Jump to content

User talk:Courcelles/Archive 73

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 70Archive 71Archive 72Archive 73Archive 74Archive 75→Archive 80

Hi

Hi, i saw you're deleting pages, and i wanted to ask, is it correct to mark pages with "unreviewed tag" for speedy deletion? example: 1--Jcaraballo (talk) 02:14, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

No, that tag does not mean the page should be marked for speedy deletion- it merely means it should be reviewed by someone other than the creator. In this particular case, the page met criteria A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, and I have deleted it, but the unreviewed tag does not mean the page may be marked for deletion. Deletion may only be done by the criteria. Courcelles 02:16, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for answering :). Greetings!--Jcaraballo (talk) 02:19, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Indonesia files and your beef with DASHBOT

Courcelles without human clothes

Courcelles, are you trying to set a record? Some 300 edits in two minutes--how do you do that so fast? Are you not human?? I may have to report you for being a bot. Drmies (talk) 02:23, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

It's the "rollback all" script, it lets you revert 50 edits with a single click. They were readded for about two minutes and then removed by the same user to fix something... and in those couple minutes, DASHbot ran and removed all the deletion tags. I really don't care one way or another, but the minutes they were back in use was not an objection to deletion, and therefore worth them showing up in tonight's database report for a manual tag run that would have taken 30 minutes or so. Hence, the rollback all script. I'm not a bot. Courcelles 02:27, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Still, I'm inclined to run a Turing test on you. I gotta say though, it looked very impressive on recent changes! Drmies (talk) 02:37, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Shoot, I always forget to use that &bot=1 trick sysops can do when I need to do a mass revert job like this. One of these days, I'll actually think of that before mashing rollback all. Courcelles 03:18, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

User:MWOAP/Wdefcon Deletion

Hey, I'm not sure if you were aware but User:MWOAP/Wdefcon was listed at Template:Vandalism_information and hence a few users may have been using it. I have now updated that template page to reflect the redirect disappearing. - Rich(MTCD)Talk Page 02:05, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I had no idea... restored until the job queue catches up. Courcelles 02:06, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

See message above

I'm not sure if you're intentionally ignoring my message above under the heading "Zach8604" or if it simply got lost since I added it in the middle (because it was still relevant to that topic). I'm assuming the latter is true, so I'm leaving this message on the bottom to call your attention to it. Feel free to remove this message when read. —KuyaBriBriTalk 14:34, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

I'll just reply here... and no, I didn't see it above. As blocking admin, and given their behaviour is childish, not vandalistic or attacking others, it wouldn't be appropriate for me to lock their talk pages, though another admin could do it quite easily. Courcelles 21:18, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Isabel dos Santos

Hello Courcelles: You may remember we were in contact because of somebody who constantly vandalized the article on "José Eduardo dos Santos". These days something similar happens to the related article on "Isabel dos Santos" where reliable and sourced information (mostly by User:Cruks) is repeatedly eliminated. The person may be the same as before, under a different name, because he/she eliminates the same kind of information. What do you propose to do? Best -- Aflis (talk) 15:14, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Both parties have been warned about crossing the 3RR... if this behaviour continues we can think about blocking people. If you think we've got a sock here, please make a filing at WP:SPI. Courcelles 21:21, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Courcelles. You have new messages at Prunesqualer's talk page.
Message added 01:03, 12 May 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hey, you seem to be a copyright expert, (or at least you go around tagging stuff!), I'm working on two articles simultaneously that could benefit from pictures. They're at WP:SDA/PUCPresidents and WP:SDA/LSUPresidents. I notice that File:UF00031408.jpg has permissions for use based on being published before a certain date. Could the first picture form this and the first ten or so pictures from this be used under a similar permission? I realize the date of publishing isn't on them, but it seems like a fair assumption that a picture from the late 1800s was published before 1923... Do you mind taking a look and if they're acceptable uploading them for use in those articles? BelloWello (talk) 04:39, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

The bottom line is that anything created in the US before 1923 is out of copyright. If you can figure out a creation date from those, you can use them, but the La Sierra one is, at least, highly questionable. WP:MCQ may be able to grant a more definitive answer, as without a date on any of the photos, I'm not willing to say anything. Courcelles 10:47, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Alright, I'll ask there. Also, take a look at this, should those logos be there? BelloWello (talk) 19:34, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Lift of ban request

Hi Courcelles. Please could you lift my indefinite ban on editing articles related to Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I have served six and a half months of this ban and would like a chance to prove I can edit constructively, in this one field, where I feel I have something to offer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prunesqualer (talk • contribs) 09:10, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Like someone told you in another thread, when reconsidering these bans, we like to see good editing in another topic area. I'll look closer, but that your last 50 edits go back to November doesn't leave me a lot of hope such good editing has been done. Courcelles 21:23, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
He has also continued to discuss the topic area on user talk pages during his ban. Request for clarification did not tell him not to but he is surely not allowed.
An admin should also notify him that "indefinite topic bans" typically cover user talk pages. UNtil that is done he is going to keep getting himself in trouble while breaking the stricter standards of decorum in the topic area.(which I have also failed to follow at times)Cptnono (talk) 03:42, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

PC protection

I know PC is over and there is about no chance of it coming back to life but where I scratch my head is what will happen to all of the reviewers. Can you help me 'cause I have no idea what is going to happen. mauchoeagle (c) 21:51, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

The future of PC is still being discussed theres a good chance of it coming back in the future. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:05, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
But what will happen to the 5400+ reviewers? Will admins take the flags away?
Removing 5,400 flags that do nothing without articles being under PC sounds like a total waste of my time. If we decide to do away with it entirely, I image the devs can remove them all very easily, whereas if consensus ever brings it back (and I hope it never does), we'll have a small army of reviewers ready to handle the work. Courcelles 22:23, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
(Talk page stalker) Indeed it is possible to very quickly remove all members from a dead group, and to do so without flooding the user rights log (it can be done without any physical record). Also, I'd personally love to see it come back, but people often call me crazy. Ajraddatz (Talk) 01:57, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Fairuse warnings on PD-gov images

You just tagged a bunch of Indonesian banknotes (eg. [4]) as orphaned fair use, but it appears that these notes are, in fact, free content -- see commons:Commons talk:Currency#Indonesia. (And, just to make life a bit more complicated, there's an extra discussion at commons:Commons talk:Licensing on whether the existing PD-ID-Gov template on both en.wp and Commons is, in fact, describing works that are free but not PD.)

In any case, fair use claims are no longer being made for these images, so please revert the tags. Jpatokal (talk) 05:41, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't know if you're right, but the files you have claimed as PD are no longer tagged for deletion. Many remain so, because they are still claimed as fair use. Courcelles 10:19, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

RevDel needed

Hi Courcelles, could you please revdel this revision as a blatant copyright violation? Thanks. StrPby (talk) 10:15, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Gone. Courcelles 10:16, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello

Please let me know if there's more I can do to help. --Dweller (talk) 10:29, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Not that I know of. Thanks. :) Courcelles 19:42, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Indonesia 1946b 25r r.jpg

Hi, I'm with RCP and File:Indonesia 1946b 25r r.jpg keeps popping up on my Huggle page. I noticed that you reverted the edit once already... I was wondering what he was doing? Thanks Bped1985 (talk) 13:15, 12 May 2011 (UTC) Hmm... Indonesian law isn't my field, so if we finally have an answer as to these files being PD or FU, all's the better. Courcelles 19:44, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Indonesian Banknotes

Any ideas on what should be put as source/author? I note a lot of this don't have {{information}} currently, and it would be a shame to CSD them on a technicality... Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:27, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

I think many of them were sourced to a website before the recent license change, which blanked everything that was on the page before. Check the history and see what you can find in there. Courcelles 16:05, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Stanley A. McChrystal

Just wondering (I saw your protection on my watchlist) if you think unprotection might be wirth a go? What the hell did you do to your hand? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:46, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Broke a dish, cut a few fingers up- tying with left hand and a thumb is not easy. I considered unprotection, but I couldn't find a single worthwhile IP edit, so decided that would be a waste of time. Courcelles 13:52, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
That was celever! Fair enough, we'll see what happens in August. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:54, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Tennis green winner 'W'

In response to your comment, there is firstly no need to be so abrupt. Secondly, if you look at the career statistics pages of nearly all tennis players, the 'W' for a tournament win has exactly the same green colour as I used.Booktext (talk) 18:13, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

A) That was not abrupt. B) If there are other articles using that headache-inducing bright colour, they need fixing, not emulating. Courcelles 18:56, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Wayne and automated tools

You might like to comment here. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:32, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello

Hi Courcelles, May I request consideration of a change in status please. As the last admin to post on my talk page I thought it best to approach you. I am interested in testing out being a reviewer and I would also like to be a confirmed user, if you think you might be able to assist with these requests I would be delighted. Thank you for your consideration, I hope all is well with you enjoy your weekend. User:MikeBeckett Please do say 'Hi!' 14:12, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

as you are already autoconfirmed, the confirmed flag would do nothing for you. As we're currently removing pending from all pages as fast as we can, the reviewer flag would also be of little use, as there is literally nothing to review. If you want to play with the features, I could set your reviewer flag on the test wiki for that extension. Courcelles 16:03, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Courcelles, thank you for your offer please do this. I would like to be experientially aware of the Reviewer feature so I may contribute to the debate on it in future, I appreciate your time and effort in this matter. User:MikeBeckett Please do say 'Hi!' 15:56, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

You'll have to go over there and let SUL create your account before I can flag it :) Courcelles 15:57, 14 May 2011 (UTC)


 Done I think User:MikeBeckett Please do say 'Hi!' 16:38, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Flagged as reviewer over there. Courcelles 17:16, 14 May 2011 (UTC)


Cheers User:MikeBeckett Please do say 'Hi!' 17:17, 14 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by MikeBeckett (talk • contribs)


While "the reviewer flag would also be of little use, as there is literally nothing to review." I would still like this privilege and have made a formal request for it here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions/Reviewer Thank you for you help it has been appreciated! User:MikeBeckett Please do say 'Hi!' 11:56, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Another RD1 for you

Same article, another RD1. [5] Cheers. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 07:06, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Gone, thanks. Courcelles 11:46, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 May 2011

FLC 1968 Summer Paralympics medal table

Thanks for your comment, you forced my hand a bit but as they needed doing anyway I've created all twenty-one stub articles to make the list a sea of blue so I'd appreciate it if you could find time to take another look. Thanks - Basement12 (T.C) 21:10, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Capped. Courcelles 14:03, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pamela Stein

I see that you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pamela Stein as "redirect to List of Playboy Playmates of 1987". When when you did this, you seem to have erased the history of Pamela Stein. Please restore the revision history.--Toddy1 (talk) 10:31, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

This was intentional, to keep the entire history of questionable BLP's sitting around indefinitely. Courcelles 14:02, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Deletion review for Pamela Stein

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Pamela Stein. 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. Toddy1 (talk) 15:32, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Courcelles/Archive_73&oldid=1171650496"