User talk:Explicit/Archive 15

Archive 10

←

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

→

Archive 20

please help me with some pictures

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

I'll look into it when I have some time. — ξ^xplicit 23:05, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Help

I Need help with templates on my wiki! i need you to make some now http://userwiki.thegamewiki.com/wiki/Special:RecentChanges --N64dude (talk) 23:12, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Followup on G10 deletions

You may want to consider revdel for the first 3 edits from Special:Contributions/80.122.74.18, they had other history so weren't good candidates for G10, but contained the same offensive content as the pages you deleted. Monty₈₄₅ 19:47, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done, revisions hidden from public view. — ξ^xplicit 19:50, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Image review

As you were pretty quick in deleting the photo I took, would you mind taking a look at [1] as a copyright violation? I tagged it four months ago but nothing's been done on it. I'm assuming I did something wrong in tagging it. Thanks, 72Dino (talk) 02:05, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

I'd hardly call a week's worth of waiting "pretty quick" (the image was an unacceptable form of a dedrivative work, by the way). I'm not an administrator at Commons, and that backlog goes as far back as November 2011. — ξ^xplicit 05:26, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Gotcha. Thanks for the info. One week compared to four months is pretty quick. I'll check back at Commons. 72Dino (talk) 05:45, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Mistake?

Hi Explicit. Just wondering why you deleted Talk:Flores warty pig as G8 when Flores warty pig does exist (contrary to what your deletion summary asserted)? Same question for Talk:Flores Warty Pig, although that is less of a problem as it was only a redirect. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 06:38, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Restored, sorry about that. Something must have gone wrong in the old noggin. I left Talk:Flores Warty Pig deleted, though, as that would have been deleted as housekeeping. — ξ^xplicit 09:10, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

No worries, thanks for fixing it so quickly. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 09:58, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Regarding What is Zealot?

You deleted the page because of G7 (author requested deletion). However, the user actually was performing a cut-and-paste move to Zealot (Starcraft Unit), which needs to be rectified. I figured you'd be the most relevant admin to fix this, since you deleted the original page. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 06:39, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done, history merge completed. — ξ^xplicit 06:47, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Status/2010

I just noticed that you deleted this last month. Could you please restore it? I must have tagged it by mistake. — Statυs (talk) 05:31, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done. — ξ^xplicit 06:24, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Apocalyp

Would you mind taking a look at this users edit history? They've made almost exclusively disruptive edits to honorific nicknames in popular music, an article several editors have tried to save from deletion by keeping it devoid of fancruft. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 07:18, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

I have left the user a final warning for their disruptive editing, and will monitor their edits from here. I'll be heading to bed shortly, so I'm not sure if I'll catch the user when they return. — ξ^xplicit 08:40, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Thankyou. And Good night. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 09:05, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

They're at it again. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 05:49, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

User blocked for 24 hours for disruptive editing. — ξ^xplicit 05:52, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Category talk:Articles to be split from January 2012

Hello, I see you deleted the above page. It was marked (if I am not mistaken) with a G8 exempt tag. Is it possible to have it undeleted? Op47 (talk) 09:20, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Restored. Force of habit of deleting the talk page after deleting the original page. — ξ^xplicit 19:26, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Thankyou Op47 (talk) 17:17, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Aaron Stipkovich

The article was only proded once. It was previously BLPProded, but never proded before. Please delete the article. Bgwhite (talk) 06:13, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

The prod was removed in this edit by Wikiand2012 (talk · contribs). Per WP:CONTESTED: If anyone, including the article creator, removes a {{proposed deletion}} tag from an article, do not replace it, even if the tag was apparently removed in bad faith. [...] If you still believe that the article needs to be deleted, or that the article should be deleted but with discussion, list it on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Please pursue AFD. — ξ^xplicit 06:51, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

File deletion without rationale

Could you elaborate on why you closed Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2012_May_13#File:Americans_Killed_in_Ramadi_June_2004.jpg discussion with a Delete? The only reason provided for deletion was WP:NFCC#8, but there were uncontested policy-based arguments from two editors providing reasons why the image is significant to the article. Diego (talk) 10:56, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I found the keep arguments rather unconvincing. The delete arguments asserted that the picture did not merit inclusion because the event itself—the execution a Scout Sniper team—was adequately described by text alone. Palm dogg argued that images of these types of events were scarce, especially at this "specific time and location in Anbar"; however, that argument did not address the nominator's concern that this image is replaceable by text. Limited images or not, he did not explain why the image was able to do a job that text alone couldn't. As for your own arguments, WP:NOTCENSORED was not even at play here. You claimed that the media would censor the image, but the media plays no role in articles. If the nominator's rationale was something along the lines of "this image is disturbing and should be deleted", then WP:NOTCENSORED would be a valid argument here, but that was not the case. The WP:PERTINENCE argument is a little off, especially since it's a manual of style page that explains how to appropriately use images to identify the subject (as the example used there, using File:APEC Police Helicopter, Opera House, 2 Sept 2007.JPG to identify a helicopter or the Sydney Opera House would not be appropriate), while WP:NFCC is stricter-than-law policy page that specifically deals with limiting the use of non-free files. WP:NPOV is a core policy, and I find your efforts of upholding the policy admirable, but it did not make this image exempt from criteria of NFCC, and I felt that the arguments made during the discussion did not sufficiently address the concerns issued by the delete arguments. As such, the discussion led me to delete the image. — ξ^xplicit 22:55, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Can you explain what you find missing from my addressing the delete arguments? The only reason given for deletion is that the image is not needed to illustrate the physical aspect of dead bodies; Palm Dogg didn't address that, but I dit it directly, so I don't know what you find missing.

As for NFCC, it's stricter than fair use law but it's not stricter than the encyclopedic requirements for free images, and other free images are being used at Wikipedia with the exact same purpose than this one, so it's a valid purpose by precedent. Also the nominator explicitly waived addressing political considerations, but since political considerations and not the exact physical information are the reason why the picture is considered significant per NFCC#8 (in this case as well as the other free images considered significant under WP:DUE), Fut.Perf argument shouldn't really hold any weight against the way the image is used. Diego (talk) 08:38, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

There seems to be two different arguments in regards to "significance" here: the contextual significance of the image by NFCC standards (that its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding), and the significance of using an image of this type of event, which the media covers/publishes a very limited amount of stories and images of events of this kind. Your comments on the discussion page argued the latter, not the former, and you justified that by citing NFCC#8 and NPOV. There was a lack of arguments explaining why the reader would suddenly not understand the article (specifically, the sentence that reads On 21 June, a four-man Scout Sniper team operating with 2nd Battalion 4th Marines in Ramadi was executed by a group of insurgents who had infiltrated their observation post.) if the image was omitted.

The use of freely licensed text and media files is encouraged as much as possible to support Wikipedia's mission to produce perpetually free content for unlimited distribution, modification and application by all users in all media, while the use of copyrighted text and media files are encouraged to be used as little as possible to minimize legal exposure by limiting the amount of non-free content. Freely licensed files used in other articles does not set a precedent of using non-free files in this article. — ξ^xplicit 22:34, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, that was helpful. I understand the purpose of freely licensed images and that they should be preferred when possible, but that's irrelevant to the encyclopedic use of non-replaceable non-free images where the alternative is deletion. I happen to think that what increases understanding to readers is not just the most noticeable features of the image, but the aggregate of all information available - context, placement and position of the bodies, and even technical (light, composition, exposure) of the photograph that illustrate how the reporter approached the photojournalism work. My pointing to free images as precedent didn't mean that they are an equivalent case with respect to policy (I know they're covered by different rulesets), but intended to show that this kind of information has been shown to be relevant to an article and are considered useful to increase the understanding of articles for readers, and thus the deleted image was valid under NFCC#8 - moreso in this case in which the context where the image was taken is the most relevant part of it. Diego (talk) 09:13, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

I understand your argument, but I still think the delete arguments on the discussion page still outweighed the keep arguments. I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. If you feel that this should be looked into further, WP:DRV would be the next step. Should you decide to pursue that venue, I will keep an on it, so a notice wouldn't be necessary. — ξ^xplicit 23:06, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Undelete European Universities Futsal Championships

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Universities_Futsal_Championships contains an overview of all European Universities Futsal Championships since 2004. Over 400 participants take part every year in this championship, with the record of 514 participants in 2011. The teams represent their universities (usually 16 men's and 16 women's teams).

A few references:

www.eusa.eu/ (Official EUSA website)

www.eucfutsal2011.com/ www.facebook.com/eucfutsal2011/ www.futsal2010.info/ http://www.futsalplanet.com/agenda/agenda-01.asp?id=11229 www.susa.org/eufc2007/

If you need other information please contact me.

28 October 2011 Explicit (talk | contribs) deleted page European Universities Futsal Championships (Expired PROD, concern was: I could not find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. Delete per WP:GNG.)

Nqv87 (talk) 10:57, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξ^xplicit 22:34, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Invitation

	Great American Wikinic at Pan-Pacific Park
	You are invited to the second Great American Wikinic taking place in Pan-Pacific Park, in Los Angeles, on Saturday, June 23, 2012! Last year's was a blast (see the LA Weekly blog post on it) and we hope we can do better this year. We would love to have you there! —howcheng {chat} 03:31, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
	If you would not like to receive future messages about meetups, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Meetup/LA/Invite.

Uploading of image (logo) File:Onyx Moonshine Logo.jpg

Hi there,

I am hoping that you may be able to help with a query. I tried to upload an image which is a logo belonging to a company and have had some difficulty in doing so. The file was deleted with the reason of 'F4 - lack of licensing information'. I have gone through the guidance on Wikipedia but I'm not 100% confident I have the correct information for the template.

I was going to amend the 'Non-free use rationale logo' template and re-submit, but there'll be little point if I'm missing something and it just gets deleted again.

I wondered if you might be able to give some guidance as to where I am going wrong and what I should do in order to successfully upload the image? Thanks in advance for your help.

The amended template is as follows:

Fbell74 (talk) 07:53, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

That looks fine. Please also to remember to add the license tag, which in this case would be {{Non-free logo}}. — ξ^xplicit 21:41, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks - I'll give it a go :) Fbell74 (talk) 04:24, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Infobox named horse

Thanks for protecting this. --John (talk) 22:28, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Silatech

Why do you insist on deleting the Silatech wikipedia entry? I kept the page free of propaganda and PR jargon. Every version we have placed up over the last 2 years has been chopped, vandalized, removed, etc. It is really quite ridiculous. All we want to do is place a brief, factual introduction to our organization on Wikipedia. Unfortunately, we do not have legions of visitors lining up to build and grow our entry from outside. There was nothing at all objectionable or hyped up about our latest entry. Don't you have anything better to do? Honestly... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephenwbrannon (talk • contribs) 14:39, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

The article was proposed for deletion by another editor and went seven days without any objection. It was deleted on procedural grounds. Reading the notability guideline for organizations and companies may help understand why the editor nominated the article for deletion to begin with. — ξ^xplicit 23:23, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Kunda, Pratapgarh

Would you help fix the the "expression error" at this page? I was patrolling NPP and thought I would wikify the article with the infobox. I can't seem to place what the error could be, I've used infoboxes several times in the past without troubles. Thanks, SwisterTwister talk 23:36, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

The error was caused by the coordinates. Only the |latd and |longd fields were filled in, and I'm guessing it has something to do with all of these fields not being filled in.

| latd = |latm = |lats = |latNS =

| longd = |longm = |longs = |longEW =

You may want to contact Rpaigu to address the issue. — ξ^xplicit 23:47, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

For The Children

The correct programme title is For The Children, not For the Children. It's not the article body that needs to be amended, the article needs to be moved, as I requested. George Ponderevo (talk) 11:50, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Ignore that, everything's fine now, thanks for your help. George Ponderevo (talk) 18:04, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Template:Ahnentafel/doc is used by a dozen of other templates

Hello. You deleted Template:Ahnentafel/doc because there is no Template:Ahnentafel. While this is true, Template:Ahnentafel/doc is used as the documentation page for Template:Ahnentafel-compact2, Template:Ahnentafel-compact6, Template:Ahnentafel-compact4, Template:Ahnentafel bottom, Template:Ahnentafel3, Template:Ahnentafel4, Template:Ahnentafel-short5, Template:Ahnentafel-compact5, Template:Ahnentafel-compact3, Template:Ahnentafel5, Template:Ahnentafel2, & Template:Ahnentafel6. Would you please restore it when you have a chance? Peaceray (talk) 08:36, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done. — ξ^xplicit 23:40, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! Peaceray (talk) 15:42, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Protection

Hey Explicit. Just saw that you unprotected EXO (band). I'm wondering why the protection didn't get moved when I moved the article, which is what normally happens (I think)? Jenks24 (talk) 02:50, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

From what I can see when hitting the edit button, Exo (band) is still protected. I'm not quite sure why the redirect remained protected. I thought that, when a page is moved, it takes the protection settings with it, but it seems to have applied it to both pages instead. — ξ^xplicit 03:21, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'll just chalk it up to an anomaly and hope it wasn't something I did wrong. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 05:30, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For cleaning up after my mess. Thanks! T. Canens (talk) 03:27, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! It wasn't much trouble at all. — ξ^xplicit 03:34, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

A Lyman Dally to Max Rep Redirect?

I noticed that the Lyman Dally article that I created was recently deleted. Though I doubt I could convince anyone to undo that, I was wondering if it could be turned into a redirect to Max Rep? It was more or less created as a companion article for Max Rep anyway, and now that it's been deleted, I'm considering in time integrating a bit of its content into that article. Having the content viewable via the history would streamline the process. That and I've mused about the possibility of there someday being a dedicated Max Rep wiki and a redirect would allow eventual export of the full content, history intact. I have no intention of undoing any such redirect status to turn it back into an article, but making it a protected redirect would assure its "deleted" status, while at the same time providing the content for future reference and use. Thanks! Andrew Y. Mousley (talk) 20:34, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

I have restored the article and made the page redirect to Max Rep. The history is now viewable, so you are able to integrate the content as you see fit. Cheers. — ξ^xplicit 23:41, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank You. It is most appreciated. I have exported and otherwise saved the content for future use and its continuing existence as an out-of-the-way redirect can otherwise come in handy. Andrew Y. Mousley (talk) 05:03, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

User:Themodernizer removing files without apparent reason

Themodernizer has been removing files from Windows related articles apparently without reason and certainly no explanation. He then removes all content from the file page and nominates the file for deletion as orphaned. Despite requests from two editors for an explanation, he has refused to supply one. After starting an AN/I discussion I noticed that you have deleted several of the files, so I thought you might care to weigh in, or at least watch it. The discussion is here if you're interested. --AussieLegend (talk) 15:53, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice, I'll restore the leftover files until Themodernizer provides an explanation for these actions. — ξ^xplicit 23:50, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Jordan Wall (actor born 1985)

The page was deleted under the notion of the person not being notable. The actor Jordan Wall has been a starring character for 3 seasons of the hit A&E series The Glades. As noted on the page for The Glades (TV Series), Jordan Wall is listed among the other starring characters, each of whom have their own page. References to his IMDB page were initially included in the original edit of the page, indicating other television and movie roles. A recent article in the Sun Sentinel (a south Florida daily newspaper) also discusses his celebrity status and charitable works (http://www.sun-sentinel.com/community/custom/society/broward/fl-societyse-crohns-0530-20120530,0,3299419.story). Please reconsider your deletion, as he does indeed meet notable requirements. (Tiger2gator (talk) 02:46, 4 June 2012 (UTC))

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξ^xplicit 22:48, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Your assistance please...

You recently concluded {{prod}}s on USA v. Barhoumi and USA v. Al Qahtani.

I request userification to User:Geo Swan/userified/2012-06/USA v. Barhoumi and User:Geo Swan/userified/2012-06/USA v. Al Qahtani.

Whoever placed those tags did not comply with the recommendation that the tag placer leave a good faith heads-up on the talk page of the individual who started the article. Our decisions are supposed to be made collegially, through discussion. Personally, I find problematic those nominators who choose to disclude those likely to disagree with them from the discussions.

Some nominators are newcomers, and are honestly unaware of the recommendations to leave the good faith heads-up. I am afraid I have wikihounders who routinely skip this step who I know know better. So, can I request you to please include the revision that shows who placed the {{prod}}?

I also request userification of the talk pages.

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 20:21, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

 Done, I have moved the articles and their talk pages into your userspace. Regards. — ξ^xplicit 23:44, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for the prompt response. Geo Swan (talk) 17:32, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

CSD and the various sock-puppets of Altenmann.

You see, I don't think that you quite understand, Sir. The sock-puppet master (Altenmann) (currently no longer blocked) has in fact been reviving blanked content from the user-pages of his sock-puppets, and put them back on, right under the sock-puppet tags, in violation of the blocks of his sock-puppets. Only a delete (of the entries, if not the page), as in [2], would do, I think. (I would rather not divulge and disclose as to how I come to know about this particular otherwise-unconnected user.) I thank you. Yours, — KC9TV 08:03, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, I see. Very well, I'll treat the pages as RHaworth did and delete all revision except the addition of the sockpuppet tag. — ξ^xplicit 23:28, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

File Suchitra Sen!

I have been suggested to contact you first, have a look here: Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion#:File:Suchitra_Sen_photo.jpg --Tito Dutta ✉ 19:55, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I did read the comment you made prior to the file's deletion, but I didn't find it very convincing. Not only is another non-free file of this actress used in this article (File:Suchitra Sen as Paro in Bimpal Roy's, Devdas (1955).jpg), but the source you provided in your rationale also hints at the possibility of her reappearing in public once again should she accept the Dadasaheb Phalke Award. As such, the deleted image seems to violate point one of WP:NFCC. — ξ^xplicit 23:28, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

fyi, the uploading editor has now listed list at DRV --62.254.139.60 (talk) 08:23, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

i did not expect/notice your reply here! Anyway, replied here --Tito Dutta ✉ 19:04, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

62.254.139.60, thank you for the courtesy notice. Titodutta, I will reply at the DRV shortly. — ξ^xplicit 23:20, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Heads up! I have replied once again in that page! --Tito Dutta ✉ 15:41, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Request

Please restore the pages User:Twri and User:Xuz you deleted: my ban expired and the rationale you gave "‎(G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban)" is invalid. It the future I hope you will check your factx begore acting as admin. - Altenmann >t 11:08, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Actually, you're right, G5 does not apply here as the page was not created before your sockpuppets were found out. I'll restore those revisions. However, it was inappropriate for you to restore the contents back onto the userpages. They were blanked for a reason, and should remain that way. You can create a subpage under your current account if you want a list of your contributions of the other accounts. — ξ^xplicit 23:20, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

I beg leave of your permission to interject. The two other accounts concerned are still blocked, as far as I know; also, Wikipedia:DENY. — KC9TV 01:47, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

File:KeithMiller1954.jpg

Hi. I'm not sure why this image was deleted. Can you help? --Dweller (talk) 12:26, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

The file was deleted as the result of this batch nomination. Basically, to be considered a free file, the image must be in the public domain in its country of origin (Australia, which it is) and must be in the public domain in the United States, which it's not. As such, this image was incorrectly tagged with {{PD-Australia}}, as it is not considered a free file by Wikipedia policy, and deleted for infringing on it's existing copyright in the states. I hope this clarifies all of your concerns. — ξ^xplicit 23:20, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Our Image Use Policy is appallingly impenetrable. When will this picture be public domain for US law? --Dweller (talk) 08:07, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

These images will enter the public domain 70 years after the photographers death. More information can be found in the first thread at Template talk:PD-Australia. — ξ^xplicit 23:57, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

More and more difficult to follow. Is this [still?] accurate (from the end of that section): "So if the creator died before 1 January 1955 or is unknown and the work was first published before 1 January 1955, then the work is out of copyright. This "in general" applies even if the creator was an employee of the newspaper which holds the actual copyright." --Dweller (talk) 23:52, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Not quite: one must consult the Hirtle Chart to determine when something will be public domain. This one probably won't be public domain until at least 2050. Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:47, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Please Delete my File

Explicit, as you deleted one of my other files, I have a request. I accidentally uploaded a picture I took of the Nest base without pixelating the serial number. Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nest_Back_Plate.png - I have (I think) properly tagged it for speedy deletion but because my serial number is involved I wanted to see if you could take care of this sooner than the process would. Thanks in advance, and if there are other things that need to be done, please let me know. Thanks, Steveketchup (talk) 22:51, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Looks like I was beat to it! — ξ^xplicit 23:20, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks anyway! Cheers, Steveketchup (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:24, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Re:File:Maulvi Abdul Qadeer Siddiqui.jpg

Re:File:Maulvi Abdul Qadeer Siddiqui.jpg

Thanks for noticing this problem! Bulwersator (talk) 08:26, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Article about Yarin Hassan

Hi, The article of Israeli player of Maccabi Netanya F.C. Yarin Hassan was deleted because he "has not played in a fully pro league". I think there is a mistake because Maccabi Netanya F.C. is an important team within the Israeli Premier League. If you can help me to return the article to Wikipedia, I will be grateful. Thanks in advance.

Bugfsyenjoygfgh (talk) 00:34, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξ^xplicit 00:36, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your help.

Bugfsyenjoygfgh (talk) 00:39, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for 20 (Twenty)

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:02, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Nancy Paterson (Cyberfeminist) Article Deletion

I was curious to why the page was deleted. I cited the page with third party sources and stated why they were notable.

Here is a full bio that I worked to build on. (Excuse me this was my first wikipedia article. She was mentioned in the Cyberfeminism article as one of the individuals who helped define the cyberfeminism, but didn't have a wikipedia page. Since I was familiar with her work, because of my own research, I decided to create a page. I really want to get this right so any help would be great. Thanks.) Sarahtariq (talk) 05:54, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Extended content

Nancy Paterson Ph.D, AOCA (born 1957) is a Toronto based electronic media artist and a cyberfeminist working primarily in the field of interactive installations. Life and Work 'Leonardo: Journal of Science and Art' included an article about her 3D VRML project THE LIBRARY in Vol. 35, No. 2 (2002). An article titled 'STOCK MARKET SKIRT and New Directions' which appeared in Leonardo Online, was a 2004 Leonardo Award for Excellence Nominee. A paper which Paterson have written situating cyberfeminism within postmodern culture, titled 'Curly, Larry & PoMo' was initially available electronically in the inaugural issue of the Ohio State University online journal 'Astrolabe.' This paper was subsequently translated into German, and is available in a book titled VISION.RUHR: KUNST MEDIEN, published by Kultur & Projeckte Dortmund, in May 2000. 'Curly, Larry & PoMo' was a follow-up to an earlier paper titled 'Cyberfeminism' which was published in the journal FIREWEED (Summer 1996). Most recently, 'Cyberfeminism' was included in a book titled CYBERFMINIZAM, published by the Centar Za Zenske Studije, Zagreb, in 1999.'Cyberfeminism' was also published in a collection of papers presented at the 'Sense of the Senses' Congress in Bonn, Germany. This collection, published in Fall 1998 by Steidl, is titled 'Der Sinn der Sinne.' 'Cyberfeminism' is available online at http: //internetfrauen.w4w.net/archiv/cyberfem.txt. Research interests include internet infrastructure and visualization leading to a Ph.D (Dec 09) in Communications & Culture from York University with a thesis entitled Bandwidth is Political: Reachability in the Public Internet. She holds a two year SSHRC postdoctoral award for research at the Faculty of Information University of Toronto and she is an Associate Professor at OCAD University. Paterson's installations have been exhibited at museums, galleries, and new media festivals such as Art Interactive, Cambridge; SIGGRAPH; ARS Electronica; Centro Nacional de las Artes; they have received extensive media coverage in publications ranging from Flash Art to Harpers, as well as scholarly journals and books. She is an Associate Professor at OCAD,.[1] Paterson is most notable for her essay "Cyberfeminism",[2] in which she defines Cyberfeminism as: Cyberfeminism as a philosophy has the potential to create a poetic, passionate identity and unity without relying on logic and language of exclusions. It offers a route for reconstructing feminist politics through theory and practice with a focus on the implications of new technology rather than on factors which are divisive[3] Publications Paterson, N. (2012). Walled gardens: The new shape of the public internet. Proceedings of the iConference 2012. ACM Digital Library . Toronto, Canada. Paterson, N. (2009). Sex, danger, women & machines. In Azoulay, E., Gaillard, F. (Eds.) Future/Projections: 100,000 years of beauty. Gallimard Editions Babylone & L’Oreal Foundation. Paris, France. p. 104. ISBN 978-2070128440 Paterson, N. (2007). Stock Market Skirt: The Evolution of the Internet, the Interface and an Idea. In Vesna, V. (Ed.), Database Aesthetics - Art in the Age of Information Overflow. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Paterson, N. (2007). MULTI: Multiple-User Interactive Template Installation. Proceedings of the Creativity & Cognition Conference 2007. Washington DC. ACM SIGCHI. p. 294. Paterson, N. (2007, February). VCR Story. The Capilano Review, 2(50). Paterson, N. (2004). Stock Market Skirt and New Directions. Leonardo: Journal of Science and Art, 11(12). Paterson, N. (2003). Bicycle TV. In Malloy, J. (Ed.) Women, Art and Technology. Cambridge: MIT Press. ISBN 0-262-13424-1 Paterson, N. (2002). The Library. Leonardo: Journal of Science and Art, 35(2), pp. 128–130. Paterson, N. (2000). Curly, Larry & PoMo. In Blasé, C., Hohlfeldt, M. & Lovink, G. (Eds.) Vision Ruhr - Kunst Medien. Ostfildern: Hatje Cantz Verlag. Paterson, N. (1999). Cyberfeminism. In Markovic, I. (Ed.) Cyberfeminizam [ver 1.0]. Zagreb: Centar za zenske studije. P.43. Paterson, N. (1998). Cyberfeminism. In Brandes, U. & Neumann, C. (Eds.) Proceedings of Der Sinn der Sinne International Congress. Kunst und Ausstellungshalle der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und Steidl Verlag. Bonn, Germany. P.292. Doxater, M., Niro, S., Paterson, N. & Shaw, C. E. (1997). How the rest was won: Shelley Niro, Nancy Paterson. McIntosh Gallery, University of Western Ontario. London, Ontario. ISBN 0771419805 Paterson, N. (1997, December). Technology Does Not (equal) Art. Fuse Magazine. Paterson, N. (1996, June). Cyberfeminism. Fireweed: A Feminist Quarterly, (54). Toronto: Firewood Press. P.48. Paterson, N. (1993, September). Lust & Wanderlust: Sex and Tourism in a Virtual World. Media Information Australia, (69). Aug 1993. Paterson, N. (1993, March). Feministische Asthetik im Zeitalter des technischen Utopismus. In Heidi Hutschenreuter . Claudia Schurian (Hg.) Feministische Streifzuge durch's Punkte-Universum MEDIENKUNST VON FRAUEN. Edition filmwerkstatt in der Overnight Sensation – Gesellschaft fur Produktion, Verkauf und Vertrieb von Medien mbH Die Rechte an den einzelnen Beitragen liegen bei femme totale e.V. Paterson, N. (1991). Word on Works. Leonardo: Journal of Science and Art, 24(4). Paterson, N. (1991). Hair Salon TV: A Computer-Controlled Video Installation. Leonardo: Journal of Science and Art, 24(1), pp. 15–17. Bibliography Azoulay, E., Gaillard, F. (2009). (Eds.) Future/Projections: 100,000 years of beauty. Gallimard Editions Babylone & L’Oreal Foundation. Paris, France. p. 104. Stermitz, E. (2009). Iconographic and Iconologic Art Practices with the Hoover. Feminist Artistic Subversions of the Female Body and the Household. In Tratnik, P. Art: Resistance, Subversion, Madness. Monitor ZSA, XI(1-2), p. 100. Shanken, E. A. (2009). Art and Electronic Media. London: Phaidon Press. Barroso, B. (2007). Interview. Diario Economico. April. Lisbon, Portugal. The Marker Magazine. (2006). Tel-Aviv, Israel. February. p. 162. Lovejoy, M. (2004). Digital Currents: Art in the Electronic Age. London: Routledge. Compton, S. (Ed.). (2004). Gamers: Writers, Artists, and Programmers on the Pleasures of Pixels. Soft Skull Press. Paul, C. (2003). Digital Art. London: Thames & Hudson. Wilson, S. (2003). Information Arts: Intersections of Art, Science and Technology. Boston: MIT Press. Federspiel, S. (2001). Net Art Guide. Fraunhofer, IRB Verlag. Mills, J. (2000). War zones. Parachute, 97, 49-50. Sherrin, B. & Bell, K. (1999). War Zones. Blackflash, 17(2), 12-19. Perra. (1999). Navigando In Rete Gli Artisti. Tema Celeste. Milan. Maggio-Giugno. Pescovitz, D. (1999, April). Be There Now: Telepresence Art Online. Flash Art, 32(205), 51-2. Silva, H. (1998, September). Style Bytes. Harper’s, 297 (1780). Deepwell, K. (1998). Women Artists Online. n.paradoxa: international feminist art journal, 2. Mirapaul, M. (1998, February 5). Watching the Hemline and the Bottom Line, Online. New York Times Cybertimes. Hume, C. (1998, February 5. Of Stocks and Bodices. The Toronto Star, G5. Miller, E. (1997). Myths from Cyberspace. Parachute, 87 (52). Hoover, M. & Stokes, L. (1997, February 13). Nancy Paterson: Live Wire. Orlando Weekly, 21. Orzessek, A. (1997, February 7). Seid nett zu den Maschinen!, Sueddeutsche Zeitung. Munchen, Germany. McGough, L. (1996). Envisioning our Machine Future. Sculpture, 15, 18-23. Palmer, R. (1995). Multimedia Survival Kit: Who to Know - The Digerati. Shift Magazine. 4(2), 30. Penny, S. (1995). Critical Issues in Electronic Media .Buffalo: SUNY Press. McGough, L. (1995). Envisioning Our Machine Future. Sculpture Magazine, 15(6). Itoh, T. (1994). Virtual Museum Interzone ’93. Intercommunication. 7. van der Plas, Wim. (1993). Jurrasic Park met z'n dinosaurussen beheerst Siggraph, AV Prof, 10. Marchessault, J. (1992). Incorporating the Gaze: Interactive video and other death drive. Parachute, 65, 24-28.Carriere, D. (1991, May 18). Quand Les Machines Revent, Le Devoir. Zimner, W. (1990, September 13). Anregend, Aber Nicht Aufregend, Neu Oz. Osnabruk, Germany. Lapage, J. (1990, January). Les Machinations Diaboliques, La Presse.

From what I can see, the sources you have cited seem to be associated to the subject herself. Please note that Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if multiple reliable sources of information on the topic exist, external to the subject itself. You can work on the page in your userspace (for example, creating User:Sarahtariq/Nancy Paterson (cyberfeminist)) before creating an article about the subject again. — ξ^xplicit 23:48, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Statue

Could you check if File:King Sejong hangul inscription.jpg is the same image as Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 May 12#File:King Sejong - from Commons.jpg? It's a statue of the same person but I don't remember if it is the same image. If it is the same image, I believe that it should be deleted as G4. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:05, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, it is the exact same image, and I have deleted it as such. — ξ^xplicit 23:48, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of "Charlemagne to the mughals"

I see you deleted this article on 1 June with justification "G8: Pages dependent on a non-existent or deleted page". I looked at this page on 18 May. At that time it had real content -- poorly written but real -- so I don't understand how that justification can apply. As an admin I believe you can look at deleted pages. Can you review the history to see what was done to it between 18 May and 1 June?

Possibly relevant: Someone had (unjustifiably IMO) deleted a link to it from Descent from antiquity on 15 May, and someone else had renamed that article Descent from antiquity (genealogical concept) on 27 May. I discovered the page had disappeared when I went to restore the deleted link.

Would it be possible to restore it to its state as of 18 May? Thanks -- --Chris Bennett (talk) 19:44, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Charlemagne to the mughals was a redirect that was deleted under G8. Charlemagne to the Mughals (note the capitalization difference) was nominated for deletion with the rationale: "The subject of this article does not seem notable. I could not find reliable sources discussing this subject with a Google books search, and the article itself does not contain any." The issue here was notability, not the state of the article. — ξ^xplicit 23:59, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Capitalization difference noted, that explains the G8. As to WP:N, I believe the article cited an article by Morris Bierbrier, "The Descendants of Theodora Comnena of Trebizond". The Genealogist, Volumes 11, No. 2, Fall 1997 to 14, No. 1, Spring 2000 (inclusive) IIRC. This is the main published discussion of the topic, and it is certainly a reliable source. Bierbrier is a noted genealogist, with particular expertise in New Kingdom Egypt (he was an assistant keeper at the British Museum for many years) and in Byzantine studies -- which is what is relevant here. He has also published studies of Muslim genealogies, also relevant to establishing his credentials. It's hardly surprising that the topic is not widely discussed, but as I read WP:GNG the reference provided should be enough to meet WP's requirements for notability. --Chris Bennett (talk) 01:09, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Very well, I went ahead and restored the article as a contested prod. Regards. — ξ^xplicit 01:13, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I see there was discussion on the talk page on May 23-24 which led to the PROD. I'll follow up there. --Chris Bennett (talk) 16:41, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Ed Piskor

Hello! Two months ago, you've deleted the page about the cartoonist Ed Piskor. I admit that the article itself was poorly written, but I think that Ed Piskor is notable enough for a Wikipedia entry. Like for example, recently, he's been featured in the Rolling Stone magazine... And there are articles about his work creating sensation among genre's fans. This is not mentioning his two graphic novels with the late Harvey Pekar... Could you please be kind and reconsider your deletion? Thanks. --FlavrSavr (talk) 22:55, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξ^xplicit 23:59, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!--FlavrSavr (talk) 18:13, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Please help me Repost an article

Hello. I would like to kindly ask your permission and help for restoring a page. A long while ago in Febrary 2011 it looks like you deleted an article about a recording artist called Ian Erix. I recently joined Wikipedia to build him a page and when I saw he had one and it was deleted I wanted to write to you ask that it was okay if I were to make a new article? I read most of the deletion comments and there is a lot of new information since his article was deleted. Ian Erix was signed to a major record label IDMG Scandinavia (Island Def Jam) and his music video is currently in the YouTube Top 100 chart for the week of June 5th. Also, his music video charted at #7 on the VEVO World Music Charts and he was playlisted nationally on MTV and on radio stations in many countries + his music video has been viewed more than 5 million times on YouTube so far. I think all this and the other stuff about his career should qualify him to have an article. Can you please give me the permission to write something fair and balanced without it getting deleted? Thank you. Urbanturn300 (talk) 07:47, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi there. Unfortunately, I am unable to restore the article because it was deleted through the articles for deletion venue. If you believe that significant new information has come to light since the deletion, a request may be made at deletion review for an input of the community. — ξ^xplicit 23:27, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Rodney Afshari

Hello,

I recently created the page for Rodney Afshari, a mentor of mine. It was listed as having no reputable sources but now I have been able to gather more information to validate his credentials and need for a Wiki page.

Can you assist on what I need to do to restore the page?

JordanMcCreery (talk) 14:20, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξ^xplicit 23:41, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Free use photos

Explicit, would you please be willing to educate me (or show me where to go to answer my question). My photo keeps being removed from the several pages where it was. What I would like to do (and clearly do not know how to do) is ensure that all photos of me here: http://thegreatstory.org/pictures.html and here: http://michaeldowd.org/media/photos/photos.html be considered free use photos. It seems that I do not understand what this means, or know how to do this. Are you willing to coach me on this? Please. :-) MBDowd (talk) 18:49, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

If you hold the copyright to these images and would like to release them under a suitable license, you can email permissions-en@wikimedia.org after following the instructions given at WP:CONSENT. — ξ^xplicit 23:41, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

User:Hahc21/sandbox/Sandbox2

Hey! I see you deleted one of my subpages. I have no problem, but it was really a redirect? I think it had other info I was working on. Could you please check it? Thanks. —Hahc21 ^{[TALK][CONTRIBS]} 23:55, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Yup, it only had one revision, which was a page move which resulted in a redirect to Un Hombre Normal (songs). — ξ^xplicit 23:56, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

o.0 Right Right! I remember. Thanks! —Hahc21 ^{[TALK][CONTRIBS]} 00:07, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Sweet Revenge Liqueur bottle.jpg

Is it actually necessary that the size be reduced? Everything other than the logo is completely free. Removing any portion of the logo would be unacceptable and reducing anything other than the logo would be pointless. Ryan Vesey Review me! 00:57, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, yes, because the logo is still non-free, and policy requires non-free content to be at low resolutions. The logo by itself is about 700x760 pixels, which is too high. — ξ^xplicit 01:06, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

It was nice to find

my image File:Cliff Fragua and his statue of Popé.jpg off the chopping block. Thanks for doing the paperwork. Keyboard work. Or whatever. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 02:17, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

China Sky

Please explain deletion. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 02:57, 14 June 2012 (UTC).

The image was automatically tagged with {{AutoReplaceable fair use buildings}} when you uploaded it, because you indicated at the upload form that it was replaceable by a free alternative. It was deleted as such. — ξ^xplicit 23:29, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Iñigo Pirfano

I see that you have deleted the article about spanish musician Iñigo Pirfano saying: "No sign of notability ("I am concern about the notability of the subject of this article. Inigo Pirfano doesn't seem to have achive enough credit to have an article here. I googled his name and got his own website bu)". Actually that's not true as he is really well known in Spain. Next summer he'll play a few concerts in Brazil [3] and last month he has received a prize by a Spanish foundation about his innovation as young talent. I think that his "notability" as you say is demonstrated at least in Spain so that he deserves an article here. Yours, --80.58.205.39 (talk) 11:23, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Can you please link the page? Iñigo Pirfano never seems to have existed, nor any alternatives like Inigo Pirfano, Iñigo pirfano or Inigo pirfano. — ξ^xplicit 23:39, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Here is the link to the page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iñigo_P%C3%ADrfano and this is the link to the foundation that gives the prize (sorry but i haven't found it in english) http://www.frdelpino.es/premio-liderazgo-joven-2011/ --88.14.130.102 (talk) 15:27, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξ^xplicit 23:44, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Mary J Blige

Hi Explicit. I got your name from here. If you have an idea of the answer, would you mind repling to my Reference_desk/Entertainment post at What is the Mary J Blige 2001 or eariler song that sounds like it has violins?. Thanks! -- JeffreyBillings (talk) 15:03, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

I haven't listened to any of Blige's older music, so I'm afraid I am unable to help here. — ξ^xplicit 23:39, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Kakati1953 early aspects assamese pp1,2.pdf

This file is being used in the dispute resolution noticeboard Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Assam.23Etymology, in an active discussion. Could you please consider restoring it? Thanks. Chaipau (talk) 18:39, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

 Done. — ξ^xplicit 23:39, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

WP Group - Fuel and Lubricant sponsor of British F3 & GT

You deleted our company page and I would like to know why? Please can you advise what the problem was and how I can stop it being removed when I put it back up again?

Thanks. MorphNorth 07:53, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

The article was proposed for deletion with the rationale: "Doesn't appear to meet the notability guideline for organisations and companies". This went uncontested for seven days and was deleted as a result of that. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. — ξ^xplicit 23:44, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Obituary H. Bürgner.jpg

Hello, I am the person who discovered the artist Dodo, whose works will be shown at the Ben Uri this summer.

I had added for reference the following:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Obituary_H._Bürgner.jpg

the page of which you deleted. Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dodofund (talk • contribs) 09:01, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Obituary H. Bürgner.jpg was deleted because it was not used in any article. All files licensed under fair use are required to be used in a minimum of one article as per our policy, and are deleted after seven days of not being in use. — ξ^xplicit 23:44, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:T1980/Music in Brainiac: Science Abuse

This userspace article was deleted without my knowledge and only just found out. I only just saw the information on my talk page. This is NOT a stale draft as the reason for deletion is given. This was originally an article I created a few years ago on Wikipedia's main area, which was deleted. I spent dozens of hours working on this, and for this reason an Administrator created this article in my userspace. I stopped working on it because i was unable to identify any more of the music given. Please restore this article as I have NO backup and not doing so will have ruined all the work I put into it. --T1980 (talk) 12:31, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Before considering to restore the page, can you please explain what will be done if it's restored? Please note that, per WP:STALEDRAFT, userspace is not meant to indefinitely store content previously deleted. Do you plan to continue working on the page and convert it into an article, integrate the content into an existing article, or something along those lines? — ξ^xplicit 21:52, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

In this case I am requesting a temporary restoration so I can recover the information. I have no backup so I guess it can be re-deleted again after a few weeks. It was originally deleted from the main article section for not being viable. I will let you know once I have copied it. Or you can just e-mail it to me if administrators have my e-mail address on file--T1980 (talk) 20:34, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

It seems that I am unable to email you, as you have not provide an email address (this can be done through the My Preferences link near the top right corner of the page). As such, I have temporarily restored your subpage. Once you have recovered the information, let me know so I may redelete it again. — ξ^xplicit 00:59, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I got it. Thanks for your help--T1980 (talk) 02:56, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Katie Boyle.jpg deletion

you deleted this file when you said that there was a free equivalent, but I can't find one, can you? Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 11:57, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

The file was deleted on the basis of the first point WP:NFCC, which states: Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created... As the subject is still alive a free alternative can still be created. — ξ^xplicit 00:06, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

I understand, but I don't think that an equivalent could be created, as the article focuses on her when she was younger and that time is now gone. Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 08:45, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Even so, this case is not exempt from abiding by NFCC. — ξ^xplicit 23:51, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Hail To The Sunrise Statue.JPG

I did not get to fix this in time, how do I get it reinstated? It was an image taken by me and since it predates the Commons, it never got sent over there. I really do not understand the entire rationale for this deletion, a little guidance in how to solve this problem with ALL my pictures, this included, would be greatly appreciated, as I have never uploaded something that was not taken by me and have no idea why this issue is happening. ToddC4176 (talk) 23:34, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

The copyright in question is not of the photograph, but the actual statue. The United States has no freedom of panorama for artworks, which means that one can not take a picture of a copyrighted work (drawing, sculpture, etc) and release that picture under a free license, as it would be infringing on the creator's rights. There was a lack of evidence to verify that the statue may be in the public domain at this point. — ξ^xplicit 00:06, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Photo

I noticed today that you deleted the following photo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:800px-Cuc.Phuong.Primate.Rehab.center.jpg

A week ago I was contacted by another editor and asked to have the person who took the photo send an email to the wikipedia permissions email address. Please see the following communication: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Morning_Sunshine#Photo_source

My friend sent the email that same day, but the photo was still deleted. Is there anything else I could have done to prevent this? Were you aware that an email had been sent? Who else should I discuss this with? The photo had been up since 2006 and I would like to reupload it.06:18, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Hm, I was not aware that an email to Wikipedia permissions. I will get in contact with a volunteer and try to get this sorted shortly. — ξ^xplicit 23:51, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Followup, I would like to direct you to this response I received in regards to this image. — ξ^xplicit 00:02, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Anime Festival Wichita Prod

Hello, I have a question related to the contested Prod of Anime Festival Wichita. I believe the contested prod might have been an act of vandalism by the IP user 192.251.134.5 and the information on their talk page User talk:192.251.134.5. If this was vandalism, would the article still require an AfD? Thanks. Esw01407 (talk) 17:12, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Was it vandalism? From what I can tell, the IP was making nonconstructive edits that weren't necessarily vandalism. Even the prod was removed in bad faith, WP:CONTESTED states that the prod should not re-added. — ξ^xplicit 23:51, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply and the information, I'll move on to Afd. Esw01407 (talk) 00:06, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Sudais

For what it is worth, the file on Commons is a copyvio, and I will probably speedy delete it, as that is a rip of the image posted by the Ninth session of the Dubai International Holy Quran Award. -- Avi (talk) 19:17, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Noted. Still, I don't believe the result of the file deletion discussion should have been any different. — ξ^xplicit 00:02, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Understood. There do seem to be more images of this person around now than in 2008. -- Avi (talk)

Deletion of File:Unger at office.png

Hi, you recently deleted this file on grounds of non-free content. I am having trouble with the media policy, however, and perhaps you can help. The situation is that the creator provided this media file for use on Wikipedia and for other educational purposes. He said that he would like to keep the copyright so as to avoid possible abuses. What type of license do you suggest? Thanks for your help. Archivingcontext (talk) 00:59, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Since this image was tagged as fair use, it violated point one of the non-free content criteria policy in that "non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose." There are several freely licensed images in the article, and there's really little room to justify the addition of a non-free image. Additionally, on the talk page, you indicated that "The image was provided by the creator for use on Wikipedia and other non-commercial sites." The copyright holder of the image would have to allow commercial use in order for it to be uploaded under a suitable free license. Otherwise, it would meet the speedy deletion criteria F3. — ξ^xplicit 01:08, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Spicejet's second delhi flight picture posted by me

Hi, I posted the Spicejet's second delhi flight from Madurai (taken by me and copyrights reserved by me) but I learn that you had removed it, I can't figure out why. Could you help me add the deleted image there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Balus1990 (talk • contribs) 02:39, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

This image was deleted because you did not specify a license you released this image under. For further information, please see file copyright tags for image creators. I can restore the file for you once you specify a license. — ξ^xplicit 00:02, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

File:AB Logo 300.png

The styalized text of the image listed at Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2010_December_23#File:AB_Logo_300.png also includes an image. Shoud the license be PD-text as listed in the close or the one for non-free logos? -- JeffreyBillings (talk) 03:39, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

This logo does not seem to be complex enough meet the threshold of originality, as the figure on the left is really just a few dots. The current license seems to be just fine. — ξ^xplicit 00:02, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Undelete File:MAF logo.png

Can you undelete File:MAF logo.png? The page on which it was used was moved and edited unnecessarily. Ta. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 08:02, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

 Done. — ξ^xplicit 00:02, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Question

Not that I care, I definitely don't see a reason to go to DRV for either image, but is this allowed of admins: Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2012_June_18#File:HexagonBorsuk.jpg and the one beneath. Maybe that admin didn't actually delete the image or something, but I didn't think that admins could close nominations that they were part of. The first one was contested (albeit not necessarily worth keeping) but I still thought that this situation was inappropriate. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 21:58, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

The admin moved the files to Commons once opposition came up, and deleted them under F8 afterwards. There was nothing here done out of process here. — ξ^xplicit 00:02, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Hail to the Sunrise

Hey there. I'm closing out some discussions at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2012 June 10 and I'm wondering why you deleted File:Hail To The Sunrise Statue.JPG. Your rationale was a link to the PUF discussion, but the comments in the discussion itself (from Stefan2, whose opinion I tend to value) seem to indicate that the statue is most likely in the public domain. Did you find information to the contrary? I only ask because the nomination after that one makes reference to it, and I'm inclined not to delete that one either. What do you think? Kafziel ^{Complaint Department: Please take a number} 15:30, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

I deleted the image because it was lacking the needed verification to come to the conclusion that the statue is actually in the public domain. Copyright is a big issue, a big legal issue, at that. I, personally, am one to err to the side of caution and delete an image instead of assuming something is not copyrighted. In this case, the statue may be in the public domain, but that certainty is not 100%. As such, I think it's better to play it safe than to gamble with possibly infringing on someone's copyright. — ξ^xplicit 01:28, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure I agree. What is the "gamble" you're referring to? We've certainly done our due diligence in trying to determine its status; proving a negative is often impossible, but, for lack of any other information, I don't think we're risking harm by making a reasonable assumption that it's in the public domain. If at some point we found information to the contrary, the worst case scenario is that the image would be deleted at that time. Why jump the gun? Kafziel ^{Complaint Department: Please take a number} 16:39, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, I suppose that's true. I don't feel too strongly about this case, so I'll go ahead and restore it. — ξ^xplicit 01:51, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the talk! All the best! Kafziel ^{Complaint Department: Please take a number} 04:11, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Cycle Airways deletion

Cyclone Airways is a legitimate charter airline operating in north Luzon area. Deleting its corresponding article in Wikipedia is like denying wiki readers an opportunity to know more about this small airline. bedcrawl 05:11, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Can you link the article? Neither Cycle Airways nor Cycle airways have ever existed, so it's a little difficult to address this message. — ξ^xplicit 00:59, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Richard bazley image deletion - Lack of licensing info

Hi there, An image I uploaded entitled Richard_Bazley.jpg was deleted after 7 days due to lack of licensing info. I spoke with Richard Bazley, who owns the copyright on the image, and he was kind enough to email wikipedia releasing the image under a creative commons license, using one of the wikipedia templates for this purpose. He did this on 21st June. Are you able to check if the permission has been recieved and re-add the image? Many thanks Dave Dave.m.houghton (talk) 09:33, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi. As I am not an OTRS volunteer, I am unable to check for this permission. If he didn't receive a response to his email, he can try emailing them again, or one can request assistance at the OTRS noticeboard. — ξ^xplicit 00:59, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Cross Gene

You moved my page to a page titled Cross Gene, previously CROSS GENE. Why...? They band's proper name is CROSS GENE. Please change it back, and thank you for asking to keep the page up! :D I was so worried I was like, oh man. Can you help me by adding the peak position? I forgot how lol...I did it the first time but I deleted(I'm stupid lol) THANKS n_n — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ukiss13elieve (talk • contribs) 18:56, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I moved the page to regular capitalization because of our WP:ALLCAPS guideline. As Cross Gene is not an acronym, initialism, or abbreviation, it title of the article should not be in all caps, regardless of how it's written elsewhere. For a similar case, see Talk:Exo (band)#Requested move. I will be moving it back to abide by the guideline once again.

Also, I couldn't help but notice how your edits essentially reversed everything I did for the page, which just brings it back to the stage that got it nominate dot begin with. Please note that blogs like Allkpop and Ohkpop are not considered reliable sources, and these should not be used to reference claims. Lastly, please do not restore the positions of the group members without citing a source. This goes against a very core policy here, verifiability. Again, I will re-edit this page to abide by Wikipedia policies and guidelines. — ξ^xplicit 00:59, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I talked to another admin and they gave me the rules, but what ever I guess. It's supposed to be written that way correctly, I don't understand the point of not writing things correctly. Also, for the member positions, there is a video of them telling their positions, just saying...I'll just get the interview from mnet champion on naver or something. I don't think Allkpop is a blog also, they've interviewed idols themselves and have an official CEO, they also give away official signed merchandise. Maybe Ohkpop I was wrong with, I'm not sure, but I'm pretty positive about allkpop being an okay news source. Also, you deleted the edit history, which kinda annoys me... >.> lol Oh dang, I just saw that you completely deleted my predebut section, which is also a bit..at least leave the history so I can keep that, but you basically erased my work, which I don't think is really fair. At least I didn't erase your editing history. Ukiss13elieve (talk) • contribs) 13:38, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Can you provide the link to this video? For every claim made in an article, you must provide a source to back it up, which my edits do. Any claim without a source is removed on the spot. As for Allkpop, their disclaimer states: "allkpop is a celebrity gossip site which publishes rumors and conjecture in addition to accurately reported facts. Information on this site may or may not be true and allkpop makes no warranty as to the validity of any claims." Additionally, in their Terms of Service, they refer to the website as a blog in the line "If you comment on a blog post..." And contrary to your claim, you did essentially revert nearly everything I added. — ξ^xplicit 01:51, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thank you for protecting people's pages! I've looked at other pages and I've seen you stopping others from just simply deleting things without a care. Thank You! :D Ukiss13elieve (talk) 19:40, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! — ξ^xplicit 00:59, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Two images with exactly the same name

Hi, I uploaded File:SSO logo.jpg to Commons, and when I tried to use it in Social Security Organization article, another file with exactly the same name appeared. Since I couldn't find any solution to this problem in Wikipedia guidelines, could you possibly find a solution? Thank you. JuventiniFan (talk) 05:44, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I have renamed the local copy to File:Syracuse Symphony Orchestra logo.jpg, so now the file on Commons should show up here. Cheers. — ξ^xplicit 06:13, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help. JuventiniFan (talk) 07:28, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Userfy

I noticed the expired PROD for Noel "Detail" Fisher production discography and that I meant to remove the PROD but forgot. will you userfy it to our WikiProject space, so we can fix the problems and bring the article back when corrected? Wikipedia:WikiProject Record Production/Workshop/Noel "Detail" Fisher production discography Thank you - StringdaBrokeda (talk) 05:42, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

 Done, page restored and moved. — ξ^xplicit 23:18, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! StringdaBrokeda (talk) 23:28, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Restoring requestion

Can you restore the files File:Madonna - The Immaculate Collection.png and File:Madonna - Like a Prayer.jpg. The uploader has similar edits as VernitaG (talk · contribs) Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 04:39, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Facepalm History repeats itself. Sorry about that, again. — ξ^xplicit 04:57, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Restoring 'Maritime Domain Awareness'

Please restore this. This is notable. Very. Just do a google. Many thanks - UN — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.239.220.249 (talk) 14:31, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

 Done by Graeme Bartlett (talk · contribs). — ξ^xplicit 23:37, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Deleted image SyncToySS.png

Hi Explicit. You deleted File:SyncToySS.png with the comment "F6: Non-free media file with no non-free use rationale". I think there should have been fair notice for people to add a rationale before it was deleted. Maybe there was a notice on the image's talk page, but there wasn't from SyncToy, which was almost certainly the only page that linked to that image. Only the article, not the image, was on my watchlist, and I'm guess that applied to most other interested people as well.

Please could you restore the image so I can put a rationale on it? And in future could you check that editors are notified through article talk pages (when possible) rather than just image talk pages, so that they actually get a chance to respond? Thanks. Quietbritishjim (talk) 16:47, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

 Done, file restored. — ξ^xplicit 03:50, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

List of Henchmen\List of Allies

Thank you for deleting List of James Bond henchmen in A View to a Kill, List of James Bond allies in A View to a Kill and List of James Bond allies in Dr. No. Unfortunately Template:James Bond characters reveals a plethora of equally useless pages waiting to be deleted. Does a faster way of doing this exist, or must I go through the pages one by one? For now, I seek only to delete those pages titled "List of (allies/henchman) in (film)". SchroCat, Betty Logan and I previously discussed this problem. - Fanthrillers (talk) 22:55, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, there is no faster process to get these deleted. You'll have to nominate these articles one by one as you have with the previous ones. — ξ^xplicit 03:50, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Niemti has reverted my Prod and turned the pages into redirects. Is that a proper way to deal with a Prod? He gives further reasons on the Bond talk page. - Fanthrillers (talk) 23:18, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

It's definitely an option, deletion is not mandatory if the user thinks the redirect target is a useful search term. If you still think the articles should be deleted, there's always articles for deletion. — ξ^xplicit 23:40, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Who will conquer the world?

Hi, I've just been notified you deleted the image file called Who will conquer the world.jpg on the grounds that it lacked a rationale for non-free image. I wasn't aware the image was going to be killed. Would you be able to reinstate it to enable me to add that rationale please? BlackCab (talk) 03:39, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

 Done, file restored. — ξ^xplicit 03:50, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. BlackCab (talk) 03:52, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

OK, sorry, now another question. Is it possible to add the rationale to this file? I can't see anywhere to do it. Or should I start again and upload it as a new image and drop it into the template that's provided? BlackCab (talk) 04:21, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, you can use the {{Non-free use rationale}} template and fill out all the required fields. — ξ^xplicit 04:25, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

{{has-NFUR}}

Much appreciated if someone else could review media tagged with this as well Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:00, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Venus Envy

I noticed the page was deleted, and I was wondering that if the webcomic itself updated, could the page be undeleted? I realize that the comic isn't particularly notable, but I am just wondering. I would have objected to the deletion during the prod period, but my internet was being less than cooperative. P.S. I noticed a disambuguation page linking to it, and it probably needs to be changed somewhat as only two of the eight results link to anything. --82.24.170.37 (talk) 15:24, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

In order for this webcomic to merit an article on Wikipedia, it should at least meet the general notability guideline. Solely being updated is insufficient for the subject to assert notability. As for the disambiguation page, red links are sometimes put in place to encourage editors to create these pages, so there isn't anything necessarily wrong with them. — ξ^xplicit 23:40, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Copy of deleted image

I don't know if that's at all possible, but could you e-mail me a copy (or a link to a copy) of File:Mariosizechart.jpg? Thanks. Salvidrim! 01:01, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Yup, I have sent you an email with a copy. — ξ^xplicit 01:05, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! :) Salvidrim! 01:09, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Can you check this please?

Can you check if the image you deleted per this nomination Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 June 8#File:Jennyatbat.png is essentially the same as this new uploaded image File:Jennyatbat2.jpg. I don't remember the image. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 14:07, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

The two images are completely different. — ξ^xplicit 00:35, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for that. ww2censor (talk) 01:43, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Annie Seel portrait Alexoch Martin.jpg

Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2012_July_2#File:Annie_Seel_portrait_Alexoch_Martin.jpg

Would you please care to expand upon your rather terse, "The result of the debate was: Delete" Thanks Andy Dingley (talk) 17:26, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I'll skip over the PD and CC license claims, as I think everyone in that discussion understood that neither were appropriate here. From the discussion, I see two arguments: 1) Remove the license and simply cite the original site's requirements; 2) this image meets WP:NFCC#8. As before, neither option was appropriate. All files require a license template, regardless if it's a freely licensed image or not. Citing the text on the source's website (this bit: Photos below are free to use for press and promotion of Annie Seel. Photo credit and photo byline "AnnieSeel.com/MaindruPhoto" is requested.) is insufficient. That strikes out point one. As for point two, all non-free files must meet all the points of WP:NFCC. You argued that this image met point eight, but this image easily fails points one in that a free image can be created. So, this wouldn't fit to be tagged as a non-free file either. As such, this image was simply not fit for use on Wikipedia. — ξ^xplicit 00:35, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Symbiotica Relaunch

Hi, I see that you were the deleting administrator for Symbiotica, and you cited "No evidence of meeting WP:GNG". I would like to recreate the page. I wish I had been actively editing when the PROD was taking place, as I would have been able to provide some additional reliable sources that offer significant coverage that would cover the general notability guidelines. I will do so now that I am actively editing. This page is within my area of domain knowledge and I wish to recreate it and bring it up to good wikipedia standards.

Some of the most recent reliable and notable sources I will use in the relaunch that should qualify for the GNG:

"Culture: Artists in the Lab." Martin Kemp. Nature. 477, 278–279 (15 September 2011) doi:10.1038/477278a

"Culture: Art That Touches a Nerve." Anthony King. Nature 470, 334 (17 February 2011) doi:10.1038/470334a

"When Artists Enter the Laboratory." Dixon, et al. Science 18 February 2011: 860. DOI:10.1126/science.1203549

Infoeco (talk) 22:34, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I have gone ahead and restored the page, please make sure to address the issue it was originally deleted for. — ξ^xplicit 00:35, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

---

Archive 10

←

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

→

Archive 20