User talk:Explicit/Archive 30

Archive 25

←

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

Archive 31

Archive 32

→

Archive 35

Restore Farida Bedwei

Hello,

Thanks for deleting Farida Bedwei based on WP:Notability. Too bad I wasn't around in time to contest. In the Ghanaain context this is a notable individual individual. What was the basis / reference used to determine this articles notability from your side? A quick search should tell you about this person CNN cc @Reddogsix:. Can this article be restored. Thanks. →Enock4seth ^(talk) 10:27, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

@Enock4seth: Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. Please note that any article proposed for deletion usually gets deleted after a grace period of seven days if uncontested. For further information regarding it being nominated to begin with, you should contact the user who tagged the page directly. ℯxplicit 23:32, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Restore File:Sher-e-Punjab Maharaja Ranjit Singh.jpg

Hello, this is to tell you that you had deleted File:Sher-e-Punjab Maharaja Ranjit Singh.jpg as the article Sher-e-Punjab: Maharaja Ranjit Singh was deleted on which the image was used. Now the article has been created. So I request you to restore the image so that it can be again used. Mr. Smart LION 09:02, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

@Mr. Smart LION:  Done, file restored. ℯxplicit 09:38, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Scout Club of Hainan.png

There was no posting for discussion of this file before it was deleted, as there had been with others. Request that it be restored to at least allow time for defense of it.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 13:28, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

@Kintetsubuffalo: The file was tagged with {{Di-fails NFCC}}; nominations at WP:FFD are not required. Are you asking for it to be discussed there solely for bureaucracy's sake? ℯxplicit 04:16, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

I don't have all of the hundreds of Scout images on my watchlist, nor does anyone in our WikiProject. As per "nominations at WP:FFD are not required", no, but as there is an existing WikiProject for Scouting which takes an interest in such things, and does try to defend them when they can be defended, a nomination or a notice would have been polite, just as when one AFDs an article, let the original author know. One recent posted image was actually saved by an editor who knew how to fix the problem, save the image and improve the article, all because it had been posted for discussion. As per "Are you asking for it to be discussed there solely for bureaucracy's sake?", I have never been curt or abrasive to you, to my knowledge, and I don't appreciate being bitten. A quick look at my userpage/talkpage/edit history shows I disdain mindless rulebound bureaucracy (and bureaucrats) in all forms. In short, no I'm not. What I _am_ asking is for you to take an extra minute to post so that interested communities can see that image might not pass muster.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 07:43, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

@Kintetsubuffalo: My comment was not made as an attack, it was a simple question. I do recall logos used in a similar fashion were discussed at FFD in the past. If I remember correctly, most didn't pan out well for the "keep" arguments. This is why I asked if you were requesting for the file to be restored based on the previous logos. File:Scout Club of Hainan.png was used in Scouting and Guiding in mainland China. This is the logo of a different organization, which is not justified by WP:NFCC. Your re-addition of File:Scout Association of the People's Republic of China.svg to the article here, which was subsequently nominated at FFD, appears to show your disregard to policy. I would be surprised if, at the previous FFD discussions, it was not clarified that simply adding a fair use rationale for a use of an article is not enough to justify the use a file in that article. I am simply not seeing a valid policy-based argument to have this file restored other than citing past FFD of similar images, which resulted in exactly the same outcome as this one. ℯxplicit 23:47, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

As I said, I'm not the only one with an interest in these images. My views/justification aside, it's not just me watching and fixing these things. See [1] I'm not going to keep parleying about this with you, I'm asking you to spend an extra minute when you do these things, because it's not just that-poor-sod-who-honestly-doesn't-give-a-****-abut-policy-so-I-can-delete-without-notice. You're right. I personally couldn't care less about WP:NFCC. I think there are far more important issues to be worried about, and frankly I know some users get a sick thrill deleting other editors' work.[2] But other editors do care about the images, which is why I am asking you. "most didn't pan out well" isn't a reason not to inform others. I occasionally see an article worth AFDing, if some "didn't pan out well", it doesn't stop me from informing interested editors. There are rules and there are ethics, and growing up in a police family, I learned most times they have very little in common. I believe you to be an ethical person from our past dealings, and I think this sneaky Pete style of deletion without publicly informing the interested WikiProject is beneath you and something I hope you will reconsider in future.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 00:44, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Sherif Gaber and Megan Phelps-Roper photos

Hello Explicit,
Recently you deleted this picture of Sherif Gaber because there supposedly was a free equivalent (NFCC #1). Where can I find and upload this free equivalent then? Greetings, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:56, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Same question for Megan Phelps-Roper. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 15:00, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

@Nederlandse Leeuw: Hi, WP:NFCC#1 does not require for a free equivalent to exist at the moment, but that it can be created. As both subjects are still living individuals, that possibility still exists, which is why the two images were deleted. ℯxplicit 23:30, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Oh, I did not know that. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 23:51, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Refund request

Could I get a WP:REFUND on Northwest Post-Grunge? Didn't notice the proposed deletion. ☆ Bri (talk) 14:55, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

@Bri: Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ℯxplicit 23:31, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Please restore File:Do17z 20mm.jpg

Hello ℯxplicit @Explicit:, please undo the deletion of the file File:Do17z 20mm.jpg so I can change the image and its status. The purpose of the image is the show a very rare image of the cannon mounted, and I challenge you to find a replacement for that. I wish to change the entry. Regards. Flightsoffancy (talk) 17:18, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

@Flightsoffancy: Please see WP:FREER. There are already several freely licensed images of the aircraft. The inclusion of a non-free image of the same aircraft simply showing a mounted cannon runs afoul of WP:NFCC#1. ℯxplicit 23:45, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

ℯxplicit @Explicit: I have said many, many times I am changing that. Besides that, there is no free version image subject. In the attack on RAF Kenly, cannon armed 17's where used, but sources conflict on this. Here is photo proof of this, supporting some sources (not all published historical sources are accurate). Flightsoffancy (talk) 04:49, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

ℯxplicit @Explicit: Please restore image so I can make the needed changes to it. Thank you Flightsoffancy (talk) 15:33, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

@Flightsoffancy: Overwriting a non-free image for another non-free file would not address the issue. If sources have incorrectly identified the cannon used, this can be mentioned in the article's text. As mentioned above, WP:FREER states this directly. ℯxplicit 23:47, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

ℯxplicit @Explicit: I am changing the status of image, because I can. Anyone read my posts? Flightsoffancy (talk) 17:06, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

@Flightsoffancy: By changing the status, do you mean changing it to a free license? If you have found a photo under the public domain that is different from this one, it is best uploaded separately instead of overwriting the file. ℯxplicit 23:30, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

@Explicit: At the very least the image is over 70 years old (was not when I first posted), and is digitized and manipulated thus not a direct copy of original. It is also from a wartime propaganda film which may not have copyright (and again over 70 years since defeat of Nazi's). This will be the same frame from film, but much better quality. Flightsoffancy (talk) 04:50, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

@Flightsoffancy: Feel free to upload the image. Restoring File:Do17z 20mm.jpg for this purpose would make no sense, as it would just require {{Split media}} and lead the restored content to be re-deleted. ℯxplicit 02:29, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

@Explicit: This will not be a "multiple independent media files", it is the same image with new edits for quality, so related and dependent. Flightsoffancy (talk) 16:15, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

@Flightsoffancy: Very well, the file has been restored. Please update the description page by adding {{Information}} and the appropriate public domain license. ℯxplicit 06:55, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. Was a lot of work making the needed changes, hope I addressed all issues. Flightsoffancy (talk) 20:01, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

We Can't Study (manga)

Hello. I noted that you deleted this article several months ago as an expired PROD, also adding to the fact that it didn't seem to be notable enough at the time. In any case, it was recently announced that the series may soon be getting an anime adaptation, based on a number of reports. Based on this, perhaps it's okay with you if you restore the article either to the mainspace or to draftspace so that it can be worked on again? Thanks. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:05, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5:  Done, I have moved the content to Draft:We Can't Study (manga). It is quite skeletal in its current form... ℯxplicit 23:34, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Refund

Hi, can I get Ahilawati restored to the draft area please. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 16:37, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

@Frayae:  Done, I have moved the content to Draft:Ahilawati. ℯxplicit 23:35, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Matty Brooks

Hi there, could you please send the article you deleted to my sandbox so that it can be added to and meet standards.Fleets (talk) 19:12, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

@Fleets:  Done, I have moved the content to User:Fleets/Matty Brooks. ℯxplicit 23:35, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks.Fleets (talk) 05:37, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Would you consider...

You deleted the article on the Pakistan Times, as an expired prod.

Since then someone drafted a new article.

Would you consider grafting the earlier revisions to the current article's history? I am curious as to who placed that prod.

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 00:11, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

@Geo Swan: The page history has been restored. ℯxplicit 01:53, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

• Wow that was quick. Thanks. Geo Swan (talk) 01:59, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Pequeno português

Hi Explicit, you deleted a page that I PRODDED, thanks. It just occurred to me that I assembled quite a few good sources in my argumentation for deletion on the talkpage and I am wondering if you would be able to rescue the discussion and get it to me either by email or on my talkpage. I would really appreciate it and do apologise for the inconvenience. Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 00:21, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

@Rui Gabriel Correia: Hi, I have instead restored the talk page and tagged it with {{G8-exempt}}. ℯxplicit 01:53, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Thnaks, Explicit. Really appreciated. Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 02:01, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Jinfonet page

Hi there, it seems our page Jinfonet was deleted. We are a software company that provides data analytics software called JReport. I have been maintaining the page mainly for updates on new versions and any messaging changes for the past few years. Could you explain to me why our page was deleted? Thanks, -Dean Yao dyao@jinfonet.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deayao (talk • contribs) 22:57, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

@Deayao: Hi, Jinfonet was proposed for deletion by another editor with the following concern: "Unable to find anything resembling the independent analysis and sourcing needed for WP:NCORP". It went uncontested for seven days and was deleted as a result. You are highly encouraged to read the aforementioned notability guideline for organizations and companies, as well as the general notability guideline to understand what constitutes "notable" on Wikipedia. I would also like to point you to the conflict of interest page, as you are directly associated with the company. ℯxplicit 23:50, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

your assistance please...

You deleted File:Guantanamo captives leaving after their debriefing by Afghan security officials on 2003-03-25.jpg, as F4.

I was kind of busy at the time, and it looks like I was not able to give this challenge the attention it deserved.

Could you see your way clear to supply me with the contents of the {{information}} template, or reasonable equivalent, I supplied for this image?

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 01:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

• File:Badr Mohammed Nasser al-Shihri.jpg too, if it is not too much trouble... Geo Swan (talk) 01:33, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

The content on the description page of File:Guantanamo captives leaving after their debriefing by Afghan security officials on 2003-03-25.jpg can be found here. This link will expire in 24 hours.

File:Badr Mohammed Nasser al-Shihri.jpg was simply deleted as orphaned. The article link provided was for Badr Mohammed Nasser al-Shihri, which doesn't exist. This one can simply be restored if it will be used on the article about the subject. ℯxplicit 01:40, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Hail_to_the_Sunrise.jpg

I saw that you deleted my picture, and I'm wondering how to restore it and correct the fair use stuff. Because, like I said, it is a picture I took myself pretty much specifically for posting on Wikipedia, which as far as I know meets the guideline other than me not using the exact wording you wanted. Please let me know how to fix this. ToddC4176 (talk) 01:27, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

@ToddC4176: Hi, can you specify which file you're referring to? File:Hail to the Sunrise.jpg has never existed on Wikipedia. ℯxplicit 00:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

@Explicit: That link is the direct link you posted on my page, copied straight over. So I'm not sure how it can't exist if you had to delete it for lack of documentation.... ToddC4176 (talk) 23:29, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

@ToddC4176: Ah, I see it now. The correct link, which was added to your talk page by a bot, is File:Hail To The Sunrise Statue.JPG. I have restored the file, please add an appropriate fair use rationale. ℯxplicit 03:58, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File talk:University of Dayton Research Institute logo.png

Is there a reason for deletion here that I'm missing? Assuming it's the same file, seems pretty PD-text-logo to me. GMG^talk 14:26, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

@GreenMeansGo: The logo is different, but you're right in that it is {{PD-textlogo}}. I have transferred the image to Commons at File:University of Dayton Research Institute old logo.png. ℯxplicit 03:58, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Do17z 20mm.jpg under Dispute resolution

Hello @Explicit:. Well, there is a dispute by editor who does not like the image despite sound rational for it. I have called for discussion with other editors and opened a DR, you can see it here. Talk:Dornier Do_17#Restoration_of_File_talk:Do17z_20mm.jpg. I expect the judgement will go my way, but will the moderatos see the image? Cheers, Flightsoffancy (talk) 02:58, 17 September 2018 (UTC) Good morning @Explicit:. Other editors cannot see image, can you please undo deletion for the review? Sorry for bother. Flightsoffancy (talk) 13:08, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi Flightsoffancyfancy. Just a general comment in that it would be better to provide a link to the source url (if one exists) for the file instead where others can see the it. If the file was deleted per F5, then it will only continue to be flagged for deletion for the same reason as long as it’s not being used in any articles. — Marchjuly (talk) 21:35, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Hello Marchjuly, there is on-line source for the image or anything like it, otherwise this would not be an issue. BilCat never produce an image with the same subject despite my repeated requests. Had he, I would have dropped the matter. I might as well just create a new upload of the same file on Wiki, and then start another round of discussions where once again BilCat will fail in producing an substitute image. @Explicit: please undo delete so editors can view and approve. Thank you. Flightsoffancy (talk) 14:29, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Images without sources

As you do a LOT of image work:- Some queries that need their results set reducing to zero :

https://quarry.wmflabs.org/query/29813 https://quarry.wmflabs.org/query/29748

Most are probably upgradeable by adding {{information}} blocks, and if the licensing is okay they should be placed on Commons.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:54, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Canowindra-2804-postmark.jpg

Apparently you deleted this image. What could have been the issue. If you had an issue why not raise it with me on my Talk page? 23:38, 22 September 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silent Billy (talk • contribs)

(talk page watcher) There is a notice on your talk page about the problem: § File source problem with File:Canowindra-2804-postmark.jpg — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:03, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

@Silent Billy: Hi, you uploaded File:Canowindra-2804-postmark.jpg and tagged it with {{cc-by-sa-4.0}}, but did not provide any evidence that supported this license. It was accordingly tagged—you were notified as noted above—and deleted under F4 for lacking a source. ℯxplicit 00:32, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

what does file source mean? It was a photo I took of the post mark the local Post Shop rubber stamps on postal articles submitted over the counter. It was a defence against the officious twats who query the statement that the town is dubbed the "Balloon Capital of Australia". Silent Billy (talk) 22:44, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

@Silent Billy: Ah, that better explains it. You did not indicate you took the photo. I have restored the image, but there may be an additional issue, which I've made note of on the file's description page. ℯxplicit 00:26, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll have a gander. Silent Billy (talk) 06:41, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Question

Is this license okay for Wikipedia? "This photo is free to use for research and academic purposes; please contact ACOR for non-watermarked images. Commercial use is granted on a case by case basis.". Photos that deals with Arabian archaeological heritage -under creative commons- are relatively scarce, so ACOR online library would be of great importance in that field for future editors, however I am not sure if it is eligible to use in this platform or not. Nabataeus (talk) 14:17, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

@Nabataeus: Creative Commons licenses must allow commercial use and derivative works. A "case by case" basis for the former is rather vague, and it doesn't mention derivative works at all. It may be worth contacting the organization for clarification on the matter, or if it is willing to offer its images under a more flexible, specific license. ℯxplicit 05:04, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes indeed, a case by case basis is vague. However, since its use is permitted in non-commercial, speculatively, non-derivative manner, isn't it okay to use it under fair use? (it doesn't need to be, but merely to discourage prohibited usage). Therefore there are really no legal consequences. Nabataeus (talk) 21:39, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

@Nabataeus: If no other free alternatives exist or can be reasonably created, then fair use would be accepted in such cases. ℯxplicit 02:07, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

CFD

Would you want to close a number of (old) CFD discussions again? The backlog has increased quite a bit in the past weeks. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:30, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

About the "PC Jeweller logo"

Hello,
You deleted File:PC Jeweller logo.jpg on 23 September 2018 (because it was an unused non-free media files for more than 7 days). But it was unused due to a vandalism on the article PC Jeweller on 12 September 2018.
I have canceled the vandalism so is it possible, for you, to restore the file?
Regards --NicoScribe (talk) 17:00, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

@NicoScribe:  Done, file restored. ℯxplicit 23:51, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Deji olatunji.png

Hi Explicit. You already deleted this once before per WP:F7, but the uploader re-uploaded it again. I’m not sure whether they understand why the it was deleted before, but it’s basically the same issue as before. — Marchjuly (talk) 07:39, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Well, there isn't much to do at the moment unless that user attempts a third upload after the file is deleted. Not quite sure where they expect to use the image, since Deji Olatunji has been deleted an incredible amount of times and was salted six months ago. ℯxplicit 23:51, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look. The uploader is currently working on a user space draft at User:MikeyScott01/sandbox/Deji Olatunji and seems to want to use the image there, but that wouldn't be allowed per NFCC#9 even if NFCC#1 wasn't an issue. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:38, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Please restore File:Do17z 20mm.jpg

Hello ℯxplicit @Explicit:, please undo deletion of File:Do17z 20mm.jpg so I can resolve dispute with image. This will be more straight forward procedure to resolve issue. Thank you. Flightsoffancy (talk) 19:25, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

@Flightsoffancy: I really do think it's time to drop the stick. Two separate administrator have declined to restore the image and there has been opposition of the image's inclusion from at least two other editors. Your constant forum shopping does not help matters. ℯxplicit 00:26, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Good morning Korea! Dear @Explicit:, only one editor is opposed to the image, and his arguments are weak at best. Other editors have agreed the image has merit, but BilCat removes the image as soon as I restore. I am being diplomatic about this and using proper channels, but being a volunteer system persons who do the reviews did not see it before the image was deleted, thus complaint closed without even looking at it! So, nothing has been settled, this issue is unresolved, the process still moves forward. Regards. Flightsoffancy (talk) 17:50, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

@Flightsoffancy: As I mentioned in the section above, this image resoundingly fails to abide by WP:NFCC, specifically what is outlined at WP:FREER. I will not restore the file. ℯxplicit 05:04, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

@Explicit: with all due respect, it was indeed accepted by a wiki copyright reviewer under "No free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose." section 1 of that referred to section. I swear to you had he denied it, I would NOT be pursing this.

For example a second variant of image showing the entire piece of film (with holes and audio strip) was posted in Film stock and in that case there was Free equivalents images, so I did not argue for its inclusion. In this case we have an editor who is actively removing the file simply because he does not like it. I am making case about his abuse, but image was "deleted" before issue was reviewed. Regards. Flightsoffancy (talk) 18:04, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

@Flightsoffancy: I haven't the slightest clue what "wiki copyright reviewer" refers to, as there is no such user group. You are also completely misrepresenting BilCat's removal of the image from the article, as he has also cited the WP:NFCC policy. I have been heavily involved in the application of the fair use policy on Wikipedia for well over a decade now, and I simply can not further elaborate on how this image violates policy to a T as I have done so in the most simplest terms. This "I can't hear you" approach is truly time-wasting at this point. ℯxplicit 02:07, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Dear @Explicit:, you did not acknowledge my efforts to resolve a dispute, I am just explaining the situation. As I have typed, I intend to have this unsettled dispute resolved one way or other, it would help all if the image was restored (it is needed for dispute resolution). This is nothing about "I can't hear you" approach as I do understand the concern of images WP:NFCC status. All best. Flightsoffancy (talk) 03:57, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Excuse me

I'm working....it's not finish.Đông Minh (talk) 04:25, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

@Đông Minh: The members of Black Pink are not notable outside of the group, so there should be no article for any of them at this time. ℯxplicit 04:28, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

so you will delete page Lisa and page Jennie mine ? right ? I'm their fan, I just think many fan wanna have a page about even them, many fan want to know about their family, their country, their personal information, include clear things all them. And that thing we can not put it in Black Pink page. If you think my page so simple or my english not good, that's other problem. Or: Black Pink page is your article, It's your created. right? Đông Minh (talk) 04:38, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

You are an administrators, but you do not explain clearly your reason why, and no answer when a man talks you. Deserved Korean under rules of Great Japan empire. Deserved! Deserved! do not cry with world. Deserved ! And your nation should back under Japan rules again. Now I'm come to other wiki to write about them, follow me and show me how can you stop me ! DMM ! Đông Minh (talk) 05:01, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi Đông Minh. Please read Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not for more information, but Wikipedia is not the right place for fan pages, etc. If want to create something like that, try something like Wikia instead. Finally, please try to keep your posts WP:CIVIL and avoid anything which might be interpreted as a personal attack against another editor. The best way to try and get an article written about these people is to show how they meet Wikipedia:Notability (people); otherwise, it's likely that any article written about them will end up being deleted. — Marchjuly (talk) 07:14, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

don't tell me about code of conduct. I was read 2 pages about 2 members of a music band on french wiki, es wiki, vi wiki... so why, why ? why english wiki can not create it. He talk a short answer and keeping silent when im talk him after that, an administrators not polite. Not clearly explain, and not keeping polite. How can him become to an administrators. If he like do silent, Korean should silents like that, do not talk about: "Japanese empire crime, hu hu hu (cry)". They should be silent and stop lies in their history, that not real things". Đông Minh (talk) 08:01, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Each language Wikipedia has its own policies and guidelines established by its respective WP:COMMUNITY; so, just because an article exists on one of more different Wikipedia doesn't mean it should exist on all Wikipedias. The policies and guidelines, particularly with respect to WP:N, of English Wikipedia tend to be much more strict than most other Wikipedias mainly because English Wikipedia has the most articles and the most editors, and in turn these policies and guidelines tend to be more rigorously applied than perhaps they are in some other Wikipedias.

If you want Explicit to give more details as to why he redirected those articles, you need to be patient a give him a chance to respond. Administrators are WP:VOLUNTEERs and they also get WP:BUSY. However, if you'd rather continuing posting rants against Explicit, Korean people, or anyone else either here, your user page or any other Wikipedia page, then you're quickly going to find your behavior being discussed by a lot more editors at WP:ANI, which may lead to your account being blocked. While editing can occasionally be frustrating, that's no excuse for WP:BATTLEFIELD or WP:MASTADON type of behavior. — Marchjuly (talk) 10:07, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

@Đông Minh: To begin with, I am not ethnically Korean, I just live in Korea. Please see WP:MUSICBIO, particularly the final note in that section: Note that members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability for activity independent of the band, such as solo releases. Not a single member of Black Pink acquired notability outside of the band. This is the standard, and can be reflected in other articles like B.A.P where only two of the six members have an article, none of the members of Seventeen have their own article, and so on. What other editions of Wikipedias do is irrelevant here, as all project function independently from one another. ℯxplicit 23:51, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Oh. so I was wrong, how can I delete my bad worlds about KRN. How ? I want to tell you : My english not good and Im not through about Kpop article what could write what could not. Im love my band so i write about them. Im lost a hour to write and you just lost little second to deleted it. oh, how can I understand the meaning what you say with little words in short sentence. You leave and put a sign: now you busy, send you message. You not busy to delete, but busy to explain clearly. What's your name meaning ? i lost time to write and you tell me I will lost my time to waiting you like waiting a girl, right ? for what ? for you come back to explain me clearly. I respect administrators's work when an administrators delete any page not accordant, but never your way your type. Im think Marchjuly is an administrators, i like the way he explained me. He real administrators, never you. You should be demission your work an administrators. You not deserved, just only Marchjuly deserved administrators. good bye ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Đông Minh (talk • contribs) 01:45, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

I am not an administrator, but Exlplict is and has been an administrator in good standing for many years. If there was something you didn't understand about Explicit's first reply to you, then you could have civilly asked for clarification without trying to insult him or the Korean people. As I posted above, administrators sometimes get busy and might be unable to post extremely detailed reponses to every question they are asked; so, sometimes you just have to be patient and ask for further assistance when there's something you don't quite understand.

Other editors are going to be willing to assume good faith and be understanding when it comes to your ability to communicate in English. They will most likely be willing to overlook most mistakes you may make; personal insults, however, are not going to be tolerated in any language, so you need to Wikipedia:Avoid personal remarks as much as possible. My advice to you would be to stop making them here about Explicit before you things go too far and you find yourself blocked. Not only Explicit, but any administrator can immediately block your account without warning if they feel it's necessary to do so, and personal attacks are one of the things editors often get blocked for.

Now, if you would like to take back some of the things you posted on this talk page to show your good faith and willingness to move on, the way to do so would be to follow the instructions in WP:REDACT and strikethrough the inappropriate comments. You can do this by using the code <s>inappropriate comment</s> so that it looks like inappropriate comment. This is the proper way to acknowledge that you might have posted something inappropriate in one of your previous talk page posts and want to take it back. Just make sure to leave an edit summary which explains why you're making the edit. As for the content on your userpage, you can just removed that completely if you want.

Finally, it's possible that someday some of all of the these band members might become Wikipedia notable in their own right for a stand-alone article even though at the moment it is Wikipedia:Too soon for one to be written; you shouldn't, however, try to preserve copies of the articles on your user page because that's not really allowed per WP:FAKEARTICLE. What you should do instead in move the content either to a user subpage as a Help:Userspace draft or to the draft namespace as a Wikipedia:Drafts; this will allow you to keep working on improving the content and adding sources until you think your work is ready to be submitted for review. At that time, you can request a review per Wikipedia:Articles for creation. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:34, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Alright Marchjuly! ....thank you for your guide. Explicit - i'll have to be patient. Sorry. Have good job you both ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Đông Minh (talk • contribs) 04:34, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

File:QEHnews autumn08.jpg

Hi, could you please undelete the above file? It was originally replaced at Queen Elizabeth's Hospital by File:QEH News Spring 2018.jpg, but this has now itself been deleted from Commons as lacking permission. If you undelete it I'll restore it to the article. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:10, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

@Mattbuck:  Done, file restored. ℯxplicit 23:12, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Thankyou! -mattbuck (Talk) 19:17, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Deletion of another media image

Hi Explicit, I see that you deleted File:MMAlam-1965.jpg for having no source and there is another file by the same editor which has the same issues File:Gen Musa Khan at Khem Karan - 1965 War.jpg. Can you please have a look at it? Please let me know if you have further questions. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 21:52, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Checking backlinks after deletions

Hi, I noticed that you deleted the page Exsuperius Weston Turnor, but did not remove list entries pointing to it ([3], [4]). This is best practice as recommended at Wikipedia:Proposed_deletion#Procedure_for_administrators.

Pardon me raising this if you normally do this but overlooked it on this occasion. – Fayenatic London 08:48, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

File:1987 God-is-overal ©Estate-Philippe-Vandenberg.jpg

Hi Explicit. This seems to be a reupload of something you deleted about a week ago per WP:F11. Uploader probably did so in good faith when they noticed the older version had been deleted, but they do not seem to understand that something more formal like an email to OTRS is needed for proper verification. — Marchjuly (talk) 19:39, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Paul Harrop - host of AOPA Live.jpg

Hi. You deleted the subject file under WP:CSD#F11. I have alleged permission for it in Ticket:2018051210000827 in OTRS. Would you please undelete it temporarily so I may verify the permission?   — Jeff G. ツ 01:35, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

@Jeff G.:  Done, file restored. ℯxplicit 02:34, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ 10:36, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

F5 restore of File:Goody two shoes cigarette ad.jpg

May I ask for this image to be restored? I have sources which explicitly discuss the visual aspects of the image, so I hope that it will not be deleted again. This is probably too much for a caption, but:

"NEVER let the goody two shoes get you down"; the slogan of this 1999 ad, uses rebelliousness to promote product use. It has also been suggested that it urges smokers to disregard health warnings. The model's gesture echoes earlier ads which made more explicit claims of voice box benefits.

The "Find your voice" ad campaign was criticized for being offensive to those who have lost their voices to throat cancer as a result of smoking, especially in light of the well-publicized laryngectomy of Janet Sackman, a former model for the same company who developed throat and lung cancer. The campaign was also criticised for using imagery targeting minority women; it was described as seeking to associate itself with empowerment, independence, women's rights, and sexual allure.

References

Thank you, and sorry for not responding sooner. HLHJ (talk) 04:49, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

@HLHJ:  Done, file restored. Critical commentary can be included in the article text; its entirety does not need to be placed in the caption. ℯxplicit 05:50, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I've referenced the image in the main text, too. HLHJ (talk) 01:06, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Sorry to trouble you again, but may I also request an undelete of File:No-one likes a quitter, e-cigarette ad.jpg? I have an opinion from the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Sourcing for image-can-be-used that some of what I wish to illustrate with this figure is sufficiently obviously illustrated that I do not need to find a source that says that the image illustrates it. HLHJ (talk) 18:45, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

@HLHJ: I'd say the advice in that discussion contradicts WP:FREER. A non-free image is not justified if text alone can adequately describe the contents of the image, and both contributors seem to suggest using a non-free image to show that ads like this were utilized is justified—it is not. ℯxplicit 01:52, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

OK, fair enough. I can quote the text instead. Thank you. HLHJ (talk) 02:05, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Blue Thunder in flight.jpg

Hi Explicit, is File:Blue Thunder in flight.jpg eligible for fair use? There are 3 photos of the Blue Thunder cockpit mockup in the Blue Thunder (helicopter) article already, though not in the condition seen in the film. The aft portion of the aircraft is mostly identical to a stock Aérospatiale Gazelle, a photo of which could easily be added to the article. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 21:38, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

@BilCat: Probably not, but this may require a discussion at WP:FFD. ℯxplicit 01:52, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Will post at WP:FFD. - BilCat (talk) 21:06, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Done. See Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2018 October 18#File:Blue Thunder in flight.jpg. Please let me know if I left any crucial information out, as this is the first time I've used FFD. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 21:11, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Josimar Da Silva martins

Hi can you tell me why was the page Josimar Da Silva martins deleted by you? Please restore it I will provide sources LordJoki (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:49, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

@LordJoki: Hi, Josimar da Silva Martins was deleted for being a biography of a living person that lacked any sources. Under the WP:PRODBLP policy, such articles are deleted after being tagged for seven days and no sources being provided, which happened here. If you can provide a source here, I can undelete the page. ℯxplicit 23:35, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Here are few sources https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/josimar/profil/spieler/256136

https://us.soccerway.com/players/josimar-da-silva-martins/100042/

https://sports.ndtv.com/ileague/i-league-mumbai-fc-sign-forward-josimar-da-silva-martins-1511569

https://m.timesofindia.com/city/goa/Dempo-sign-Brazilian-Josimar/articleshow/49521814.cms

https://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-sports/Joshimar-gets-a-point-for-Chirag/article12717635.ece

LordJoki (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:22, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

@LordJoki: Thank you, I've restored the page. Please add these references to the article. ℯxplicit 23:13, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks LordJoki (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:36, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Tribe of Torqua.png

File:Tribe of Torqua.png (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) That image didn't violate "F7. Invalid fair-use claim" on Camp Cherry Valley, please restore it. Thanks. --evrik ^(talk) 21:59, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

@Evrik: Hi, per WP:NFC##cite_note-4, the "allowance for logos only applies to the use of the logo on the infobox or lede for the stand-alone article about the entity... The use of historical logos for an entity is not allowed, unless the historical logo itself is described in the context of critical commentary about that historical logo." The above logo was used in a section of the article to showcase the Tribe of Torqua patch, which was not accompanied by any sourced critical commentary. At the time of deletion, the file was in violation of policy. ℯxplicit 23:39, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

The article has changed over time. Please restore the image and give me a day to restore the content. Thank you. --evrik ^(talk) 15:52, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

@Evrik: You will need to justify the use of the image before its restoration. Per WP:NFCCE: "Note that it is the duty of users seeking to include or retain content to provide a valid rationale." ℯxplicit 00:33, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

CodeLaunch Content

Good day Explicit,

I sent you an email requesting a copy of the content from the deleted page "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CodeLaunch". I realize the page violates the G11 policy written in the Wikipedia guidelines and understand the article would require an overhaul of the content for it to be a permanent fixture on Wikipedia. However, we created that page over 2 years ago and contains a lot of valuable information. I would like to receive a copy of that content for our own personal use, even if it means the article will remain deleted.

I look forward to your response.

Thanks,

CodeAuthorityCH (talk) 19:03, 23 October 2018 (UTC)Cory

@CodeAuthorityCH: I have emailed you a copy of the contents. ℯxplicit 00:33, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Re add deleted image

Dear Sir

You have recently deleted an image as it was removed from a page. I have replaced the image as its removal was unjustified. As such I would ask that you reverse the deletion.

Kind regards Mtaylor848 (talk) 22:15, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

@Mtaylor848: Hi, the image was remove from Briggate, Leeds twice by Chemical Engineer. The second time, the user commented, "Remove skyscraper picture. Uncited bit about something that never happened. I think encyclopedia should be key facts. Sorry." You should discuss the issue with the user instead editing warring over it. Additionally, it appears to me that the use of the image would violate WP:NFCC#1. If the information can be properly cited, it would contradict the passage at WP:FREER. ℯxplicit 00:32, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

See Talk:Briggate,_Leeds#Skyscraper. There was no response. I also doubted that the image was available for use.Chemical Engineer (talk)

It is not my intention to edit war. I have reviewed the situation as it stands and cannot see reasonable justification for its removal. I have stated that I feel if any other editor feels inclined to remove it I would be happy to take this to arbitration. However I do not feel it is possible to reach a consensus if we do not even have the file. As this issue is not settled and I was not consulted or warned about the deletion of my work I am not in a fair position to make my case.

Thanks. Mtaylor848 (talk) 16:44, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi Mtaylor848. You received a notification on your user talk page that the file was "orphaned" and was going to be deleted per WP:F5. As Explict has posted, restoring the file would only make sense if there was a 100% certainly that it would be immediate be added to an article and not subsequently removed again so that WP:NFCC#7 is satisfied; otherwise, the file would just be deleted as an orphan again. You can, howwever, add an external link to the file's source to the articles talk page for discussion purposes, if you want to try and establish a consensus to re-add the file. Once it becomes clear that a consensus has been established in favor of reusing it, I'm pretty sure that Explict will have not problem with restoring the file. Images are like article content in the sense that a consensus may need to be established for using them in an article in a particular way; a file's licensing helps determine how it may be used, but there's still no automatic guarantee that file will be used even when licensing is not an issue. In such cases, you should try to resolve any differences of opinion on the article talk page or as otherwise explained in WP:DR, just as you would with disputed textual content. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:37, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Re add image Sheridan_School_logo.png for Sheridan_School

Over the summer I updated a logo for my school (that is used with permission) but did so prematurely and reverted until the logo was ready for use. In the meantime, it was (properly) deleted for lack of being used anywhere. Now that I would like to make the update again, it will not let me re-upload the image. I'm not sure how to do it again but would appreciate your help.

The file is at Sheridan_School_logo.png for the page Sheridan_School — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaybriar (talk • contribs) 19:43, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

@Jaybriar: I have restored File:Sheridan School logo.png and added it to the article. ℯxplicit 00:57, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Restore File:Khalifa International Stadium.jpg

I was led to your talk page to ask you if you'd be willing to restore File:Khalifa International Stadium.jpg, which was replaced by a commons file that has now been deleted itself due to a freedom of panorama case. It came with a detailed non-free use rationale that took a while to write up, and I don't want to have to write up another lengthy non-free use rationale for the same image. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 01:24, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

@PhilipTerryGraham: Hi, I have uploaded the Commons file locally instead (File:Khaliffa stadium - panoramio (1).jpg). It is free enough to be uploaded at least on the English Wikipedia. Cheers. ℯxplicit 02:24, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

@Explicit: Apparently this photograph was taken on January 2, 2014? If so, then this defeats the purpose of having this debacle at all. We need a photograph of the redeveloped stadium, not the old one. I was misled by GTVM92 into believing the photograph was taken in 2018, after they edited the caption in {{Infobox venue}} saying it was so. The image originally uploaded to Wikipedia was that of the redeveloped stadium. That and I still need the non-free use rationale I wrote up for it. I've mentioned it numerous times but nobody seems to acknowledge that issue I have as well. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 04:50, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

@PhilipTerryGraham: If that's the case, a non-free image of the redesigned stadium is not be justified because it would violate WP:NFCC#1. As a structure that still exists and can be accessed, a freely licensed image can be created and uploaded locally. ℯxplicit 05:06, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

@Explicit: But it's not the same structure, thus the building pictured in the commons photographs no longer exist and cannot be accessed. There still has been no attempt to address my concern about the non-free use rationale that I had written up that I want to retrieve. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 09:17, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

@PhilipTerryGraham: The fair use rationale you mention is directly tied to the WP:NFCC#1 issue: "Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose." Even if a freely licensed photo does not currently exist, a non-free image is not justifiable under policy because a freely licensed photo can be created of the new stadium. You are free to remove the image from the infobox if you believe an image of the current stadium fits best, but a non-free image simply can not be used. ℯxplicit 00:04, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

@Explicit: I think there's been a lot of misunderstanding here. I do believe an image of the current stadium fits best, but no free images of the stadium exist. You're presenting me with a paradoxical situation where you're telling me I can't use an image of the new stadium even though you're inviting me to. Also, your response to my question about the non-free use rationale I wrote up is confusing and does not answer my question at all to any degree. I'll try to simplify it as best as humanly possible. I wrote a bunch of text. I want that text back. Is there any way to get that text I wrote back? I don't want to write it up again. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 00:09, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

@PhilipTerryGraham: I have pasted it here. The situation is not paradoxical. A photo like File:Khaliffa stadium - panoramio (1).jpg (licensed under Creative Commons or some other appropriate free license) can be used; a photo like File:Khalifa International Stadium.jpg (a fully copyrighted photo which requires a non-free license) can not be used. If a freely licensed photo of the current stadium does not exist, then you must simply wait until one is created. ℯxplicit 00:18, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Beanpole (TV pilot)

Whoever prodded this article never notified me; would you please restore it so I can improve it? Erpert ^{blah, blah, blah...} 03:54, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

@Erpert: Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ℯxplicit 23:48, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Page Deletion Inquiry

Hello,

I would like to inquire about how to fix/republish a page that was deleted for David Meltzer (the Sports Executive).

I believe there was some bad sourcing, etc that we would like to fix.

There is a strong possibility that source material from the WWE Employed "David Meltzer" was tied to the David Meltzer I am referencing, who can be found at www.davemeltzer.com.

Is this something you can help us do? Or can you advise as to better steps to accomplish this?

The URL is: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:New_user_landing_page&page=David+Meltzer+%28sports+executive%29

Thank you!

-Derek Shaw (310) 980-4965 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derekshaw35 (talk • contribs) 17:14, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

@Derekshaw35: Hi, if you haven't already, please consider reading notability guidelines for people and the general notability guideline to understand what constitutes "notable" on Wikipedia, as this was the main concern. There was also a concern over the article creator's association with the subject; if you are share the same ties, please read the conflict of interest page as well. The best way to proceed would be going through the articles for creation process. There, the article you plan to create will go through a draft phase, and an experienced editor will review the page and determine if it is suitable to be an article; if not, you will receive feedback on how to improve the page. ℯxplicit 02:24, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

@Xplicit: Thank you for this direction. I appreciate you response! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derekshaw35 (talk • contribs) 15:24, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Where else to discuss Template:Di-disputed fair use rationale

I thought about discussing "Template:Di-disputed fair use rationale" to either TfD or VPP. Personally, I found it either too intimidating or too bureaucratic. Contacting the person responsible for using this template shouldn't be necessary. There's already File PROD, which is less bureaucratic, less restricted, more editor-friendly, etc. Suggestions? George Ho (talk) 20:24, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

@George Ho: WP:TFD, though I was well noted for opposing the use of File PROD on non-free files. It adds to the workload for me, and {{di-disputed fair use rationale}} is much easier to handle. ℯxplicit 23:48, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Although I'm using Template:Prod when I can, I'm still not sure that it's better than {{di-disputed fair use rationale}} as a way to nominate non-free files for speedy deletion/review. Nominated files can be de-prodded even in bad faith without any sort of administrator review which then means that the file needs to be taken to FFD or tagged again anyway. Since most non-free file speedy deletions (based on my experience) seem to be clear cut per WP:F7 or WP:F9, prodding these seems like a waste of time; "di-disputed fair use rationale", however, can also be used when just one non-free use of a file needs to be assessed, and removal not deletion of the file is being proposed which I don't think is something which can be handled very well by PROD. If an admin reviews the di template and decides further discussion is needed, they usually say so in the edit sum they leave when removing the template.

So, it might instead be better to try and tweak the existing template to make it more user friendly and clarify how it should be contested (perhaps by creating a {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}} type template for it) instead of deprecating its use. Pretty much the only editors bothering to bring files to FFD or tag them with templates are those who seem to have a pretty good grasp of WP:IUP and WP:NFCCP; so, I don't think these templates are being abused in anyway. Mistakes may be made, but these can usually be caught by the reviewing admin (who also tend to be very experience in dealing with files), which doesn't always happen when files are deprodded. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:25, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions. I was gonna take the template to TfD as suggested, but then I changed my mind and then requested creation of {{di-disputed fair use rationale disputed}} at Wikipedia:Requested templates. George Ho (talk) 01:53, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure that "di-disputed fair use rationale disputed" would be a good name for such a template; it seems like it might be easily mistaken for typo or some other error given that "disputed" is used twice. Moreover, as I tried to discuss awhile back at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 67#Change "fair use" to "non-free content", the wording of all of these types of templates should be changed to be consistant with the actual name of the policy. WP:NFCC is not really "Wikipedia's fair use criteria"; it's "Wikipedia's non-free content criteria". Moreover, WP:FUR is not really a "fair use rationale", but rather a "non-free use rationale". Editors new and experienced already mistake fair use/fair dealing as being interchangeable with non-free content use, even though the latter is much more restrictive. The way some of these templates are worded only seems to keep things confusing, so it would be best not to create any more with similar naming problems until the existing ones have been revised accordingly. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:46, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Tudor House, Melbourne

Hi, this page was deleted. I believe it should not have been. User (rosguill) who proposed deletion cited the fact it was not on a heritage register. This claim presumes that historical significance is determined only by state and local governments, which I strongly dispute. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tom od (talk • contribs) 07:26, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

@Tom od: Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ℯxplicit 23:58, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Fair use image restore request

Please restore File:Windows Server 2012 R2.png – it is to be used in the article Windows Server 2012 R2. Modernponderer (talk) 08:15, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

@Modernponderer:  Done, file restored. ℯxplicit 23:29, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Request for restoring page that was deleted

Hello, I noticed a page about me (Marquis_Wright) was deleted and saw somewhere that you were the person to reach out to. I'm not familiar with editing or creating pages on Wikipedia and believe I may have tried to update some content on it without being logged onto a wikipedia account. An administrator explained the controversy there to me and how the page can be flagged as a result. However, I wanted to reach out to you and see if you can undue the page deletion.

Thanks, Marquis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mnw30 (talk • contribs) 01:02, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

@Mnw30: Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ℯxplicit 01:23, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Request for restoring Wikipedia page of K7 Total Security

Dear Sir/Mam,

I am writing to you on behalf of K7 Computing, a global provider of leading IT security solutions for enterprises and consumers. Incorporated in 1991, K7 Computing has its registered office in Chennai, India and a strong presence in all Indian states. With more than 20,000 channel partners, K7 Computing is protecting more than 25 million customers worldwide against threats to their IT environment. Corporate website

K7 Computing’s flagship product; K7 Total Security had a Wikipedia page which was deleted in October 2016 and the reason quoted was "Non-notable product developed by non-notable company".

Please allow me to share a few media coverage here to support the fact that K7 Computing is indeed a notable company with millions of users actively using K7 Total Security product.

Please find pasted below links to a few authentic and trustworthy media publications those have published news about K7 Computing. All these are category A publications in India and few of these have international presence as well.

The Times of India - K7 Computing eyes $50mn revenue, to expand to US and Europe

Business Standard - K7 Computing eyes $50mn revenue, to expand to US and Europe

The Financial Express - K7 Computing eyes $50mn revenue, to expand to US and Europe

India Today - K7 Computing eyes $50mn revenue, to expand to US and Europe

Outlook - K7 Computing eyes $50mn revenue, to expand to US and Europe

Money Control - K7 Computing eyes $50mn revenue, to expand to US and Europe

Express Computer CRN - K7 Computing Celebrates Completion of 25 Years

Zee Business - K7 Computing eyes $50mn revenue, to expand to US and Europe

VARIndia - K7 Computing completes 25 glorious years

Channel Drive - K7 Computing Unveils K7 Academy, Celebrates Completion of 25 Years

United news of India (UNI) - K7 Computing launches new security solutions

The Times of India - Chennai's homegrown cybersecurity enterprise K7 Computing expands to B2B segment

The Hindu - Concern about cybersecurity on the rise

The Hindu Business Line - K7 launches cyber security products large enterprises

CIOL - K7 Computing Announces Strategic Repositioning and Expansion of its Enterprise Security Business

CRN India - K7 Computing announces strategic repositioning and expansion

Communications Today - Concern About Cybersecurity on The Rise

B4U media - K7 Computing Announces Strategic Repositioning and Expansion of its Enterprise Security Business at its Annual K7 Odyssey Event

3rdEyeReports - K7 Computing Announces Strategic Re-positioning and Expansion

SPO India - Help the people in distress in Kerala with K7 Computing

VAR India - AI helps in staying ahead of ever-evolving threats

Request you to kindly restore the page of K7 Total Security on Wikipedia and guide me to create a Wikipedia page on K7 Computing. Kindly let me know if I could assist you with further information about the company or any specific detail.

Thanks and regards Rashmi Markhedkar Official email: rashmi.m@k7computing.com 106.193.158.232 (talk) 13:46, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ℯxplicit 23:29, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Dear Sir/ Mam, Thank you for restoring the page on K7 Total Security. I had 2 queries – 1) The Wikipedia page of K7 Total Security is still not reflecting in Google search. Kindly help me understand if this takes some time. 2) The Wikipedia page of K7 Total Security is in a language other than English. Is it possible to have a Wikipedia page of K7 Total Security in English Also, would request you to guide/ help me to create a Wikipedia page for K7 Computing, the company. Request you to let me know if I can assist you with any information or detail. Regards Rashmi Markhedkar Official email: rashmi.m@k7computing.com Rashmimarkhedkar (talk) 13:16, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Explicit. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Page deletion

Hello, Explicit,

I was looking at the Deletion Log and noticed that you are often deleting 5 or 6 or more pages during the same minute. Is there a script that helps you delete more than one page at the same time? Maybe it's my old computer but I find myself only being able to delete one page every minute or every two minutes. I was wondering if there was some tool available that would make this go faster.

Thanks for any advice you can offer! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:33, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@Liz: Hi, I use Twinkle's batch deletion for deleting multiple pages under the same rationale. I mostly use this tool for pages in the file namespace. Other times (usually for expired WP:PROD, which all come with different deletion rationales), I simply open several tabs at a time and review the pages and histories individually. Upon confirming they are eligible for deletion under the process, I manually delete them in quick succession. ℯxplicit 03:41, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Explicit. I'll have to look into batch deletion mode. You must have a quick deletion finger! Unfortunately, my laptop is running slowly and I'm finding that Twinkle is taking about 2 minutes to tag an empty category for deletion and log it on my CSD log page. I posted a note about it on the Twinkle talk page but I'm beginning to think it is a problem with my computer, not Twinkle. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:08, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Coat of Arms of the NUI.png

I notice you deleted this file on the basis that it was unused (F5). The reason it was unused is that a rogue user had removed it from the page where it was needed (National University of Ireland). For this reason I recommend reinstating it. Zacwill (talk) 11:51, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

@Zacwill:  Done, file restored. ℯxplicit 11:59, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! Zacwill (talk) 12:13, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

S. Thurairaja

Hi Explicit, in October you deleted the article S. Thurairaja, would you be able to restore it, or move it to a user page of mine, so that I can expand it. Thank you.--Blackknight12 (talk) 09:13, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

@Blackknight12:  Done, content moved to User:Blackknight12/S. Thurairaja. ℯxplicit 12:09, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks--Blackknight12 (talk) 05:57, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

A?

Hey Explicit,

I was wondering if you would still consider being an admin over at Commons. From your experience dealing with files, you could be a positive benefit to the project. -- 1989 (talk) 06:01, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

@1989: Hmm, I'll mull it over for a bit and decide soon. ℯxplicit 10:37, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Sure thing. When you decide, let me know. Here's a guide of what you’d get into, if you’re interested. -- 1989 (talk) 13:06, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

See you again

Oh ho !!!, so surprise, today I has been see your personal page, and I watched your page: views history. Now I see you have many enemy ! and I'm think I know why ? Đông Minh (talk) 01:19, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Request to Restore Inspirock Page

Hi Explicit,

I'm reaching out to request restoration of the Inspirock page. This indicates that you had requested deletion on the grounds ‘Non-notable company’ / ‘WP:NCORP’: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=delete&user=&page=Inspirock&wpdate=&tagfilter=&subtype=delete

However, a few news pieces have been published about Inspirock that might help the company meet the standard for notability:

http://www.latimes.com/travel/deals/la-tr-webbuzz-20151122-story.html Los Angeles Times - Inspirock is the subject, rather than a mentioned company. This is not a sponsored article.

https://www.cntraveler.com/stories/2015-06-26/inspirock-digital-trip-vacation-planner-tool - Conde Nast, a leading travel publication, reviewed Inspirock in 2015.

https://www.phocuswire.com/Inspirock-prioritises-engineering-and-awareness-sees-stellar-growth - PhocusWire (formerly Tnooz), another well-known travel publication, published this article about Inspirock in 2016.

https://36kr.com/p/5037102.html - 36kr, the Chinese equivalent of TechCrunch, has 11 million monthly visitors and published this feature article about Inspirock in 2015.

https://stirileprotv.ro/ilikeit/smart-things/ilikeit-site-urile-care-te-ajuta-sa-gaseste-cele-mai-bune-oferte-pentru-vacanta-croaziera-in-caraibe-la-pret-de-300-de-eur.html - ProTV is a leading Romanian media outlet that has its own Wikipedia page; the article briefly describes Inspirock, but the video provides a lengthier discussion beginning at about 00:38. This is not a sponsored spot.

Based on the above examples, I hope you will reconsider Inspirock's suitability for inclusion on Wikipedia.

Sieffron79 (talk) 22:13, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

@Sieffron79: Hi, Inspirock has already been restored and moved to Draft:Inspirock by other administrators. ℯxplicit 23:40, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Disruptive Editing

This page needs admin intervention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encounter_(South_Korean_TV_series)

A user keeps messing on the cast list. Also, pretty sure they're using VPN. Thanks. 112.206.182.198 (talk) 05:31, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Block

Hi, can you block 86.171.208.223 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)? Thanks. -KH-1 (talk) 00:10, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

@KH-1: Got beat to it! ℯxplicit 00:11, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Commons question

I have a question regarding images on Commons. File:MQ-8 VX-20 NAS Point Mugu (cropped).jpg image has been cropped, but the uploader didn't provide the specific link to the original file on source's site. Is there a specific tag for requesting the specific image link for Commons? I have a reason for asking for the link. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 02:06, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

@BilCat: These can be tagged as Template:No source since. My reverse Google search suggests the image originates from here, which is not a government website. ℯxplicit 04:27, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. That wasn't what I thought the issue might be, but it does look like a copyvio, as the image is tagged "Northrop Grumman photo". I've had issues with the uploader over the changing of backgrounds on images, but I've never seen a hint any copyvio issues with him. I hate to even bring it up with him for fear of widening the rift between us. I'll tag the image with "No source" and see where it goes from there. - BilCat (talk) 05:05, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)] @BilCat: There seem to be two pages on the MQ-8 found on the source website ([5] and [6]), so perhaps one of those photos is an acceptable replacement. When I'm not fairly certain whether something's a copyvio, I ask for feedback at c:COM:VPC. Often someone is able to sort things out and a copyvio will be tagged as such or c:COM:DR'd as necessary by someone else without myself having to do anything further. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:37, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

• Thanks. While I'm experienced on English Wikipedia, I haven't spent enough time on Commons to know my way well around it yet, so thanks for the suggestions. - BilCat (talk) 05:56, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

It originally came from their media report from the news section, but won't link the article (US Naval institute) - FOX 52 (talk) 05:42, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Some official US government websites do use copyrighted photos/content provided by third-parties; if that's the case here, then I don't think you can claim it's PD if the file can be established to have originated somewhere else. Does the source for the file attribute it to the US Navy like is done here? -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:47, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Yeah I see your point (I'll do some more digging to clear it) Thanks FOX 52 (talk) 05:53, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

If it says "Photo courtesy of Northrop Grumman" like it does here, then it's probably not going to be PD? If that's the case, c:COM:DR the file and upload one which is a Navy photo. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:56, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @FOX 52: Did it state it was a Navy photo? Because the Northrop image claims it as its own. I'm sure that's not a rare occurrence when dealing with government contractor photos and publishers, so I'm not assuming you're incorrect. In my experience, we've usually assumed a company's claim is correct, and not used the photo. - BilCat (talk) 05:57, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

It was from a group montage from US Naval institute, and it may not be free as Marchjuly pointed out. (and now I can't find the montage) - Will search FOX 52 (talk) 06:07, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

FYI I moved for a rdf less of a headache to deal with - FOX 52 (talk) 06:14, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Martina Sanollová

Just curious. I've renominated this for deletion, and feel it needs to be salted.(Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martina Sanollová) You mentioned when you deleted this the first time in April that the article was created by a paid editor. Who was that user? I have a sneaking suspicion that may have been a User:Jan Blanicky sock? A Blanicky created the article on the Czech Wikipedia, ([[7]]). User: Heptapolein recreated the English article(and created the German article) in September and he was just discovered to be a sockpuppet of Blanicky and has a conflict of interest in that he helped write and maintain the official website for Vladimir Hirsch, who is a collaborator of Martina Sanollová and is in Skrol with her.(evidence here:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladim%C3%ADr_Hirsch#cite_note-1, clearly authored by "Blanicky,J" and there are pictures on the page that Blanicky has claimed to have taken himself and has even uploaded to Wikipedia.) - R9tgokunks ⭕ 01:37, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

@R9tgokunks: The article was originally created by Blanicky, which has been blocked for some time now. In regards to salting, I usually don't implement such protection to a deleted article until it gets deleted a third time. ℯxplicit 04:27, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

@Explicit:I suspected so. That's interesting. So... he basically created the website for Vladimir Hirsch and had started (including sockpuppets) nearly every transwiki article on him. I wonder how I would go about getting those removed? How exactly were you able to know Blanicky was a paid contributor? I'm appalled that if this was common knowldge amongst people that he was able to go on with creating/advocting for all those articles. - R9tgokunks ⭕ 06:59, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

@R9tgokunks: When I seek assistance on matters of sister projects, I go to meta:Administrators of Wikimedia projects, look for an active user, and post my concern on their talk page. I don't have much information about this contributor; the article was proposed for deletion by Praxidicae, so she may be able to assist you further. ℯxplicit 07:09, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Nir Brand article

Hello

Two months ago I've created a page titled Nir Brand with all relevant information about the person who is a philanthropist and a musical conductor. For some reason it has been deleted by you, I'd like to understand why, and how this action ce be reverted.

Thank you, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Utrecht1 (talk • contribs) 11:39, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

@Utrecht1: Hi, Nir Brand was proposed for deletion by another editor with the following concern: "Unref blp; no evidence of meeting WP:ENT or WP:GNG." It went uncontested for seven days and was deleted as a result. You are highly encouraged to read the aforementioned notability guidelines regarding entertainers, as well as the notability guideline for musicians to understand what constitutes "notable" on Wikipedia. For contesting the deletion, please see WP:CONTESTED. ℯxplicit 01:03, 5 December 2018 (UTC)