active, or when someone requests my attetion. My suggestion would be for you to suggest to the wikiproject that they update the maps to svg format or if you'd like I can look into doing that myself. -JCarriker 21:15, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Friedrich Kellner

Thank you for your attention to the Friedrich Kellner images. Was there a simpler way for me to get those photos into Commons without having to upload them separately in Commons the way I did? I tried to find a regulation about that, but without success. I have a feeling there is a simple code that I could have placed on the images that would have automatically transferred them to Commons. Am I right? The reason I needed them in Commons is that a number of translations are going on, and the Friedrich Kellner page is now in seven different languages. Thanks again for your help. I do appreciate it. Scott Kellner --Rskellner 18:18, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Blind allez

Alan Thornton (author of the Blind Allez article) and myself have tried emailing several times granting permission for the article to be used on wikipedia but no avail. I state again for about the fourth or fifth time that the author of the Blind allez article has granted full permission for this article to be used on wikipedia. Please reinstate the article.

People go to a lot of effort to add informative and factually correct infomation to wikipedia and it is a travesty that people can just come along and delete it as being against copyright, then ask for confirmation of permission and completely ignore responses granting such permission. tinman (Martin Anderson, moderator of the GUN board in the official Blind allez web site and owner and editor of the GUN fan site "Welcome to the real world") --tinman9898 20:07, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Quake.jpg

Image:Quake.jpg should actually be removed, not promoted to Wikicommons. Image:San Francisco Fire Sacramento Street 1906-04-18.jpg is a far superior version. --Paul 23:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Edgey

Thanks for the cleanup, how can I add a picture to that wiki (I have dozens to contribute), since I noticed you removed it (but I'm unsure how to verify the legitimicy of any photos I upload.

Thanks.

See WP:IUP. Conscious 18:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

ru-sib closure

I confirm that I'm for closing the "Siberian language" Wikipedia. Conscious 19:09, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for supporting me in my RfA! It succeeded, and I now have The Tools – which I'm planning to use as wisely as I possibly can. I hope I will be worth your confidence. Thanks again! :-) –mysid☎ 21:04, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Narek removing my sources, yet using same sources??

User:Nareklm is using the same site for "source" , yet he purposely removed my same source (same site armenainhighland.com images) with "no source" so you can remove it. Please check this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Tigranmetscoin.jpg ,this is the same site armenainhighland.com source. Yet he removed my images from the "same site" "same source" Ararat_arev

The source I also had put in "File History" please check at the bottom of the images

Here are my images I uploaded from same site as Nareklm uploaded Tigranmetscoin.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Nkar3.jpg and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Hurrian-AncientArmenian.jpg

List of Russian rulers

Sorry! - missed the one good bit whilst trying to rv out the vandalism ! Thanks for that. Pedro1999a |  Talk  11:24, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Award

For your dedicated work in dealing with copyvios, I award you the Public Domain Astronaut. --Robth^Talk 06:50, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Copyvio: Montalbano Innovation and Development Inc.

Thanks for taking a look. I posted a WQA at the time also, and got some good suggestions on how to handle the situation. I guess I should have made it clear on the talk page. --Ronz 00:51, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

:Image:Monica sweetheart.jpg

Ok, I'm confused. I thought that the {{imagevio}} tag was the fastest way available to delete an image. I originally tagged this image on 14-January, which means it should have been gone by 21-January, if I recall correctly. How does retagging it {{replaceable fair use}} today help it get deleted, considering it can't be deleted for another week that way? Valrith 22:35, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Order of Crist Cross

The inner white cross of Order of Crist Cross is more length. Please see its real length at São Paulo City flag [2]. The white cross starts where the red serifs ends.Roberto Lyra 23:34, 1 February 2007 (UTC). Thanks

• Yes, please visit the Portuguese and Brazilian page of “Ordem de Cristo” [3]. There are some images with the length of the inner White Cross. The white cross starts where the red serifs ends [4] and, if possible, please fix the actual image. Thanks

__________________________________________ On your list of special contributions that you mentioned on my discussion page, I cannot find one single example on Feb. 3, where you wrote any content. Instead, you pick apart and criticize work others have written. You have their articles declared copyright violations based on what particular academic training? Study of physics?

You clearly have formed a bias with respect to anything I write and are no longer objective. You create significant harm to articles without anyone having a method to challenge your dubious statements. At some point, you really need to examine how you spend your life criticizing others' works, but not writing anything of substance yourself.

Mikeguth 01:00, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Comment to User:Conscious. You state that "I placed appropriate notices in the article and on your talk page, instead of going for outright deletion." That is outright lie! Any user searching for the article would have found the outrageous copyright violation and no content. That is tantamount to a deletion. You acted in December, not on Jan. 8, and you DELETED the article without any notice to me. Your behavior was appalling.

You are correct that I want to see content that you personally wrote. I am confident that you do not have any original ideas of your own, and everything you contribute is indeed a copyright violation. Accordingly, I intend to scrutinize all of your writing on Wikipedia and have any content removed for copyright violations. When you learn you can't write any content without violating copyrights, then maybe you will exercise a little more self-control when you go around sniping at and cutting down other people's work.

Finally, I believe it is COWARDLY for you to hide behind an anonymous name so that you can take pot shots at people and their writings but don't suffer any consequences. Mikeguth 16:07, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

CONGRATULATIONS!

You found the Wikifood! WizardDuck 23:20, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

1st 45th Portable Surgical Hospital

Hi, I just happened to notice the copyright issue on the article. The source now mentions (at the top, left of the picture) that it is GFDL and written by the same name used by the poster here. His talk page also mentions this. I haven't reverted the article because the template proclaims it shouldn't be touched in massive, annoying capital letters, but it should be okay to revert to the content? (I asked you because it looks like you know rather more about the copyright template than I do :P) Thanks- skip (t / c) 08:09, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

ALF image

I responded on the deletion page. The image is PD. Arkangel has written to confirm that they don't hold the copyright. ALF images are in the public domain, for obvious reasons. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:24, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

"Fair use claimed" on Image:Fred Rodgers.jpg

Hi, Conscious. You decided Image:Fred Rodgers.jpg was not a imagevio because there was some "Fair use claimed"[5]. Well, the images is tagged as {{Promophoto}} with no fair use rationale. And as I have explained in the nomination, the was downloaded from a site that explicitly says their images can't be used by other sites, that is, they are not promophotos.

Please, understand that not every image found on the Internet is promotional. Most of them can't be used beyond simply viewing them in your browser (even downloading is usually forbidden). Do you still believe the "fair use claimed" for this image is sound? --Abu badali ^(talk) 13:54, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Garrinchab&w.jpg

Also in this case, do you believe we have a rationale strong enough to use an image from photo agency Corbis? The fact the the image's subject is dead only increase the image's value. Have you taken item #2 of WP:FUC and item 5 of WP:FU#Counterexamples into account? --Abu badali ^(talk) 15:42, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not quite sute what the proper procedure for such cases is. I have tagged both images as {{fairusedisputed}} and moved your reports to Wikipedia:Copyright problems/Fair use claims. Conscious 18:02, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

If a fair use claim is unsound, it's a copyvio, right? Or is WP:CP only for images claimed to be free? These images were tagged as violation, evidence was provided, their uploaders where warned, a week has passed an no objection to the evidences were raised. What's the point in keeping them? Do you have an objection yourself? An image from Corbis is a pretty straightforward case. And in the case of usatoday.com, it was just about reading the site's "Terms of use" to see that was only on more random-image-found-on-internet-and-tagged-as-promotional.

I don't remember ever seen cases like those survive a WP:CP nomination. --Abu badali ^(talk) 18:08, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I do not feel qualified enough to decide on this. I suggest you nominate these images for deletion through WP:IFD, this is going to be faster (or much faster) than waiting for someone to clear backlogged Wikipedia:Copyright problems/Fair use claims. Conscious 18:12, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

If you "do not feel qualified enough to decide on this", don't you think it would be a better idea let other admin decide on this? Please, I don't mean to be offensive. I understand that you, like any other admin, don't have to be well versed and highly capable in every possible admin task. But I just think each one should choose tasks he/she feels more comfortable doing. And if even in this task you feel unqualified in some special case, you can always skip it and let other admin take care of it. I don't mean to imply any kind of incompetence at all. So, would you revert the {{imagevio}} tags on these images and make sure the WP:CP pages where these images appear are still listed as pending tasks? --Abu badali ^(talk) 18:25, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

"Fair use claimed"... What happened to WP:FUC#2 ?

Conscious, please, could you explain me how is Corbis's image Image:Garrinchab&w.jpg not an obvious violation of item 5 of Wikipedia:Fair use#Counterexamples? Or could you please delete the image instead? --Abu badali ^(talk) 06:49, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar

Hi Conscious, thanks for the barnstar. I would try to continue my contributions towards this. I could not do perform well without you. Actually you deserve this barnstar. Thanks again for the barnstar and comments. Regards, Shyam ^(T/C) 07:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Jamesmarkhetterley

Nice solution for Jamesmarkhetterley. He gets to keep his little bragging page, while it is out of mainspace. Thanks. Dan D. Ric 13:19, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Coronal Mass Ejection pic

Hi, I am just checking why you removed the CME picture. I would assume it is from NASA and is fair use, but I want to make sure. Thanks

USferdinand 08:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:N739PA Maid of the Seas.jpg

You removed a possible copyright violation tag of this image. However, the fairuse rationale is extremely misleading, given proof I provided in the image's talk page when I did another cursory search on the planes tailnumber and produced the first few images that popped up in a search. The image is still a possible copyright violation. I'm putting the image backup for another examination. --293.xx.xxx.xx 02:32, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Opinion on an image?

Hi - Can you take a look at Image:MontyHallProblemMadeEasy.jpg and let me know what you think about it's copyright status? It's made with clipart from Microsoft Powerpoint which has restrictions listed at http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/help/HP030900871033.aspx . As I read this, a derived work cannot be PD (because the clipart image itself is in the derived work, which would imply the clipart image is being made PD). FYI - there's an ongoing dispute at Talk:Monty Hall problem about use of this image in the article (which I'm a party to). It would be kind of a crappy way to settle the dispute, but if the image has copyright problems it clearly can't be used (at least until it's redone). Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 03:23, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

It's been a week and a bit since my recent request for adminship passed, and since I haven't managed to delete the Main Page - yet - I figure it's safe to send these out. Thanks a lot for participating in my RfA; I hope to do a good job. If you see me doing something wrong, need help, or just want to have a chat, please don't hesitate to drop by :) – riana_dzasta 13:02, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Flashspring relisted on AfD to achieve more meaningful consensus

Might you want to weigh in? Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Flashspring Cheers. Carolfrog 15:16, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

NWA Virginia Alpha Heavyweight Title History page

Why the quick delete??? It's the secondary heavyweight title for NWA Championship Wrestling from Virginia. JeffCapo 17:22, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Rochelle Porteous Image

Why did you delete the images for the article?

The reasons for deletion are given in the deletion log. [6] [7] Conscious 17:53, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Soviet Union/USSR

Hello. Shouldn't "USSR national football team" and related FIFA World Cup templates be renamed to "Soviet Union" form? We already use United States instead of U.S. or USA. Regards. - Darwinek 21:59, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Help developing Metallurg Lipetsk

I speak a little bit of russian, however i read it very poorly. may you help me use this website: http://metallurg.lipetsk.ru/index.php to help me develop this page: FC Metallurg Lipetsk. I just started it, and it's very vague.

Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#Regarding notability of Football (soccer) players

Hi, seeing you are interested in football this is an invitation to contribute to this discussion to clarify certain issues about football player notability. I think clearer guidelines are needed to avoid repeated inappropriate nominations for deletion and time consuming discussions. Cheers! StephP 19:54, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Logo_of_FC_Khimki.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Logo_of_FC_Khimki.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 01:39, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Nuptial flight deleted?

I noticed you deleted the article nuptial flight... why? are you aware of the fact that there is now a redlink on the main page? --Zvika 18:17, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Stop deleting pages

Can you stop deleting pages, leaving red links on main page! Ichigostar2007 18:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Looks like they desysopped me. I'd have blocked you next.

Can I ask... Well.. Why? You'd achieved so much, then threw it away in about a minute. Why? Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 18:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry blood, this guy's password was cracked. It's happened with a bunch of admins. *Sigh*. LOLz, that was funny, you vandalized wikipedia. You win. The Evil Spartan 18:23, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Ah.. You see, after reading this, I just assumed... Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 18:24, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

It was just a matter of time before another jerk would copycat Robdurbar. We have got to make the login process more secure... --Zvika 18:27, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree. From now on, I'm never using anything but the secure server. We should ancrypt all logins. ASAP. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 18:29, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I've thought since day 1 that it was ridiculous that Wikipedia has its passwords non-encrypted. What if Jimbo Wales uses a wifi connection? Someone can just take the password, and then very bad things happen. The Evil Spartan 18:51, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe we should launch a full discusion on this? At Main Page, perhaps? Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 18:55, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

While I'm no expert, perhaps WP:AN is the way to go. The Evil Spartan 19:04, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

In this case, encrypting passwords over the wire would not have prevented a dictionary attack. Encryption does nothing to help weak passwords. -- I already forgot  talk  19:02, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Right, but just because criminals often break in the front door, doesn't mean we ignore locking the backdoor. Instead, after a break-in, you lock both doors; in other words, when you see a problem, you fix all possible problems with it. The Evil Spartan 19:04, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Please note: this conversation has been continued here. --Zvika 06:24, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Unblock request

... and resysopped. I'm sure somebody has said this already, but please do pick a solid password this time round. Best of luck. — Dan | talk 01:10, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Ukrainian Premier League

Template:Ukrainian Premier League has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.

TfD nomination of Template:Ukrainian First League

Template:Ukrainian First League has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.

TfD nomination of Template:Ukrainian Second League

Template:Ukrainian Second League has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.

Hope all is well =)) --Palffy 23:42, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Carioca RFA

Thanks for your support on my request for adminship.

The final outcome was (31/4/1), so I am now an administrator. If you have any comments or concerns on my actions as an administrator, please let me know. Thank you! --Carioca 20:20, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Recent renaming of Great Britain and stamps

I happened to see that a decision was made to nominate two categories for renaming that involved a philatelic topic but no one bothered to notify the Philately WikiProject so that some members input might have been considered if notification had been offered. I think a mistake has been made because the current (new) name does not reflect the topic within the hobby, nor the complete facts of the stamps issued. The current UK does not cover all the entities that issues stamps within this topic. It would just have been a courtesy to have been given a heads up, that's part of why WikiProjects exist so that those who know a topic can weigh in as experts, excluding them means that decisions may be made by people who may have no knowledge of the topic and maybe no interest in the topic, just in the naming decision. Cheers ww2censor 04:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I didn't know about the Wikiproject, nor do I think that the burden of informing the project lies on the closing administrator. Please consider adding categories you're interested in to your watchlist. If you think that the Wikiproject will widely support reverting to the previous category names, a reverse CFR might be a good idea. Conscious 19:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I doubt it is a requirement for the closing, or nominating, editor to notify the project. It's just that I was disappointed no one made any mention of the nom until I happened to notice the bot category changes to pages on my watchlist AFTER the nom had been closed. I suppose you are right that we could try to reverse the CFR. I already watch 300 pages/categories/templates and nom pages are unique, so I doubt that suggestion will work. I'll ask some of the others what they think. BTW, I moved your reply back here as I hate to split up discussions and you possibly did not see the notice on my page to that effect. Thanks ww2censor 23:01, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:American university and college presidents

Just as a pointer, I think your closure of the May 9 CfD on Category:American university and college presidents missed a lot of the proposed renames. More than half of the subcategories are still named "(x) presidents" rather than "presidents of (x)" as the CfD decided to rename them. -- Rbellin|Talk 14:41, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

It seems silly to reopen a new CfD to make the category names consistent -- the old one was explicitly started for this purpose, and virtually every comment shared the goal of consistent naming. Why not just rename the remaining categories now? -- Rbellin|Talk 19:14, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Clarification

Hello Concious,

I'm a bit confused by your closing of this CfD. Specifically, you said The result of the debate was rename per amended proposals (specifically, splitting "Archaeological sites" and "Monasteries" categories), which also appears to be the straightforward consensus, yet you didn't rename the two categories meant to be split. Could you clarify whether that was a mistaken or intentional omission on your part, and explain what your rationale was if the latter :-) Cheers, Tewfik^Talk 03:48, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

There were so many changes/amendments during that CfD that I have significant concerns about some aspects of it. I voted support based on the first amendment, but I didn't support the final amendment added 3 days after all the votes were case by nominator Humus sapiens to split some of the "Palestinian territories" categories into separate "Gaza Strip" and "West Bank" categories. I suggest that we put up another CfD regarding this split because it isn't clear there was consensus for it (for instance I would not have voted support if I knew the CfD was about spliting categories into two.) --Abnn 04:21, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Crosspost

My impression was that [Abnn] actually supported separating between WB & GS for geographic issues, since [they] wrote Topics related to one of the two main regional divisions, West Bank and the Gaza Strip, should make use of those restricted regional terms, for example: Category:Palestinian refugee camps in the Gaza Strip on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Palestine#Consistent Palestinian naming standards, as well as supported in part based on my caveat. Brown Haired Girl also expressed concern about exclusion of the Gaza Strip (though she didn't support in any event), as did myself, David Kernow, and Carlossuarez46. Alai and Shamir1 also supported per my caveat, and the other supports seem to have seen the caveat and I believe that they support it based on a number of factors, though we can clarify. I believe that Humus only modified to fit the demands of the discussion rather than to change them. Tewfik^Talk 06:50, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

It seems that I personally got confused somewhere along the lines. I supported Humus sapiens' first amendment, but not the last one. I wrote my true feelings on the WikiProject Palestine talk page when I wrote that I preferred (this edit):

"1. Category:Airlines of Palestine to Category:Airlines in the Palestinian territories

2. Category:Aviation in Palestine to Category:Aviation in the Palestinian territories

3. Category:Sport in Palestine to Category:Sport in the Palestinian territories"

This is what Humus sapiens had written in his first amendment to the CfD. This is different from what David proposed during the CfD which was:

"Category:Aviation in Palestine to Category:Aviation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip

Category:Transport in the Palestinian territories to Category:Transport in the West Bank and Gaza Strip

Category:Sport in Palestine to Category:Sport in the West Bank and Gaza Strip"

I don't mind having a Gaza Strip specific category and another West Bank specific category for a topic, but I am very much against a "West Bank and Gaza Strip" category (such as those Humus sapiens proposed in his final amendment that I never read until after the CfD was closed), in such cases it should rather use the standardized "the Palestinian territories" name. What I am saying is that I don't support forcibly splitting a "Palestinian territories" category into two nor do I support using the terminology "West Bank and Gaza Strip" (which I think is what your clarification Tewfik is about?), although I have no problem with someone creating "West Bank" and "Gaza Strip" categories in order to further divide by region (in a parallel fashion, not as a replacement) the larger "Palestinian territories" or when a category is only needed in one of the two regions. Am I making sense now? I guess my position is nuanced and so is the situation. --Abnn 07:06, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I think there may be a bit of a misunderstanding then, since Humus' last revision was to clarify separate Gaza Strip and West Bank categories as you say you want, not the joint one to which you are opposed. So I don't think you disagree with the CfD's result, and I'm pretty sure that the other supports also support it - is that accurate? Tewfik^Talk 07:15, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Hmm... yeah, I think we agree. It is just the forceful splitting up categories that I don't agree with. I guess the weird naming of "Geography of the West Bank and Gaza Strip" article the other day and then its splitting up (such that the remnants didn't point directly to what it was split up in) was something I disagreed with. Categories and articles specific to "Gaza Strip" and "West Bank" are find with me as long as they can exist in parallel to "Palestinian territories" categories and articles. I got confused and probably over thought things. --Abnn 07:54, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Guys, I think I'll answer here. First, the two categories that need to be split were not overlooked; they need to be processed manually and are listed at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Working/Manual.

Now, for an explanation of the closure. This was a kind of a tough call, and indeed some problem with such discussions is that new suggestions arise in the middle of them. While one might think that this is good, there are some people who have already said something and passed by, so the new suggestions are discussed by fewer Wikipedians (if any). In case of this CFD, I closed it the way I did because there were little to no objections to the amended proposal. In fact, after such a complicated CFD some "correction CFDs" might be in order, for example to merge two resulting pairs of categories somewhere (if there's some disagreement over this decision, it won't hurt to test community opinion on this specific matter). Conscious 05:00, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Jimmy Kimmel Live CFD

I'm very confused as to why this category was kept. The precedent against categorizing people by project is strong and clear and the arguments for keeping it were 1) that I'd mis-stated the contents as guests instead of cast and crew and 2) a comment deploring the general notion of deleting TV series categories that was ignored in every other CFD where it was copied and pasted. Otto4711 19:24, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi Conscious. I'd like to thank you for your support of my RfA. It was closed at surprising 75/0/0, so I'm an admin now. MaxSem 22:10, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

List of flowers by season

I'm a bit concerned about this article. It's an orphan, has no references, and crucially does not state what country/countries/climatic zone it refers to. My instinct is to delete, but since there appears to have been a fair bit of work put into it, and you are the only listed editor, I would welcome your views. jimfbleak 07:23, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I've read the discussion, but that seems to refer to a category, not an article, or have I missed something? If this article is immune from deletion, it seems to me that it should be de-orphaned, and should be put in context, ie, This is a list of flowers in Europe/Germany/my garden or whatever, However, its not a big deal for me, you're an experienced editor, and if you are happy with it as it stands, I'll go with that, jimfbleak 10:10, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

DRV listing

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Category:Jimmy Kimmel Live. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Otto4711 13:54, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Articles needing original script

Hi! When you are merging the subcats (this moment), you are not merging the talkpages, as should also be done. Thanks! Chris 06:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

You've done a great job on this, thank you! There are still 4 old categories that need attended to-

• Category:Lacking Belarusian text has not yet been merged into the new cat
• Category:Lacking Bulgarian text has not been deleted and is duplicate
• Category:Lacking Korean text has not yet been merged into the new cat
• Category:Lacking Ukrainian text has not been deleted and is duplicate

Thanks again, Chris 10:50, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I would make these last remaining changes if I knew how, but I don't, please help. Chris 06:16, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Logo of FC Spartak Nizhny Novgorod.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Logo of FC Spartak Nizhny Novgorod.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aksibot 12:33, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

about the Image:Boniface8.gif

I would like to know why do you delete this picture, as you said "Image:Bonifacio-VIII.jpg". However, there is no image called Image:Bonifacio-VIII.jpg. Can you please tell me the reason so that I can fix the one in other wiki? Thank you. Chanueting 03:36, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I see, thanks a lot. Chanueting 05:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)