User talk:Crossmr/Archive/Archive 11

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Alexandra Powers photo needed

A photo of Alexandra Powers is needed on her wikipedia page. Would any of this pictures be acceptable?: http://www.aveleyman.com/ActorCredit.aspx?ActorID=14027 http://www.tvspielfilm.de/stars/star/alexandra-powers,1571496,ApplicationGallery.html?page=5 http://www.flixster.com/actor/alexandra-powers Please let me know if any of these photos are acceptable for her wikipedia page. Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 00:46, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Konglish

Hi. On the Konglish page, there is an uncited reference to a list of most common words in Korean. You also mention such a list. Could you tell me here it is published? Kdammers (talk) 00:11, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Hi,
On ANI you said "By his own admission he's basically gone from one screw up 3 weeks ago to this one even after a break."

I would be grateful if you could point out where I said that.

Rich Farmbrough, 02:18, 22 October 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Avalogo.png

⚠

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

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:40, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

regarding your edit

Pardon my asking, but why is it in the infobox and the body of the article, then? --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 03:54, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quite alright - happens to the best of us. And I'm not the best of us, so I should know. :-) --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 13:50, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anyang Halla

I'm sorry I missed the (sic) when correcting spelling. Just now I went there intending to protect that misspelling from future well-intentioned 'correction' by wrapping it in a {{sic}} template, but I see you've removed the entire reference anyway.

The unlinking of the country names was not 'inexplicable', it was in line with the Manual of Style: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (linking)#What_generally_should_not_be_linked. I agree that the article could be further improved by the removal of the multiple South Korea links. Colonies Chris (talk) 09:56, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where in the citation guide-lines?

Where does it say that it has to be at the end? The only sentence about that that I found talks about "one way."

Kdammers (talk) 09:04, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brain

hey, quit using your brain :P Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 23:17, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers station

I moved your comment to Talk:Numbers station and responded there. Ecphora (talk) 12:46, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Hello Crossmr. Just had to drop a note regarding this [1] edit. Thanks for making me laugh out loud on a chilly (where I am) day. Cheers of the holiday season to you. MarnetteD | Talk 20:35, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It reached me, too, and I had to enshrine it. – Athaenara ✉ 10:08, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ani

I am interested that you have often jumped into ANI calling for my expulsion from the project. As far as I know you have no particular reason to do this, so I am very puzzled by your behaviour. Can you explain it? Rich Farmbrough, 14:13, 17 February 2011 (UTC).[reply]

MOB

Greetings Crossmr. I invite you to take a look at Mail Order Bride. There is a big problem with vandalism on this page; at one point last year, someone came in and simply wiped everything, and completely created a new page. I entered in a section on South Korea and the mail order bride industry, and some are insisting that it come down because it does not present Korea in a good light. Please take a look, get involved, and apply your Wikipedia expertise.Computer1200 (talk) 22:15, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox SMS station restored parameters

After struggling with it more than I planned, I restored the parameters dumped by XenoXiaoyuJosh. I also reduced the title cases to sentence case. I'm not sure if all the HTML in his other edits is worth to be wikified, and whether there are any problematic format settings, so for now I left all his other edits without change. --Rontombontom (talk) 14:21, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hagweons

I wish you would stop erasing everything I put in on hagweons. I don't know why you don't want ANY information about chains on the page: I give data; you erase it; I give sources; you erase the entry; I give numbers; you erase the statement. There is so much wrong with the article, but you insist WASTING my time and your time. Chains are an important part of hagweon reality: stop covering it up. Kdammers (talk) 06:47, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are edit warring. There is a lot in the article that is not backed up with any sources, but you ignore that. Chains are an important factor in the Korean hagwon system. Instead of carping, why don't you help me on this, or at least just put up a ref. needed note instead of hiding an important fact from readers?

And your "you have been warned" ex cathedra statement is simply an arrogant re-wording of "I disagree with you." Kdammers (talk) 04:01, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sea of Japan East Sea naming convention

I am reviving a discussion on the naming usage of Sea of Japan and East Sea. See Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Korean)/Disputed names. Chunbum Park (talk) 06:30, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hagwons

It's about time you stop acting like the final judge here. You are edit warring. You write that I should cooperate -- why didn't you cooperate from the start, instead of erasing and thro2win up all sorts of arguments? Now, you write that you found a citation -- after eliminating mine. Why don't you try to correct other stuff in the article? For example, "In April 2010 it was reported that there were over 25,000 hagwon registered with the Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education, with nearly 6,000 being in the Gangnam area.[24] Despite this, several hagwons have tried to work around this.[25]" is the first sentence of a paragraph. What is "despite this" supposed to be referring to?Kdammers (talk) 07:58, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well

It's up to you. You're the main editor for that article. I just contributed because it's an important article showing a rather unfortunate situation in Seoul. Komitsuki (talk) 09:50, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any problem with using "Despite that". It refers to the previous sentence as obvious in the English language. Komitsuki (talk) 10:20, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you're right. You can move this sentence to another place. Komitsuki (talk) 10:25, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. I was doing something else and got confused. Komitsuki (talk) 10:35, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/As a Peace-Loving Global Citizen (2nd nomination). Thanks. Kitfoxxe (talk) 14:14, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for trying to save this article. I'm sorry that you ran into such unreasonable opposition and wasted a lot of time and effort. I have to say that I do admire your honesty and sincerity and I hope you are blessed for that. Steve Dufour (talk) 05:00, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Let me award you the Peace Rose Steve Dufour (talk) 05:03, 7 May 2011 (UTC):[reply]

May 2011

Oh please. Spare me the threat tactics. A) My reverts were NOT within a 24 hour period B) the material reverted was not what you think. Two of them were related to "citiation requested" tags, that another author had reverted but later replaced with a gobal template. (with concensus)

Back off on the wiki-lawyering. Theres absoltely no precident or rationale for deleting fully referenced encyclopedic content that is on-topic to an article.You did NOT have a concensus as the other user and I had reached our own concensus on the placement and wording of the material.

Like Budda (talk) 22:45, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AGF

Crossmr, regarding this: that you disagree with Delta, or that you have issues with things Delta does or says does not excuse you, in any form, from not obeying WP:AGF, or from being civil. I expect you to assume good faith with Delta, just as much as with other editors, however difficult it may be to believe on an edit Delta does, and even when in the end it turns out that you would have been right to assume bad faith. You are aware of the policies and guidelines of this site, they also go for you, and you can hence consider this a final warning. Thank you. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 15:09, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On the email you sent me...

Your analysis of the situation you sent in my email seems correct on the facts; the basic behavior pattern (refusing to help fix easilly correctable NFCC problems like spelling errors or problems with moved articles, newbie biting) are exactly and specifically the same sorts of problems we have always seen. However, I don't think this extends specifically to be a civility problem. Lets be very specific and careful and deliberate in how we note the problems of others, and don't let one problem color our view of everything; that is just because of these problems doesn't mean that he has violated any civility restriction or anything. As a general note, I think that you should present what you sent me in the email in a public forum, and I would support your analysis. As an aside, I am not generally comfortable discussing on-wiki situations in a private environment, excepting where privacy and security are an issue, and this was CLEARLY not it. If you've got something to say, say it in public. Emailing me, even if I agree with you, isn't appropriate especially because there was nothing in the email we couldn't be discussing on my talk page. --Jayron32 19:38, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

June 2011

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Thank you. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 06:15, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image use question

Hi. Saw your thread at AN/I and wondered if you wouldn't mind having a look at this and my immediately-following response in the article's edit history? I think I managed it properly, but would be grateful for any feedback. Have watchlisted this page, temporarily, so you can reply here, if you're willing. Thanks, – OhioStandard (talk) 12:32, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks; I greatly appreciate your having taken a look, and will regard the advice next time out, as well. Best, – OhioStandard (talk) 14:04, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks

I have to thank you for your great assistance in the article Gary Pinto as well as the correction of my oversight about the picture used for the cover used for Chen Aharoni (album) and taking the time to inform me about it. I greatly appreciate these contributions. They mean a lot to me and show the great friendship and good faith of editor colleagues. werldwayd (talk) 12:26, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fun fact

135 of your last 136 project space edits were posts either criticizing Δ or advocating for his ban. (Or both!) I'm not trying to pick a fight here, I just wanted to share that interesting statistic with you since you at one point seemed puzzled when people suggested they thought you were on an anti-Δ crusade. This statistic is why they think that. Cheers, 28bytes (talk) 23:35, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help

Thank you very much Mr Cross (I dyslexic am) for your help on the poster. I couldn't figure out what was wrong, I just thought someone was offended by the poster and deleted it for some reason, or sometimes my computer shuts down in the midst of things and thought I had done it twice or something.Foofbun (talk) 08:17, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for helping me

Hi Crossmr, thank you very for helping me and my mistakes on the Alive (Gravity Kills song) page and also for removing the gallery images in the Perversion (album) page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DoctorWho64 (talk • contribs) 20:01, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since I said I would

Looking back over some of your conversation at the "Ban Delta" thread(s), I'm not really sure there's much more for me to say. I could reply to the comment about how many articles I've edited, or the accusation of me being uncivil .. but I didn't get the impression that those were serious attempts at discussion. However, since I stated I'd drop you a line, here I am. If there's something you wish to discuss, I'm always open to my fellow wikipedians. I'll be in and out today, so a response to anything may not be immediate, but I will follow up to see if there's anything of a serious nature you want to discuss in regards to your ban Delta crusade. Cheers, and have a good day. — Ched : ? 12:05, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I note the "Thanks for your help" comments here .. I applaud you for your work and efforts in that regard. — Ched : ? 12:07, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

for the help. I was not aware of that problem until now. I already check my past edits and will pay more attention on the future. Sorry for the trouble, Andreasm ^{just talk to me} 19:07, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts on the Betacommand topic ban debate (in a block with too many parentheticals)

Hullo;

I'm not very happy with what I perceive as attempts to derail the discussion on the topic ban. I wish I'd stayed clear so that I could "close" it. (While I'm in supporter of the Foundation's NFC edict, I've never been involved enough to have formed a strong partisan opinon, other than that Beta has always had communication problems. I reckon I'm even handed {don't we all?} I've kept articles that I thought should be deleted, etc etc, so me supporting in my head the ban shouldn't in theory prevent me from closing it had I not !voted, amiright?)

So it's a "what now" sort of question... A) Is there any possibility that this will come to some fruition in its current form? 2) Might an RfC now be called for? A Concise Item^TM that explicitly stated it was focused on the question of the topic ban? If we go that way, I'd like to find someone to "captain" it and prevent fog by moving things to talk, enforcing word limits, etc. Slim, MoonRG, I don't care whom as long as we can get some resolution to this issue.

Thoughs? (I'm going to place a similar messageon MRG's talk, btw.)

Aaron Brenneman (talk) 01:49, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please excuse me

	Shitsurei shimashita.
	Thank you for clarifying. I should not have presumed. I apologize. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:39, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. WikiLove doesn't make it any easier to find the right images, and it actually makes it harder to leave notes after, which I habitually do. I am sorry, and I do appreciate your explanation. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:40, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw your comment

Aaron Brenneman stopped by my talk page and made the excellent point that all this additional chatter on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Betacommand 2011 isn't particularly useful to anyone, so I've decided to follow his lead and stop commenting there. If you'd like to carry on arguing with me, you're welcome to stop by my talk page and do it there, although I suspect you and I both have better things to do with our time. 28bytes (talk) 23:15, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On a totally related note, please see my talk page, I mention you. - Aaron Brenneman (talk) 17:03, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use image

Thank you for your help with the fair use rationale for the St. Francis Xavier women's ice hockey season.Maple Leaf (talk) 21:25, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Frog Boys

On 23 July 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Frog Boys, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that when the Frog Boys went missing, South Korean President Roh Tae-woo dispatched 300,000 police officers to search for them? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:04, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Feature

Regarding your edit that I noticed on a user talk page: I feel Amandajm to have been correct - the edit comment was not suggesting that 'featuring' could only refer to movie stars, but rather exemplifying why the term was a misplacer: It would have been quite disrespectful of the phonecard company to use the pictures of the unfortunate 'Frog Boys' as an attraction. Because that is what is implied by a 'feature', it is not as neutral a term as 'characteristic' (one meaning) and not something that is merely prominently visible (second meaning) —or did you ever knew anyone in an open field to say that the sky is featuring a thunderstorm?— it does have a clear undertone of an eye-catching and/or decorative attractive intention or effect, of what makes something worthwhile. Kind regards▲ SomeHuman 2011-07-24 03:45 (UTC)

I am perfectly well aware of the meaning of the word "feature". It is a noun, of which the primary use is for something that is on ones face i.e. a nose or a mouth. It is also used to signify a particular attraction. e.g. "The Statue of Liberty is a feature of New York ".

The word has come increasingly into use as a verb e.g. The film features the following actor. A particular film is featuring on TV.

I write mainly architecture articles, where the word is abused over and again in place of "has" e.g. "the building features Gothic arcades", instead of "the building has Gothic arcades".

I am somewhat revolted by the notion of a phonecard "featuring" pictures of the boys. On the other hand, "showing" or "publishing" pictures of the boys as an aid to their recovery is a very different matter.

I am sorry if my brusqueness gave offence.

Amandajm (talk) 04:08, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think you'll find that the word, used as a verb to mean "make special display of" has been in use since 1888, that is hardly a recent or unusual use of the word and has absolutely nothing to do with with "featuring an actor". This also came into use before motion pictures even existed. The cards made a special display of the photos on them. it didn't tuck them away in a corner, they were largely and prominently displayed on the card, which was special. They don't do that for everyone/thing.--Crossmr (talk) 06:25, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, apart from a person's facial characteristics and since 1690 'any distinctive part', the for our context inappropriate notions of entertainment and attraction are clearly perceived since the nineteenth century: Quote from the Online Etymology Dictionary © 2001-2010 Douglas Harper:

feature (n.)
early 14c., "make, form, fashion," from Anglo-Fr. feture, from O.Fr. faiture "deed, action; fashion, shape, form; countenance," from L. factura "a formation, a working," from pp. stem of facere "make, do, perform" (see factitious). Sense of "facial characteristic" is mid-14c.; that of "any distinctive part" first recorded 1690s. Entertainment sense is from 1801; in journalism by 1855. Meaning "a feature film" is from 1913.
feature (v.)
1755, "to resemble," from feature (n.). The sense of "make special display or attraction of" is 1888; entertainment sense from 1897. Related: Featured; featuring.
© 2001-2010 Douglas Harper

Crossmr, did your source for 1888 not show "or attraction"? Anyway, there are enough terms in English that are not as distinctly associated with attraction or entertainment. Do note that 'a phonecard featuring something' is easily interpreted as attracting buyers to the phonecard, whereas we should ensure the phrase being understood as attracting attention to the missing boys.
▲ SomeHuman 2011-07-27 16:07-16:25 (UTC)

Or does not mean and. The usage of the verb feature is an extension of its use as a noun to denote "any distinctive part". Both british and US dictionaries agree on that [2] It's an Australian company whose logo features a red kangaroo., [3], it sounds more like a personal bias against the usage of the word, and there is absolutely nothing presented which would indicate the majority, or anyone other than yourselves would view the word "feature" as having solely an entertainment meaning.--Crossmr (talk) 02:27, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do not put words into my mouth: Where did you get the idea that the word "feature" is viewed as having solely an entertainment meaning? Unlike "to display", "to show", "to direct the attention to", "to present"... however, "to feature" is a verb often used with a clear ring of attracting attention to the whole by the use of an eye-catching part, without needing the context to specify this meaning. It is not only my perception, but was also explicitly noted by the quoted dictionary. "To feature" is therefore not the best choice when the context allows for a such interpretation, while it is not unlikely to be a factually incorrect one and yet sounds offensive or unethical.
As a matter of fact, a such ambiguous term tends to be used to purposefully discredit someone, knowing one can escape responsiblity by an "I didn't mean it that way". Better to avoid it, I'd say.
▲ SomeHuman 2011-07-28 03:37-03:44 (UTC)

feature
Word History
Date of Origin 14th c.
Feature comes ultimately from Latin factūra, a derivative of the verb facere ‘do, make’ which meant literally ‘making, formation’. Elements of this original sense remained when the word reached English via Old French faiture – when John Dymmok wrote in 1600 of ‘horses of a fine feature’, e.g., he was referring to their shape or general conformation – but already a semantic narrowing down to the ‘way in which the face is shaped’ had taken place. This meaning was then distributed, as it were, to the individual components of the face, and hence (in the 17th century) to any distinctive or characteristic part.
© 2011 Word-Origins.com

also points out that a "feature" is a [...] part. It follows that "featuring" (as a result of someone's will) means that what is being featured is a part that (intentionally) characterizes or distincts the whole. In other words, intended to benefit the whole. And that is a clear misplacer when something is presented to benefit the part, in our case: the missing boys.
▲ SomeHuman 2011-07-28 04:21-04:35 (UTC)

Korean Language

Korean in a significant language in Primorsky Krai. Also percentage wise there are more Korean speakers in Russia than in China, yet Korean is listed as a language in China. Specifically the three countries in the world where Korean is spoken outside of Korea is China, Japan and Russia/CIS. Although Korean may be spoken in other countries as well, Korean speakers have specific names for those speakers so Russia should also be included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ieodoiskorean (talk • contribs) 03:09, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Because you performed a real act of kindness to Knock, Knock, Ginger by getting rid of its disastrous list of "Popular culture". Atomician (talk) 15:10, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question about Asian leagues

Hi Crossmr, you seem to know a lot about Asian ice hockey leagues. As I am one of the main contributors about ice hockey leagues from the not so well-know regionas on de.wp, I hope you can help me with a little problem. Is the All Japan Ice hockey Championship something like the national cup competition of Japan while the Japan Ice Hockey League was the national league? Were/Are there other league levels in Japan? And regarding South Korea: is there just this Korea Domestic Championship and is it also like a cup competition? Or is there also a league at national level? And the last one: is the Chinese Ice Hockey Championship a league or a cup competion? Are there other leagues in the country? Any help is really appreciated. Best regards, Vicente2782 (talk) 10:49, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for your answer ! Was the Korea Divisional Domestic Championship something like a qualification tournament for the Korea Domestic Championship? Or why did they have two tournaments at the same time? Vicente2782 (talk) 11:47, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for forcing folks to get facts right on that ANI discussion. There is a lot going on in that case and it's apparent that some of the folks didn't quite assemble the pieces correctly. Thanks for pointing that out. Toddst1 (talk) 15:07, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proof

You asked for proof that my edits are not automatic, I really don't want to provide this on the VPP as the tool isn't really ready for normal usage outside of myself, as I dont want to be responsible for when others screw stuff up. but add importScript('User:Δ/NFCC alt.js'); to your monobook/vector.js or which ever skin you use and then go to a page and press the cleanup tab. ΔT _{^{The only constant}} 12:22, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The edit restriction was designed so that it is not necessary to tell whether the edits are automatic. There are many ways to make automatic edits appear to be non-automatic, and ways to make a non-automatic cleanup script into something essentially automatic (e.g. tabbed browsing). So the restrictions are written in a way that is agnostic to the manner in which the edits are made. — Carl (CBM · talk) 15:36, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John Hecimovic

Sorry about accidentally undoing your edit. I intended to edit the old version I was reverting to, so as to reinstate your edit, but I evidently forgot to. Thanks for pointing out my mistake, which may warn me to avoid similar mistakes in the future. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:02, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of arbitration case

An arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Betacommand 3. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Betacommand 3/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 7, 2011, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Betacommand 3/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 00:37, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Korea

Hi Crossmr. We had talked about making articles for the Korean Ice Hockey League and Kangwon Cup. Will you be able to create those soon? --Hockeyben (talk) 15:08, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ARS list DRV

I am requesting that you comment here on a deletion review regarding the rescue list.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 05:59, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

resposne to comments on Marshall's close

Honestly, I think there was a bit of a WP:COMMON issue with the close. Any time a wikiproject page is nominated for deletion or deletion review one should expect and account for the discussion being immediately flooded by sympathetic votes, especially one as large and active as the ARS. That most of the people endorsing the close gave no reason, with some being nothing more than spiteful remarks towards me, just made it worse. Editors are required to plainly indicate that the page is facing deletion with a big notice at the top of the page. In this case that means essentially inviting keep votes, while WP:CANVASS prohibits finding a large group of people who will vote the other way. That sort of "damned if you, damned if you don't" aspect of the policy made my position quite difficult. On a side note, I just realized the discussion was closed 60 hours before it would normally be closed, rather than 36 hours as I said before. Not that I am fool enough to try and re-argue it, even when I am right. However, that is definitely getting mentioned in an RfC.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 16:58, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just noting that at one time these discussions were normally closed after 5 days, and it wasn't all that long ago (perhaps a year or so back?) that this was changed to 7 days. Given that others have opined that the close itself was not outside of the norm for a snow close, I would advise against continuing with this issue. In fact, I thought you had finally decided to drop this issue, which is why I ultimately changed my opinion in the topic ban discussion on AN... --Tothwolf (talk) 17:13, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some opined that it was not outside the norm for a snow close, others thought it was an inappropriate close. I said very plainly that I would not bring these issues up at ANI to try and re-argue the case. Re-arguing the close of one discussion that was about getting another discussion re-opened for a second time would just be excessive. That does not mean I think the issue does not merit mentioning at another level of dispute resolution. Honestly, I think the use of WP:SNOW in this situation is one of the points that should be subject to further scrutiny and so the close of the DRV would be an issue relevant to that.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 04:24, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Even so, other editors may see this is simply attempting to continue the same dispute in another venue, this time, an RFC. --Tothwolf (talk) 06:29, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is that the concerns of outside editors were that my actions at ANI were disruptive. I think that is more because ANI is prone to disruptive activity and so anything contentious being brought there leads to disruption regardless of the editor's intent. An RfC is supposed to be more stable and constructive.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 07:49, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DRV notice

You participated in the discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#WP:TFD deletions by admin User:Fastily, which occured following the closure of Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 January 24#Template:New York cities and mayors of 100.2C000 population. Be advised that I have opened Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2012 February 27#User:TonyTheTiger/New York cities and mayors of 100,000 population.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:33, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Ultrabotsscreen1.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Ultrabotsscreen1.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 01:56, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:NewsAgent1.png

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:NewsAgent1.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 01:59, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Japantouriststamp.png

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Japantouriststamp.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 02:03, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Koreanh1visa.png

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Koreanh1visa.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 02:03, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Changchunfight.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Changchunfight.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 02:10, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Anyangjerseyscompare.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Anyangjerseyscompare.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 02:19, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tzarburdenofthecrownscreenshot.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Tzarburdenofthecrownscreenshot.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Bulwersator (talk) 17:04, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite

Hello Crossmr/Archive. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.

You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang ^{DR goes to Wikimania!} 01:33, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Koreanh1visa.png

As I stated at the discussion page (Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2012 April 3), this image is eligible for fair use, should someone rewrite the article. If you were willing to come out of retirement, albeit only for one last thing - to make the article conform to fair use standards so we can include the image, then I will certainly undelete it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 09:16, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Lottedepartmentlogo.png)

Thanks for uploading File:Lottedepartmentlogo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:10, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

In this issue:

Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
Research: The most recent DR data
Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->

--The Olive Branch 18:56, 4 September 2012 (UTC)