User talk:Maxim/Archives/2

RE:Delivery

Sure! Do you want this to be the July, or the August newsletter? —« ANIMUM » 18:31, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh dear. I've already started the bot, and AWB doesn't arrange links by the order in which they appear on a page, in fact, it is seemingly random. Sorry. :-( —« ANIMUM » 18:43, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Done

Obviously done. :-) —« ANIMUM » 19:31, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Newsletter

I see you posted a request on my talk. I was away. Anyway, next time you need the newsletter delivered, just tell me. (Animum said he'd let me do it). --(Review Me) R ^ParlateContribs_@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 20:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Please give me a diff to said statement. :-P —« ANIMUM » 20:53, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi Maxim, and thanks for your participation in my RfA. I've withdrawn it, and have written up an "analysis" of it, which is available at User:Giggy/RfA/Giggy. Please come around when you get the chance, and give me feedback on how I can improve. Also, sorry for the late note, I didn't see your comments originally. Thanks again, Giggy ^{Talk | Review} 22:24, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

User Talk:71.175.143.192

Hi Maxim, I was linked to User Talk:71.175.143.192 and told I vandalized Talk: XFL and then finally Virginia Tech Massacre. The 2nd (last!) warning was from EvilClown93 which links to you. I don't remember updating either of these topics (or any others for that matter) can I find out what I said? and can I exonerate myself? I am the only one with access to this computer, but it's very buggy, and also possibly my brother said something here, and I'd like to find out

Somebody used that IP (your brother, maybe), and vandalised (I looked at the contributions). If you don't want to have a direct connection to the IP, create an account. Maxim 11:28, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Credit Action query

Deletion query Maxim - On July 6th you deleted the page 'Credit Action'. I am wondering if you could give me an explanation as to why this action was taken. Cheers. Tappyea2 15:14, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

It was blatant advertising, which is allowed to be deleted on sight per this policy, and more specifically this criterion. Hope that helps! Maxim 23:55, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok thanks for explanation. However I would question whether it was in fact blatant advertising. It didn't promote any services or company. Credit Action is a charity which does financial education, the main aim of the article was simply informative as to what the charity does and given that the content was entirely factual I don't see what the problem is. I merely added because I thought it could be useful to people looking for a charity which did this kind of work. I would like you to consider reinstating the article as I'm really not sure it does fall foul of the criteria you mention. Thanks. Tappyea2 11:41, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

A response would be appreciated. Cheers mate. Tappyea2 15:52, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I archived something too quickly again. The problem is that it lacks notability for inclusion, and it the article didn't assert notability, even if it met the guideline. I realise you might be a bit dissatisfied with my decision not to restore it; however, I suggest, if you want some sort of review of this action to go to deletion review. Maxim 11:50, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of La-Mulana?

Why was La-Mulana deleted? There was a notice of prod and it was not removed since it was still some objection to removing it. I think this article at least deserves a vote if it is to be deleted.Subanark 18:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Because it was proposed for deletion. Nobody objected, and per policy, it was deleted after five days. You've misunderstood the policy. The exact reason for deletion is quoted directly from the template in the summary. Maxim 11:52, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

The notice was on the article since November. I originally objected to that and took down the notice after a week. The original posted of the notice then put it back up where I objected again, but left it up there. I thought the article was in a finished state, so I stopped watching it. The subject has become much more notable than it was when the notice was first put up. Even if no one was actively watching the article does not mean it was not noteworthy.

Battle of Washita River-related user conduct RfCs

As an administrator who has been involved with the long-term disputes about the article Battle of Washita River (which is still under full protection), I want to inform you of the two related user-conduct RfCs that have now been certified:

• Wikipedia:Requests for comment/HanzoHattori
• Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Custerwest

Thanks for your past efforts in trying to help us deal with the disputes about this article. --Yksin 20:07, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

FYI, a related article RfC has been initiated at Talk:Battle of Washita River#Request for comment. We could really use some comments from people outside the dispute. Thanks. --Yksin 02:19, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

August 4 DYK

On 4 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Wally Tatomir, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Andrew c ^[talk] 11:47, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka 2

Thank you for your support in my Request for Adminship. Unfortunately the nomination did not succeed, but please rest assured that I am still in full support of the Wikipedia project, and I'll try again in a few months! If you ever have any questions or suggestions for me, please don't hesitate to contact me. Best wishes, --Elonka 06:45, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Username change

Maxim, you need to change your username again. Although I know you probably were unaware of it at the time you made the usurptation request (and the bureaucrat unaware when he performed the change), there is another editor with a username similar to your own. User:MaXim is a long-standing editor who, although he hasn't edited in ten days, has been editing on and off under that username for three years. The username policy prohibits confusing usernames, including those that "closely resemble the name of another Wikipedia user and may cause confusion". In fact, the similarity already has caused confusion. If you want more community input, filing a request at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names is appropriate. Otherwise, please file a request at Wikipedia:Changing username. Thanks.--Chaser - T 03:44, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I didn't mean for that to happen, and I probably shouldn't have said that I was confused; I surely wasn't, and I meant only that I was surprised that there was another long-standing user with a similar username. In the apparent absence of any editor's having been confused or inconvenienced, I'm not certain that there would be any immediate objections at user names RfC, and I'd encourage you at least to raise the issue there before requesting another change. I was going to write you about an entirely unrelated issue in the next few days, but for now I feel like a real jackass, because I'm not at all sure that the similarity of names ever would have presented a problem and because it surely didn't for me; apologies. Joe 04:15, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

In that case I think an acceptable alternative would be user disambiguation links at the tops of your userpages. Since you don't have a userpage, that would be at the top of this user talk page.--Chaser - T 05:02, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

TierraWiki

Hello, I just wanted to let you know that we sort of 'admin conflicted' on this article. I was in the process of AfDing it when you deleted it. I had decided that 100,000km of route and 4 million GPS tracks was enough to cross the "assertion" threshold, and was sending it to AfD for a proper study. So I noticed you deleted it, obviously, and I just restored it on the spot. Just letting you know, and not intending to nark you at all. Splash - tk 22:38, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

PROD vs Speedy on transwikies

I prefer to give the transwikied articles a chance for rehabilitation. Five days on PROD gives people a chance to protest, and a number of them have done just that. On one where, even after the protest I still felt it should be deleted, I put it up for AFD, and the AFD was resoundingly opposed by the botany community on the project, and the article was much improved during the AFD time. So it's to give the chance for this time of improvement into keepable article that I use PROD rather than speedy. Not all are improved. Most are not. But PROD gives them a chance, while if I speedied them, there would be no chance. And overall, I'm not in a hurry to see these go away. There's no rush. As for the large numbers, someone else used to regularly PROD these each day. They stopped around June, and these have been backing up, unattended, since then. I got tired of it, and started PRODing a bunch to clear out the backlog. After two days of PRODs (of which I think you just deleted the first day's), I got caught up, and have been myself PRODing each day's transwikies since. So after the next batch of PRODed transwikies, the numbers in each day's group should drop dramatically. - TexasAndroid 03:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Dealing with redirects to deleted articles

Hi, I noticed you removed some redirects that were pointing to speedy deleted articles (Sub-genomic & Morphotactic). Just to let you know that rather than unlink the redirect, it is better to nominate it for {{csd-r1}} so that the redirect can also be deleted. → AA ^(talk) — 10:54, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, noticed you are an administrator :) If my understanding is incorrect, please do let me know. Regards. → AA ^(talk) — 10:57, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Email

You have email. Please reply in that format, if possible. Cheers -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 14:58, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Umm... are you running a bot

Are you running a bot on this account.... your edit rate seems a little high -- Tawker 18:18, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Looks like a script (or multiple tabs, like I do on Commons). Majorly (talk) 18:29, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, no problemo - some people tend to freak out with the idea of bots and admin accounts so I figured it was easier to ask when I see a fairly high edit rate (but perfectly normal w/ TWINKLE). You might find AutoWikiBrowser useful for some of the tasks -- Tawker 23:06, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Re:

Please restore now :-). I think it was a problem with translutes (sp?). ~ Wikihermit 23:16, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Could you also restore User:Wikihermit/userpage ? ~ Wikihermit 23:19, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I got all of 'em tagged, you can go ahead and clear the tagged one :-). ~ Wikihermit 23:34, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Children's cookery

The page Children's cookery was deleted by yourself less than 5 minutes after it was tagged for speed deletion, despite the fact that {{hangon)] was inserted - and before I had time to put a page justification in the discussion page.

This page was created as a stub for further content and citing, and was thus listed as a stub.

Please could you look at the discussion page [[1]] and get back to me.

Many thanks,

Liondor 00:40, 15 August 2007 (UTC)Liondor

Bronchoscopy

Hi, Maxim. I see that you deleted bronchoscopy as a "blatant copyright infringement". Is it possible for me to review the previous page? There might be some salvageable material. Thanks. Axl 10:09, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I would have e-mailed you the old revision, but you don't have an e-mail specified :(. Can you specify an email in preferences so I can do that, as I'm not comfortable putting up deleted revisions, especially copyvios up. Thanks! --Maxim 11:21, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Damu Ridas Vol.2: How Deep Is Your Hood

This was tagged as needing speedy deletion since it was not linked to from anywhere. This is not a speedy deletion criterion, so please do check up on the actual reason for the request. Redirects resulting from moves are not deleted, since they are likely to be useful in future even if unlinked now. In this particular case, the article had been cut-n-paste moved to How Deep Is Your Hood. Such a happening is fairly typical when an article is suddenly without linkage, and is one of the reasons that being so is never a speedy deletion criterion. Splash - tk 22:32, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Splash, am I allowed to make one mistake in 200 deletions? Being familiar with Wikipedia and trusted to admin, and being sufficiently experienced as an admin, I found your message treating me as an inexperienced user unpleasant, and you could've saved your time by posting a template. --Maxim 22:40, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm? I thought I'd let you know that I reversed one of your deletion and tell you why. I'm particularly keen on people not inventing speedy criteria and routinely leave admins a note when that occurs. In this particular case, you missed that a cut-n-paste move needed fixing, which is actually moderately important given the attribution requirements of the GFDL. You are allowed as many mistakes as you like, as long as someone is allowed to fix them! I don't understand what you mean by "posting a template". Splash - tk 22:43, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Smile

Lights has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Cheers, Lights 00:08, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nor thgate Mall (Tullahoma) (2nd nomination)

You did a speedy delete on this mall. Please also close out the AFD which was in progress when you speedied it. Thanks! Edison 00:18, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Oops. I always forget. :( Maxim 00:27, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Edison 00:30, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

You're very welcome. You can do it yourself by adding {{subst:afd top}} at the top of the discussion and {{subst:afd bottom}} at the bottom, and announcing the result (Delete, Keep, etc.) immediately after the top template. Cheers! --Maxim 00:33, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

ProjectPier

Hi, not sure if this is the best place to do this. You apparently put a speedy deletion on the ProjectPier page, noting that it had been a candidate for deletion before. However, the content of the article was significantly different (and much expanded upon) since the first post and had almost no resemblance to the initial article that was deleted. Additionally, there was a discussion on the talk page of the article regarding the deletion criteria. As part of that discussion, the article was amended to address the concerns that were brought up. After that discussion, the deletion tag (and the hold tag i put on it to work out the deletion discussion) were removed. If you have further criticisms, please let me know so I can address them otherwise will you please resurrect/reinstate this page? Rcrossvs 03:42, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Note that there is a deletion review going on if you care to comment Wikipedia:Deletion_review#ProjectPier

Deletion of Manchester Phoenix ENL page

You did a quick delete on this page, which was a work in progress. Can you please further explain the decision to delete the page? LearnedRobb 17:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I've reread the article, and I've decided to restore it. --Maxim 22:25, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for blocking 68.98.125.45. This IP posted a death threat on Mullet (haircut), which scared me. NHRHS2010 ^Talk 22:33, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Email...again

I have sent back the answer to those questions. Just making sure you got em. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 22:58, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Premature deletion

Last time I checked (which has been a while), bronchoscopy looked not at all like a copyright infringement. In fact, I seem to remember that much of it was written from scratch, so whoever thought it was copyrighted material should probably have looked closer. But the history and talk page is gone and I can't check. Please email me the version that you deleted so I can review it. Thanks. Kosebamse 13:02, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Email address not specified. Please specify one. Sorry. Maxim 22:13, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

My mistake, should work now.

And I have found a recent copy in Google's archives which looks qute unlike the article that I remember. I have dug deeper into my memory and am now quite sure that I have, together with others, written the article much from scratch. There must be a version that is clearly not a copyright violation.

"00:26, 15 August 2007 Maxim (Talk | contribs) deleted "Bronchoscopy" (Speedy deleted per (CSD g12), was a blatant copyright infringement.)" CSD explicitly excludes articles with salvageable versions in the history. I do wonder how an article that has existed so long can be speedy deleted without thoroughly checking the history. That looks rather unfriendly towards those who have written it, quite apart from the unnecessary loss of valuable material. Kosebamse 06:06, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your email. That version is indeed very unlike the text that has long existed in that article and may very well be a copyright violation. However, the earlier versions were valuable and should not remain deleted. I suggest that you review the article history and I'll be glad to help find a suitable version (and no, I'll not request to have admin rights restored to do it myself, as I have given them up in a well-considered decision and my arguments still hold). And please do not misunderstand me, I don't want to hurry you, but I think that the decision to speedy delete was hasty and should be reversed. Kosebamse 05:14, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

August 2007

The lines I quoted and the surrounding text on the talk page are taken verbatim. That is the most blatant copyvio I have ever seen. Q ^{T C} 07:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

DRV notice for Incompetence

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Incompetence. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Azazello 20:16, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Junkyard Jane

I saw that you deleted Junkyard Jane. The notability of the subject was well established in the content of the article. I have not ever requested a deletion review before, and am unsure if it is necessary.~~ Michael J Swassing 06:33, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Igor Vishev

Are you serious? I said on the talk page of Igor Vishev that this addition was with a permission from Bruce Klein, the director of ImmInst. This means that parameter 4 of the 12th criterion for speedy deletion did not apply (it was bolded that all parameters must be met). I asserted permission for use of the text immediately after adding the article and elaborated on that. If you don't beleive me, you can easily contact Bruce Klein (his work address is on his profile page at ImmInst, which is accessible from Directors page). That said, I require that you immediately restore the page that you have deleted in blatant violation of the Wikipedia policy to its last version. Inform me on my talk page. Paranoid 16:13, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Igor Vishev. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review.

Deletion problems

Dear Maxim,

as I have not received a reply to my concerns over the deleted article bronchoscopy (further up on this page) I would like to repeat here that the deletion was not in accordance with established criteria and that usefuil content from earlier versions of that page should be salvaged. Please review the article history and state your opinion on the matter.

Furthermore, judging by this talk page it seems that more than one user is unhappy with your deletions. I wonder whether you are giving their thoughts enough consideration. As it is not impossible that your behavior might become subject to discussion outside this page, I would urge you to reconsider your attitudes toward deletion, particularly speedy deletion, and discuss these matters with those involved.

Respectfully, Kosebamse 18:33, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Stats

Hey, I thought you might be interested in User:ST47/Stats, if you didn't already know about it. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 20:00, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Nope, I didn't, but I like it... (178 in deletions over 1500 other admins in only 6 weeks... Deletecountitis :D Maxim 20:12, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

2-28 loan

What a concept! We have had variable rate mortgages in the past. The annual ceiling was fixed at 3/4 of a point, and could only be raised if the consumer price index rose that much. Two years ago we refinanced at 8.5% which rose to 11.5% with 45 days notice. The notice states that they can, which means they will raise it 3% every six months, ad infinitum. Ergo, we will be paying 14.5% next year and 20.5% the year after. We are in Michigan. I would like to know in how many states this is legal?--W8IMP 17:06, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

View (previous 50) (next 50) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500). ·18:30, 16 August 2007 Maxim (Talk | contribs) deleted "2-28 loans", (Speedy deleted per (CSDg1), was patent nonsense: an unsalvageably incoherent page with no meaningful content.")

The "2-28 loan" is clearly mentioned in the article on Subprime lending and having been the victim of one, I thought it might be helpful to start a conversation with others who have been likewise victimized.

Although perhaps it would be more appropriate for the Talk:Subprime lending page, I found no mention of it there. I cannot put it anywhere if you delete it as "patent nonsense: an unsalvageably incoherent page with no meaningful content."

Thank you,--W8IMP 23:06, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Pressed wrong button. WP:TW, a Javascript tool assists WP:CSD deletion summaries, and the one I meant to put was WP:CSD#G11, spam. Please read through G11, as your article doesn't comply with that policy at all. Sorry. Maxim 00:29, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Spam?

Please re-read my article, and tell me how in the world anyone could characterise it as spam?--W8IMP 02:21, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I would, as would every other established user at Wikipedia. It is blatant advertising, sorry. Maxim 02:53, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Esther Baptiste

Hey Max, several of us, including myself -the one who asked that this be speedily deleted - are wondering what about her asserts notability. Can you please defend your removing the db on the AfD page? thanks.

Nonsense?

Max,

For another reading I am enclosing my article on 2-28 loan, with a sincere request that you justify its deletion:

Wikipedia:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Featured topic Drive

Hi, as you may or may not know, some of us at WP:HOCKEY have banded together and are trying to get the various NHL Trophy pages to FT status. It is a big job and if you would be willing to offer any assistance, it would be most appreciated. You can find out more here. Thanks for the time, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 21:34, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Welcome aboard then. You might want to put it on the page that you are working on that trophy, otherwise somebody else might assume nobody is doing it and work on it at the same time. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 21:40, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

The chart portion looks good, but unfortunately the infobox pushes the images down and screws up the page, although I guess that's a problem with most. Once you expand the history a bit it might look better. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 21:57, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Taxi squad

Why did you delete Taxi squad, it was a requested article from WP:HOCKEY. If there was something unproper, such as structure or tone, can you or someone else fix it up? Thanks. --Hasek is the best 15:18, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. --Hasek is the best 16:41, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

South Rushden Junior Football Club

Hi there,

I see that you have deleted the article on the above as being a 'non-notable youth football club'.

While this may be appear to be true we are actually only the secopnd football club in the UK to become a Community Interest Company, a step that was taken from a postion of strength rather than weakness and one that will allow us to move forward.

We may be non-notable in the big wide world but locally we have a very positive and growing profile and continue to offer football coaching for the children of Rushden in a safe and friendly environment, a fact that the Football Association of England have recognised by granting us FA Charter Club status.

We are forward thinking and try to embrace all new media, our website is informative and regularly updated through the season.

With all this in mind I would be grateful if you consider re-instating our article.

Regards

David Cockings —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Davidcockings (talk • contribs) 14:20, August 21, 2007 (UTC).

Dear David,

I'm sorry, but it's deleted per policy, specifically due to WP:N, and quite possibly WP:CSD#g7. Also please read WP:NOT,WP:ROLE, WP:SPAM, and WP:U. It explains a bit more what Wikipedia is. You can try deletion review if you are unsatisfied with mydecision (to not restore the article), after reading all the pages that explain my reasoning. Maxim_(talk) 14:30, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi again,

Thanks for your quick reply and the explanation. Disppointed but understand —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Davidcockings (talk • contribs) 21:21, August 21, 2007 (UTC).

StatusBot

It's running without a flag as it is not fully approved as of the moment. See the BRFA process. Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 21:23, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

You have email again. I hope you aren't annoyed. Cheers -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 17:23, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, got it. I replied to that, but did you reply to my reply? It said I had new email, but I think I didn't find anything... -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 17:35, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, I've got all your messages. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 17:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I got your last email, but it is really annoying - my email has stuffed up, so I will send a reply here: any time is fine, I don't mind in the slightest; when you are ready, I am too. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 18:02, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the lovely barnstar. However, could I ask one thing? Would you mind signing it, so I will know who it's from? Thank you so very much. Cheers, Neranei (talk) 02:15, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you again! Just doing my job. Hope all is well, and please drop me a line if you need anything. Cheers! Neranei (talk) 02:16, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Sea View

Hi, I was just looking for information on Sea View 4, an add on for MSTS. It seems the page has been deleted because it may have been advertising.

Of course I haven't actually seen the page, but since Sea View 4 is a free add on, concerns about advertising may be unjustified. Is it more 'advertising' than any of the many pages detailing music albums or the like?

Anyway, thought you might like to know that I came here seeking information, and found said info had been deleted.

Regards —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.12.80.122 (talk) 06:05:04, August 19, 2007 (UTC)

Sicko

Good call, I got edit conflicted because I was trying to do that as well... I'm contacting Moore to see if he will pull those.--Isotope23 ^talk 13:55, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

THF

The edit munged one of my templates. Separately, can we have a reference to the fact that my edits have helped Moore? For example, this one? THF 15:06, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

• Is there any way that you can change the message on THF to not make it sound like admins rule supreme over Wikipedia? I think it sends the wrong message, and it doesn't sound very Wiki. WP:ADMIN#No_big_deal. I think something a little less bombastic and more matter-of-fact would sound better...to all of us. --David Shankbone 15:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I'd prefer something more conciliatory. I don't view myself at war with these people, even if they feel otherwise. THF 15:09, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Frank J. Selke Trophy FLC

I've updated the picture and some info for Frank J. Selke Trophy, which is up for FLC and you have commented on. If you have time, please check it out and see if you are willing to support. Anthony Hit me up... 15:30, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Pimptastic

Hi - you indef blocked User:Pimptastic - may I ask why? The precedent has been that "pimp" is okay (see the "Chicagopimp" discussion at WP:RFCN) - [2]. I'm certainly not going to unblock without discussion first, and maybe I'm missing something, but I think it's important that we're consistent on this one. (And for the record, I opposed allowing "pimp" in that case). - Philippe | Talk 18:07, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Because xe is not an a. established user b. vandalised on the first edit. Maxim_(talk) 18:09, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I would generally not block for a first offense, and if it's a vandalism block, I'm surprised that you blocked it as a username hardblock. I'm truly not trying to be difficult, and I could support a vandal-only block, but I just don't want the user thinking we blocked them for a name that isn't against policy. - Philippe | Talk 18:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, I reset it to a non-Hard block. Is it fair? Maxim_(talk) 18:15, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, if you blocked them for vandalism, I think they need a vandalism block, not a username block. This is the sort of thing that could get ugly if they appeal the block; the admin handling the appeal needs to know from the block and the block notice exactly why the user was blocked. As it is, if they don't know you're blocking for vandalism (and how could they? Your block notice references the username policy), I would think they might unblock because there's no violation of the username policy. I'd change it to a vandalism block and change the message on their talk page to reflect vandalism. They haven't violated the username policy, so a username block won't stick. - Philippe | Talk 18:22, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Phillipe, would you mind setting the block yourslef? I think it will aleviate a bigger mess. Maxim_(talk) 18:26, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't mind at all. I just didn't want to mess with your block unless you asked me to. I'll do it right now. Thanks for being willing to listen! - Philippe | Talk 18:27, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar!

Watching the new user log is sooo addictive! :) Eliz81^{(talk)(contribs)} 20:27, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Bill Masterton Memorial Trophy Comments

Okay, here are the concerns I amassed. I assumed you wanted me to list them on your talk page, but I'll list them at WP:FLC as well. I'm sorry if I'm being nit-picky. :)

• • Pit Martin - I would recommend finding a better word than "responded"
  • Henri Richard - he would play only 16 more games after being awarded - What doe sthis have to do with him winning the award? I would suggest removal.
  • Ed Westfall - Awarded for "leading teams in the shadows of superstars" - What does this mean? I know it is a quote, but things like this can get confusing to readers, and should be reworded.
  • Butch Goring - Made the NHL despite his small size; not sure if this is relevant, but a reowrd would be good. Perhaps stature would be more appropriate than size. But what does his small size have to do with him winning an award?
  • Glenn Resch - gave his young team more confidence while he was in the nets' Does this just mean he was goaltender? This seemed like hyped-up language to me.
  • Lanny McDonald - as he was traded around the league - Is this relevant?
  • Brad Park - in the statistical shadow of Bobby Orr - Is this relevant? Why is it mentioned?
  • Anders Hedberg - The first player raised outside of North America to win it - What does this have to do with winning the award?
  • Doug Jarvis - He would later take the record to 964 games - Not relevant to winning the award. Also, merge (914 games) into prose.
  • Gary Roberts - Successfully from possibly career-ending surgery to correct bone spurs and nerve damage - I presume this is a typo?
  • Steve Yzerman - attempted to play during 2002-03 NHL season - Inconclusive: Did he or did he not play?
• Raime 22:32, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

And here are my comments from previous edits that still have not been addressed, probably because you couldn't find them amidst the mess on the FLC entry page. :)

• • Is there a better term than "Notes" that can be used as the column title? Perhaps "Reasons for winning" or something along those lines? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Raime (talk • contribs) 22:50, August 23, 2007 (UTC).
  • During his playing career, Masterton exhibited the qualities for which the trophy is dedicated - This sounds like POV to me. Stating that he demostrated "the qualities of perseverance, sportsmanship, and dedication to ice hockey" is an opinion, not a fact. Should be put into a quote from the NHL.
  • Due to the nature of the award, no player has ever won it more than once seems redundant, after you have already stated in the lead that A player can win this trophy only once in his career.
  • You should remove the wikilinks to the hockey players' and NHL seasons' Wikipedia articles that are found in the image captions. This is overlinking, as they are already clearly linked in the list.
  • Some entries have punctuation, others do not. Either use periods throughout, or not at all.
  • I think you should use:
    •   Player is still active
      rather than {| class="wikitable" !style="background-color: #CFECEC;" |Still active |} to remain consistent with similar trophy lists.
• Raime 22:45, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Wow, it's hard to believe that entire 3 section-entry was made up of our edits! :) Great job in your continual improvements to this list. I can now say that I unconditionally support. Raime 02:04, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

My RFA

Cheers, JetLover ^(talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks for your comments at my RFA! Democracy sure is great, even when you lose. I'll try to use your comments to shape my character and become a better admin, thanks! BTW, Canada is nice! Cheers, JetLover ^(talk) 02:08, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Jokes at my RFA

I made a few jokes at my RFA, I can explain them. The Nixon thing wasn't a joke towards Nixon, just his quote. And the "he's me" thing wasn't supposed to be a gut buster or anything, just something that'd make someone smile. Cheers, JetLover ^(talk) 02:46, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use

You recently removed the replaceable fair use template from Image:Richland Airport.jpg. While the RC patroller who warned you about it was a little overzealous, to say the least, they had a point. The image was blatantly inappropriate unfair use; it falls well short of our Non-free content guideline. The required notification time has elapsed, so please delete the image. Cheers, ➪HiDrNick! 17:45, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Lloyd Banks & G-Unit Live.jpg

Hi Maxim, you removed the speedy tag saying it's not a copyvio. Anything licensed under NonCommercial is certainly a copyvio. Don't know if you have an account on Wikimedia Commons, but this page explains it pretty well. Spellcast 19:04, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I recheck the Flickr page and it's a definite i3. Maxim_(talk) 19:08, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah it's alright, I made that same mistake too when I started out here :) Spellcast 19:13, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Electronic art music

Hey there, thanks for doing this move - would you be able to move the talk page across as well? It didn't occur to me that I'd need to tag them both, sorry. Cheers, - Zeibura ^(Talk) 21:58, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

(Update) Ah never mind, someone just found it when I finished writing this message. Have a nice day, - Zeibura ^(Talk) 22:00, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Mail again

Sorry, but it was necessary. I hope you understand. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 03:55, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations

Congratulations, Maxim.--Patar knight 19:01, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Copyvio question

Hi, Maxim - I wanted to check with you on this, as the image appears to be copyvio from [3] and the uploader only changed the license from copyrighted to GFDL when the image was marked as a replaceable non-free image. I looked at the source and it has a copyright statement, were you able to find a free license for the image? Videmus Omnia ^Talk 17:30, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

No. Maxim_(talk) 17:33, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Videmus Omnia ^Talk 17:34, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks a lot, again, Maxim, for nominating me. Much appreciated. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 21:27, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Also - DarkFalls and Melsaran wanted to co-nom (sorry if I already said), so please don't go live until that has kind of happened. Or is that not usual/proper? Cheers -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 21:33, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Ahh well... to late. I guess they will come later. No worries :) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 21:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

EVula has already posted it. And thats Wizardman that has already given co-nom. DarkFalls and Melsaran also wanteed to, but I guess they will come later. Cheers -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 21:38, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Barnstars

The Original Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		This is for your tireless efforts in getting the Bill Masterton Memorial Trophy fully sourced and informed, especially the reasons section. Croat Canuck Say hello or just talk 22:30, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Haha, I just haven't had the time to explore FLC at all the last few days, maybe tomorrow. Croat Canuck Say hello or just talk 02:31, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Question..

Hello, I would like to know why you removed the picture of Steven Weston. Rockinfreakapotomi 00:17, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Very well.

Uncivil? Possibly. But does it matter? You haven't answered the question...why has the Torture in China article been removed? Deleted? Erased? It seems to me that you're abusing your powers of administration...unless you have a very good other reason, you have deleted this article out of personal belief...I'm merely guessing this. And isn't Wikipedia supposed to be neutral? Correct me if I'm wrong. Crazy Eddy 16:31, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Deletion policy I know all about. Of course I've done my research. But...why was it tagged in the first place? The last time I checked on it (which was a long time ago, admittedly) it was a very extensive article...with many important points. So why was it tagged? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazy Eddy (talk • contribs) 16:39, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

Please restore List of collective nouns for birds

I noticed that you deleted List of collective nouns for birds with the justification "Speedy deleted per (CSD a5), was properly transwikified elsewhere." Even if the article has been properly transwikied, CSD A5 specifically only applies to an "article that either consists only of a dictionary definition" (this was a list, not a dictionary definition), "or that has been discussed at Articles for deletion with an outcome to move it to another wiki". However, the outcome of this AfD was to keep. Please restore this article per the AfD. DHowell 03:07, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Please also restore the following, per their respective AfDs:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of collective nouns by subject A-H
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of collective nouns by subject I-Z
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of collective nouns by collective term (2nd nomination)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of collective nouns for fish, invertebrates, and plants
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of collective nouns for reptiles and amphibians
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of collective nouns by subject
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of collective nouns by collective term A-K
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of collective nouns by collective term L-Z

DHowell 03:17, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

No, it was prodded afterwards, as there was some traswikification. However, there was a. community consensus to keep, b. You shouldn't prod articles after an AfD unless you've got a very good reason; in this case, TexasAndroid (the prodder) felt he needed to use that system to delete, but I used CSD system to perform the deletion, helped by a script, and c. I've taken this as a contensted prod, and have subsequently restored the article. Maxim_(talk) 13:15, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationales

Hi, Maxim - I noticed this edit, where you removed the "no fair use rationale" tag despite the fact that the image still has no rationale per WP:NONFREE. I restored the tag, please let me know if I was mistaken or if I'm missing something here. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 14:41, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: CSD I6

I was just working from the bottom up. I can just stop for a few minutes and let you do all you need to. And then just pick up where ever you leave off if you want. Sorry for the hassle. MECU≈talk 14:47, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Belcourt gates.jpg

I see you removed the deletion tags from that image. Can you explain your reasoning there? — Carl (CBM · talk) 15:28, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

The creator could find a free alternative. If I'm having a mental glitch and/or missing something, feel free to delete it. Cheers! Maxim_(talk) 15:31, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm confused because (as you say) they could find a free alternative, but you didn't delete the image. — Carl (CBM · talk) 15:36, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I meant he could not. That's probably my most stupid and confusing typo of the month. Sorry. Maxim_(talk) 15:37, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, that makes sense (I have typos as well). The issue is, this is a photo of a public location, so a free replacement could be created. That's all that is required to fail WP:NFCC#1. — Carl (CBM · talk) 15:38, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

And consequently nuked. My mistake. Maxim_(talk) 15:40, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Sarek.jpg deletion

Had the Speedy nominator actually put notices on the pages linking to the image, I would have been happy to come up with a fair-use rationale, especially as Mark Lenard is dead, and hence no new images of him as Sarek can be obtained. Can you undelete it so I can fix this, please? Thanks.--SarekOfVulcan 15:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

speedy category deletion

Hello. I see that you deleted Category:St. John's Fog Devils players under WP:CSD#C1. Note that this category has not been empty for four days. A number of articles were just removed from this category today. See these for a few examples: [4], [5], [6], [7]. -- JamesTeterenko 16:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

He is correct I used the wrong template by mistake. So feel free to restore the cat if you like and I will readd it in 4 days or just post it in another method since all the categories with this naming standard were long since deleted anyways and almost all the articles that were filling it will be deleted in a couple days anyways. --Djsasso 16:59, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Re:Email

Got it. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 20:49, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Replied too. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 20:57, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I notice you took down the image named above. Can't seem to find the discussion on the removal. Just wondered if you knew what prompted the removal, as it was an illustrative image for an entire section at Evil twin. The character is specifically mentioned by the text, as well. I'm not passionatey sold on the image, but the artcle does cry out for an image of a character with a goatee, such as the one removed. I'd like to know what, specifcally, was wrong with the image so that a second attempt at providing illustraton won't be taken down. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 22:08, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Did you read the deletion log? Maxim_(talk) 22:47, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my Talk page. =) -- Gogo Dodo 06:47, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I also have to thank you. --Oxymoron⁸³ 09:09, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Chrisjnelson

Okay, i'm circumventing the boards and just coming straight here - i'm about to go off on this guy - look at this edit summary: [8]. That's about as offensive as it gets! I will gladly provide you with the plethera of other warnings he's had about his offensive statements - but since he refractors half the time and archives the rest of it - it will take a while. I have no patience for this kid (and he's a kid - he's 17). Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  02:38, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Have fun trying to make sense on his talkpage. Maxim_(talk) 02:43, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Would you clarify that more directly? I can't tell if you are being sarcastic with me for the sake of humor or if you are somewhat offended and making an off-color remark. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  02:45, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd say I'm being just a tad sarcastic. See, Ksy and Chris got bickering, so I've protected Chris' talkpage, and warned Ksy. So you can't edit Chris' talkpage for a few more hours. Maxim_(talk) 02:47, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, he's 19. Evidence of this is Chris' Yahoo! profile, [9], which is available from his user page. Ksy92003(talk) 02:59, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Man, I wasn't even thinking. His user page says he's 20 years old. Ksy92003(talk) 03:04, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

He has now warn out whatever patience i had with him (which isn't much) - this guy is an offensive troll who has done nothing but dirsupt things here. Okay some warnings (just for NPA -i've left the other ones out) [10], [11], [12] Lmk if you need anymore. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  03:01, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Maxim - don't call me a troll. You're mistaken. Thanks.►Chris Nelson 11:20, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Chris you're damn lucky. I gave you three hours; Durova and Seraphimblade might've blocked for a week, or more, and next time I'm not going to be lenient. Maxim_(talk) 13:29, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Whether or not you were lenient does not give you the right to make bullshit personal attacks.►Chris Nelson 16:45, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

My response

I left a comment at User talk:Chrisjnelson which he deleted because he doesn't want me to post here. Fortunately, he can't remove my comment here, so I'll place it here:

Chris, you were incivil when I first met you three months ago, making personal attacks towards Yankees10 (talk · contribs), and I intervened to settle the dispute. I thought you had changed your ways, but I was wrong. Right now, you're back to making the same personal attacks and the same incivility.

Just wanted you to know about this comment, since you won't be able to see it on his talk page. No matter how relevant my comment is, he won't let me say anything. Ksy92003(talk) 17:39, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry again. I just got kinda frustrated how Chris won't let me give my opinion, although it's perfectly relevant. I thought he was just trying to keep you from reading it so he could be unblocked. Ksy92003(talk) 18:27, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Email

Sent you one. ~ Wikihermit 21:22, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Rogue!

You are a rogue admin Maxim! Wiping out Ariel's comment like that... What a rebel... :D -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 01:12, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

You are the rogue! You do whatever you want! :) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 01:18, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Image removal

Could you please fix the script you're using to remove images? It's making mistakes whenever an image caption contains a hyperlink, such as [13]. --Carnildo 04:28, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

85.197.16.0/22's block

Hi, we received an unblock request on the miling list from an user from this range about this block. I checked his IP (85.197.16.179) and it is not a TOR proxy at the moment. Do you have reasons to believe this whole range is constituted of TORs? -- lucasbfr ^talk 10:40, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Paedophile naming thing

I think this needs slightly more sensitivity than you showed in case it is genuine. You should try and at least tell them where to post rather than just biting them. Secretlondon 20:15, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

The link was firstly broken and A search didn't turn up anything, so I presumed it more of a hoax, but decided to tell at least that it was the wrong noticeboard. I didn't feel that the circumstance were calling for anything more. Maxim_(talk) 20:21, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Well I left them a note on their talk page. This sort of stuff can blow up in our face if we are not careful. Secretlondon 10:16, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Two images

I noticed that you didn't delete Image:Georgi-Gladyshev.jpg or Image:EToS band.jpg. I hate asking again, but could you explain your reasoning for them? As far as I can tell both are replaceable nonfree images. — Carl (CBM · talk) 20:24, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

E-mails. But maybe I'm making a mistake with a policy. BTW, feel free to badger me, as I'm a very new image deleter, and even without being sysop, I have very little experience in that area. I've tried to do because the backlog was piling up... Unfortunately, making mistakes is often the way to learn. Maxim_(talk) 20:27, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Any help with the backlogs is greatly appreciated; I don't mind making my case if I think a mistake was made, so please don't take any offense by it.

Those two images do have emails, but that doesn't make them free images. If we only have permission to use the image on Wikipedia, that isn't a free license, and so all the NFCC criteria still apply. It's actually better that these images have the emails posted, because that makes it easier to check that the license is not a free license. In order to make the image free, the email would need to explicitly say that the license was GFDL, CC-BY-SA, public domain, or some other free license. The Georgi image clearly has a non-free license release; it explicitly says it's for use on Wikipedia. The other email seems confused; what is "some sort of public domain"? Moreover, the copyright for the image most likely belongs to the record label, not the individual band members. We would need permission from the label to release the image into public domain.

Several users have contacted me when I tagged images for deletion to clarify the license release. We even got some images released under GfDL that were previously not free. But in this case neither of the user who uploaded thse images has disputed the fact that the images are not under a free license.

Although I occasionally make mistakes, when checking for replaceable fair use I try to verify these things:

• The images doesn't have a free license tag.
• If a picture of a person, the person is still living and accessible to the public (not in prison, missing in war, etc.)
• If a picture of a band, the band is still performing together.

— Carl (CBM · talk) 20:42, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

CSD

I thought that the backlog tag only applied to text articles. Am I wrong? If so, you are wholly correct and I apologise. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 22:10, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I think so. There are instructions in near the adminbacklog tag, which excludes only the separate categories. Maxim_(talk) 22:24, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

OK. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 22:27, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Trackplans

A lot of the Sydney rail trackplans have been removed from their respective pages by other users, despite the wishes of others (and myself). Therefore I am reluctant to put any more effort into the remaining ones. Quaidy 23:55, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Two images

I'm not sure whether you intended to archive this thread without commenting on it? If so, that's fine; it just isn't clear. — Carl (CBM · talk) 19:34, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I deleted them, as I was wrong. Maxim_(talk) 19:36, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I should have noticed the red links, but I didn't. I'm sorry to have bothered you about it again. Your work in cleaning up the image categories is emphatically appreciated by people who know what a pain it is. — Carl (CBM · talk) 19:41, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

And...

I replied :). ~ Wikihermit 19:54, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Mazzuca,Robert-NF-012.jpg

Question about the speedy deletion of Image:Mazzuca,Robert-NF-012.jpg. You say, "Speedy deleted per (CSD i7), was an image with an invalid fair use rationale and the uploader was notified more than 48 hours ago."

First, how and where was I notified more than 48 hours ago that you were going to delete this image and Second dosn't CSD i7 state that "Fair use images...including no use rationale whatsoever, may be speedy deleted 48 hours after notification to the editor who uploaded the image is given." My image had a rationale despite you finding it to be invalid. Please help me understand. Thanks. --Jdurbach 00:29, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

You were notified that the image was a replaceable nonfree image; you placed a tag on the image page in response on August 30. The image was deleted per WP:CSD#I7, which says "Invalid fair-use claim. Non-free images or media that fail any part of the non-free content criteria and were uploaded after 2006-07-13 may be deleted forty-eight hours after notification of the uploader. " This image fails WP:NFCC#1 - a nonfree picture of a living person used to illustrate the appearance of that person is considered replaceable. I see nothing amiss in this deletion. — Carl (CBM · talk) 00:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Whoops

Yes that was me, I forgot to log in. You were fast and edit conflicted me before I could fix it. Fixed now :-) Regards, Húsönd 01:21, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Yep, it was about time

We do now have a presumptive suspect ( Naius (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) ) in the spree, it was about time to protect the page. Thanks! Georgewilliamherbert 02:04, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Your turn now...

You protected the page... you get the vandal. Figures. You should probably semi yourself, I bet. Gscshoyru 02:10, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

My talk page

Thanks for reverting, I'm actually taking a turn weeding out socks, it's rather fun. Maxim_(talk) 02:15, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

It is fun. I get a very peculiar high from reverting vandals and watching them get blocked. You should probably semi your talk page though... you caught the vandal you protected against. Gscshoyru 02:17, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the nom

Thank you once again for the excellent nomination. It meant a great deal, to have someone make such an offer, and write such a great statement. I hope I will prove competent with the new buttons. Happy editing! -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 06:40, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

re User:216.204.18.2 block for 400 days

Just to advise you that the talkpage for the above account mentions a max of 1 year (365 days) for blocks - in case anyone else queries it. For the record, I support the tariff imposed. LessHeard vanU 12:30, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

My RFA

Thanks for the nom Maxim, however I withdrew at 28/18/6. Thanks again. ~ Wikihermit 15:16, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Question I can't help but ask

Just curious, what was your reasoning behind this? Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 22:01, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

See my RfA... probably. The image vandalism was hillarious, and I couldn't resists, but it earned two neutrals in my RfA :(, so I don't suggest that others repeat this. Maxim_(talk) 22:04, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

"You never told me to relax. :D"

I was too busy building your userpage! Which you baleeted, by the way! :p ~ Riana ⁂ 03:56, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I deleted, than I restored with the same design, but I finally made up my mind that my talk page has all I need, I don't link to it, and I prefer a slash-link. Maxim_(talk) 18:39, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Dear Maxim

For being such a busy bee at CSD, and just to let you know your extremely hard work is much, much appreciated, I gift you this little Star that moves on forever, just as you slowly and steadily work for the best of us all. Keep it up, my friend! :) Love, Phaedriel - 02:08, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Your rant

I've been plugging away at C:CSD recently (including a few images) as of late. If you think the backlog's getting out of hand, drop me a line and I'll help you trim it down. Cheers, Caknuck 03:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I probably will. Thanks for the offer! Maxim_(talk) 20:08, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I saw your rant also. Apologies for causing you trouble. Was not my intent to add to your burdens since you blocked me for the 3RR. I know admins usually don't get an apology from the folks they have blocked, but you were right to do so. Thank you. Benkenobi18 21:59, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Recent deletion of Krabi Krabong pic

Hi,

I have noticed that you have removed the Krabi Krabong pic from my page which was explained that it was speedily deleted. Would there be a page on Wikipedia that would possibly have a list of pics that are on the verge of speedy deletion so I can keep a track of what pics to use or not? Regards. Wiki Raja 04:08, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I replied on your talkpage. Maxim_(talk) 20:09, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Enforcers Spider-Man cover

Hi. Just wondering about the deletion since the image wasn't tagged with a warning. (See caption here.) Can you shed some light? Thanks! --Tenebrae 04:48, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

It had no fair use rationale. If you want to readd one, send me the rationale, and I'll restore it. Maxim_(talk) 20:11, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Let's Share a cookie!

For I know how WP:PRODSUM cleaning can be a branwashing job :) (unfortunately I often find the list empty when I go through it. I assume you're partly to blame!) -- lucasbfr ^talk 09:03, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately I've also being finding it empty lately, but thanks for the cookies! Maxim_(talk) 20:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

In your honour

See my 12:47 entry here --Dweller 12:48, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I've decide to come back a bit cooled off. Maxim_(talk) 20:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Sdurrant

Good work re:User:Sdurrant. Thank you. AndyJones 19:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I highly appreciate your compliment. Maxim_(talk) 19:16, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

... for the assist in Category:Images with unknown source as of 30 August 2007. Thought I was going to be plugging away in there forever today. --Spike Wilbury ♫ talk 21:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

MTV Generation

Hi. I'm sorry but there is no way that this is a valid candidate for a speedy deletion under A7, and hoax/other problems is not a valid criteria. This is so obviously not a candidate that I have restored it. I don't want you to feel that I am wheel-warring, but this really is absolutely not a speedy and is a very well known subject, that I felt needed to be immediately restored. Cheers TigerShark 00:01, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

The Eleventh Commandment (disambiguation)

This is also clearly not valid for a speedy under G1, because it does not match the definition of Wikipedia:Patent nonsense. This is nowhere near as blatant as MTV Generation, so I have no intention of restoring it without discussion with you. Cheers TigerShark 00:07, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

London Buses route 268

Again, this does not fit in the criteria of A7 (as it is a bus route) or, as far as I can see, under any other speedy criteria. Again, I will not touch it without discussion with you. Cheers TigerShark 00:08, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

PROD both of them. I think I'm a bit too tired to handle CSD right now, I'm logging off and going to sleep. Maxim_(talk) 00:10, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Sweet Dreams, Maxim! ^Ariel♥Gold 00:26, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

OK, I have recreated them for now. I have not prodded them, as I don't feel they need to be deleted - but I assume that you will want to do so. Cheers TigerShark 00:26, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Olivo Barbieri: not speedy material

This edit of yours to Higashikawa Prize popped up on my watch list. The article includes a table showing every prizewinner. Most are red links, but the blue links in the column for "Overseas Photographer Prize" include a couple of very eminent names. Thanks to your edit, there's now a single non-link, to Olivo Barbieri. Your edit summary reads: (Removing backlinks to Olivo Barbieri that has been speedily deleted per (CSD A7);). And it turns out that it was you who speedily deleted this article (whose existence I hadn't noticed) per CSD A7.

I find both decisions extraordinary. The article was indeed unsourced and mediocre (as are most new articles) but did assert notability for use of a photographic technique (or less charitably a photographic gimmick) -- one that has considerable popularity (and has been employed by one of the two latest winners of the Kimura Ihei Award). According to a sourced WP article that you knew of, the photographer had one at least one award, admittedly a minor one but also one that put him together with Sternfeld, Meyerowitz, Baltz, and Iturbide. While googling doesn't immediately bring up any particularly impressive story, it does bring thousands of hits, such as this one, which mentions a six-week solo exhibition in NYC, admittedly a commercial exhibition, but nevertheless hardly the kind of thing that's typical of CSD A7 fodder.

So I urge you to undelete. You'd then of course be welcome to take the article to AfD, whereupon I would argue for "Keep". -- Hoary 00:56, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Ugh. I had a downright terrible CSD A7 outing as you can see above. Let's say I restored, restored the link, and now I'm with a fresh mind, I can see the downright mess I spawned yesterday. Sorry. :~( Maxim_(talk) 11:22, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Spoken like a gentleperson! -- Hoary 00:11, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Closing FLCs

I understand your eagerness to close this nomination, but you forgot to provide some comments (i.e. promote/fail) and sign at the end. Could you add them now?--Crzycheetah 01:43, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I left them, but they didn't show up for some reason. If you check my first closing diff, you'll see them. Maxim_(talk) 11:18, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Image

So what ? That image can be on diffrent name - but that is the same image. You shuld`n undo my edits. Pmgpmg 10:30, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I concur. Conscious 10:48, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

On second thoughts, I agree that you might refuse deletion instead of replacing links. Conscious 10:58, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

You reverted some of my edits - if you don`t wanna check links and correct links to image on commons then why you doing this ? Pmgpmg 12:21, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I have no clue what you want me to do. I don't recall reverting you, and can you at least provide me a link to the page you're referencing? Maxim_(talk) 12:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

You have deleted my template {{subst:ncd}} from ship`s image. That link who are insert higher now is dead because some admin deleted image - but you are reverted at most 4 my edits.

In example you reverted my edist on Image:USS North Carolina BB-55.jpg (then was another image on en wiki - now is on commons). I moved that photo to commons and on commons that image has diffrent name - Image:USS North Carolina BB-55-2.jpg. And you was reverted my edit because on commons that image has diffrent name. I moved that photo on 27 August and you was reverted my edit (if my memory are good) yesterday.

In my opinion i was doing that what is good. I moved in the same way something about 400 images (all american submarines and battleships), and you are the first user who reverts my edits. So - I am very suprise. Pmgpmg 13:02, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

PS. - On en wiki users don`t anserws on talk page user who talk with them ? Pmgpmg 13:02, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Day By The River.jpg

Hi... User:Clickwithus re-uploaded this file after you had speedied it as a copyvio, this time with a fair-use rationale claiming it's an album cover. I'm not sure how plausible that claim is. It's not square, there's no text on it, and I can't find an image of the supposed album cover with a google search -- none of which is definitive, but... The only place I can find this image is here, where it has exactly the same filename as the uploaded image.

The article Day By The River also seems pretty spammy, which doesn't bolster the credibility of the claim. --Rrburke^(talk) 12:00, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

pottercruft

Hi, I am surprised by the deletion of Harry Potter newspapers and magazines because it didnt look clear-cut and you didnt give any reasoning. I had only recently expanded the article being considered and little time was given for any feedback on the changes. Could you take another look at the references I added for the Daily Prophet section of the article; one of them was a newspaper article entirely devoted to these fictional newspapers (the books are all in google books if you want to double check those references). Cheers, John Vandenberg 15:21, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Dear John.,
I felt there was consensus to delete. I had weighed the arguments and I felt that the community felt that the list belonged more or less on something like Harry Potter Wiki. Wikipedia does run by consensus. I have hope that answered your question. Yours truly, Maxim_(talk) 18:05, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

As I said, I dont see how the consensus was to delete, but that isnt the point. I had updated the article soon before you closed it and asked for more opinion on the Afd. Since you closed it before further input was made, I had hoped that you would take the time to explain why you personally felt that despite my improvements it was still an unacceptable article based on policy/guidelines/whatever. If you take the time, I think you will see that some of the arguments such as Loving the term "Pottercruft". No secondary sources cited (or even available) no longer held any water. If you dont wish to review the outcome or improvements I made, could you restore it to User:Jayvdb/Saved pages/Harry Potter newspapers and magazines so that I can continue to work on it. Thank you, John Vandenberg 00:55, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

KlipFolio

For some reason, I don't know why, I decided to go through the KlipFolio entry (which incidently had been running under Klipfolio with no capital F since your deletion of main article) and clean it up, restore it, and make it half readable. There must have been 20 links for the word Klip, all of the linking within the same article! Anway, now that I have done that, and removed what I thought was some pointless praising of the software (though I could be wrong), I would like to know in more detail why you originally removed the article. Just so you know, I have never used the product (it doesn't really sound very interesting), but I was just in despair at the current state of it, which means I don't know much about the product, but I want to see if the article actually deserves to stay in the wiki or not :)
Bistromaths 21:45, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laetitia Zonzambé

I saw your comments on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laetitia Zonzambé on sockpuppets. See Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Myth1727. --Edcolins 01:28, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Eleventyseven

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Eleventyseven. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Chubbles 04:57, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

King Clancy Trophy FLC

The white space is between the heading King Clancy Memorial Trophy Winnersand the table itself. The info box drops down too far, forcing the table down due to its width. This creates a white space starting from the bottom of 'current holder' in the info box to the bottom of the box. The best way to get rid of it would be to add more of an intro and/or add more history to the prose sections. ludahai 魯大海 11:59, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Expanding either the history section or the introductory section would eliminate the whitespace. Pictures on the side, while welcome, would NOT do anything to help. ludahai 魯大海 12:12, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for considering to keep the images in Creative ZEN. You've been very generous.--Jw21/PenaltyKillah^{(discuss•edits)} 17:35, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Gratefully....

received!! Your nomination and support (along with that of others) has moved my timescale marginally forward. I thank you for the trust you have put in me. Pedro |  Chat  21:29, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I've sent you an email. Also, nice to see SOMEONE checked Pedro's contribs instead of just nomming him :P Dihydrogen Monoxide 07:26, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Problem

You could share your problems with me, only if you want to. It reduces the burden and I could probably help you out with them. You could also email me, if private. Just concerned for a co-human. --Altruism^{T a l k - Contribs.} 05:08, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Hub Group

Hello, your speedy deletion of Hub Group was improper. It's #972 on the Fortune 1000 list, which by its nature as one of the 1000 largest companies in the United States by revenue makes it notable. Please restore it, and I will do a bit to improve the obvious notability of this major freight transportation services company, with $1.6 billion in revenue.Steven Russell 01:25, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Please read the link I provided in my deletion summary. If you do, you would understand why I deleted. And I advise you to use a bit more politer tone, as demands like this made me question my involvement here, as well as recreating it from scratch. Thank you, Steven. Maxim_(talk) 23:23, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Keep it up Maxim! We all believe in you. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 23:26, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. :D Maxim_(talk) 23:30, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry mate, I would, but I have to run. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 00:00, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Once again, sorry I couldn't do this. I had to a school thing (not an exam, but similar), so it took priority! If you need help in the future, though, give me a yell, chances are I'll be able to help out. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 07:41, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Melt the clouds of sin and sadness...

Marlith ^T/C has wished you well! Joy promotes WikiLove and hopefully this little bit has helped make your day better. Spread the WikiJoy by sharing the joy someone else, Try to brighten the day of as many people as you can! Keep up the great editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Joy message}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Marlith ^T/C 04:10, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

User:Carlstar3 on Sanjay Gupta

User:Carlstar3 resumed deletion of info following expiration of your protection of Sanjay Gupta. User did not take the time to engage in productive discussion on the talk page. I reported user here. Ripe 23:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

My request for adminship

Hey thanks for your support, but more than that thanks for giving a fair review and trusting your instints we need more users like you here, take care. - Caribbean~H.Q. 00:29, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Dear Maxim

I told you that sorrow would fade, friend, And you would forget half your pain; That the sweet bird of song would waken ere long, And sing in your bosom again; That hope would creep out of the shadows, And back to its nest in your heart, And gladness would come, and find its old home, And that sorrow at length would depart. I told you that grief seldom killed, friend, Though the heart might seem dead for awhile. But the world is so bright, and full of warm light That 'twould waken at length, in its smile. Ah, friend! was I not a true prophet? There's a sweet happy smile on your face; Your sadness has flown - the snow-drift is gone, And the buttercups bloom in its place. Ella Wheeler Wilcox Missing your dear presence over here, and hoping this is just a short resting time until you return to us, my friend, With love, Phaedriel 22:30, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Out-of-process deletions

Please elaborate where and when this redirect (or the content of the article it links to) was nominated for deletion. Thanks, Ghirla^-трёп- 23:57, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Care to sift over the deletion log, by chance? Maxim_(talk) 00:00, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Care to compare the content of what was nominated for deletion and what was deleted by you? --Ghirla^-трёп- 00:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

You are very welcome to demonstrate that I was "abusing my edit rights and should be banned off the project".[14] I, for my own part, will appreciate if you refer me to the process by which you have received the tools. I see that you have been editing for several months already but I can see your name neither in the user rights log or user rename log. Thanks, Ghirla^-трёп- 06:15, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks for supporting my recent successful RfA. It was flattering to read that you were considering nominating me - I'm honoured! Unfortunately, you won't see any RFCN reports from me any more ;) . Feel free to let me know if I do something incorrectly. Cheers! -- Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 03:46, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Email

You've got mail. :P Vassyana 07:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to disregard it. Vassyana 12:17, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Al-insan al-kamil

It has been protected for months now. Are you ever going to unprotect it? You can't just lock an article and leave it like that. — EliasAlucard|Talk 12:05 13 Sept, 2007 (UTC)

Yay!

Yay! Thank you for brightening my day up with the wonderful news, my friend! :) And please, don't mention it - you deserve a thousand poems, not just one ;) Too bad I was offline when you told me about the size of CSD... but I promise I'll join you in the crusade next time (after I clear the backlog of Now on Commons pics ! ;) Lots of love, and take good care, Phaedriel - 11:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, i have a quick question, i do not understand why this page was deleted. I would appreciate if you would explain it to me. Thank you. Tiptoety 18:25, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Basic housekeeping. User:Miranda specified it was already transcluded, I believe, so it was simply unneeded. Maxim_(talk) 20:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Trophy FLCs

Thanks for your comments on my talk page. I am happy to review any list you want me to - I'll get on that right away. But could you do me a favor? I nominated List of tallest buildings in Miami a few days ago, and so far it has not barely received any feedback, so if you have time would mind reviewing it? Thanks, Rai-me 00:11, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your review! Rai-me 02:31, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

Click there to open your card! → → →

Dearest Maxim,
Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 96 supports, 1 oppose, and 3 neutrals. No matter if you !voted support, oppose, neutral, I thank you for taking the time to drop by. I'm a new admin remember, so if you have any suggestions feel free to inform me of them. I would like to give a special shout out to Hirohisat, Wizardman, and Husond, for there original co-nominations. Thank you once again and good day.

Тhε Rαnδom Eδιτor

Credits

This RFA thanks was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks. So unfortunatly this is not entirely my own design.

Cannabis culture article

Hi Maxim! I noticed that your article was deleted, which is too bad because I was using it to learn about cannabis culture. I respect that Wikipedians don't see this as Wikipedia material, but it seems awfully sad to me to let all that research go to waste. A much better place to put those insights is www.wikitaba.org, which already has a stub article for it (just type in "cannabis culture" in the search bar). I don't talk on Wikipedia much, so please contact me at piece.of.kake@gmail.com if you want to talk!

~ Spektacle 10:42, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Unbelievable

Are not admins supposed to evaluate the quality of arguments? Given that there were no quality arguments made in favor of keeping the Mansfield in pop culture article, how is it possibly closed as anything other than delete? Otto4711 14:13, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I didn't find consensus to delete, dear Otto. If there's no consensus on an action, there's no deletion. Maxim_(talk) 15:12, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

• A numerical superiority for deletion coupled with policy-based arguments, versus a minority for keeping with no policy-based arguments and no refutation of the arguments for deletion. Seems like consensus... Otto4711 05:59, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Request

Hi, I recently had my user page deleted, but I was wondering if you would mind getting the code from it and throwing it on this page? I don't want it restored, there's just some stuff on there I wanted to get back. Thanks, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 16:23, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the help. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:29, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Nope, that is all. Thanks again. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:42, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks to you, I just discovered that there was once a user called user:Scorpion0422 Sucks. I had no idea...

In response to your questions, there are currently 4 being worked on, but I think progress has ground to a halt. My original goal was to have it ready for an FTC by the start of the NHL season, but I doubt it will happen now. I think part of the reason things stopped is because we had 7 FLCs at once and people stopped working and seemed to have forgotten since. Another factor might be that the four pages that will be the toughest are left and people might be reluctant to jump at them so quickly. I guess one of us could leave a talk page message to each participant asking about their status and with luck, that'll get things going again. As for me, I'm kinda burned out right now, which is why I haven't been working on any, but I could work on one if needed. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:56, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I've addressed all of your concerns. Thanks for the review. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:40, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

If you're going to nominate any page that is being worked on, you should check with that user first to make sure they think its ready. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:56, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

User talk:86.10.194.199

Okay, Timotab already requested protection at WP:RPP but it's not coming and the guy keeps vandaizing the page. Could you protect it, please? —Ignatzmice^talk_contribs 16:24, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Crash Bandicoot (character)

You recently protected Crash Bandicoot (character) and I hope that I was not the trigger for that block. I have been trying to help fight vandalism and so WP:AIV is on my watchlist (not because I am an admin but because I have posted there). I happened to see an unusual edit summary of a posting to AIV - it was sort of a plea for help - so I decided to take a closer look.

Maybe it wasn't my job but I decided to be bold. I looked over the history of the Crash article, looked at the Talk page, and looked at the Talk pages of the various contributors. Only after doing that did I decide to revert what was arguably vandalism. Here is some of what I discovered:

• One user continually changed an image. He has been reported to WP:AN/3rr.
• His image violated fair-use. Both a bot and an admin warned him on his talk page.
• Other users reverted his change because he violated fair-use.
• There is a WP:ANI report against the offending user.

As an outsider I don't have any particular interest in the article, but I thought I should tell you what I have learned about the controversy. Sbowers3 17:42, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Adam's Bridge

Can you please clarify why the article Adam's Bridge was protected rather than semi-protected ? There is no real edit dispute with regards to the article; only anon IPs changing the article lead, and even names of cited articles and intra-wiki/interwiki links (which obviously breaks them) - and named accounts in good standing (Lahiru k (talk · contribs), Til Eulenspiegel (talk · contribs) and I, Abecedare (talk · contribs)) have been cleaning up. I have recently been expanding and cleaning up the article with references (compare earlier version and the current version in terms of sections, references, and external links) and full protection will only prevent that; I also fail to see 3 days is supposed to help us discuss any issues with anon SPAs using open proxies and zombie computers. Abecedare 19:43, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

OK, I see now. The anon will get blocked if xe restores the same content. No need for anyprotection, actually. *scratches own head*. Maxim_(talk) 19:47, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll request page prtection again if there are continued reversions. The problem with users editing it with proxies is that it is difficult to tell if it is just an individual SPA, or multiple users with concerns and it is impossible to report them for 3RR.

By the way, can you also reblock the proxy - 159.148.225.11 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). The user's talk page has a {{blocked proxy}}, but apparently it is not really blocked. Cheers. Abecedare 19:56, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Smile:)

SJP has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Baseless allegations of misconduct

I'm still waiting for substantiation of your charges of "abusing my edit rights" and your calls to have me "banned off the project".[15] I don't take these wild accusations lightly and, if you fail to back them up with evidence, we will have to open a RfC on your unseemly behaviour. You can't reasonably expect to retain your position as an administrator after frivolous attacks against more experienced editors, aggravated by failure to communicate with the offended. Стыд не дым, глаза не ест? --Ghirla^-трёп- 08:01, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Maxim, my gripe is not with the deletion. Please explain why you want to have me, in your own words, "banned off the project". --Ghirla^-трёп- 13:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

A question

Can you elaborate on this closure, as I had been asked to close as delete see this User_talk:Gnangarra#Requesting_closure. Gnangarra —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 13:51, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I felt there was a consensus that the article was too much OR, and the best action was to delete. Maxim_(talk) 14:06, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

thanks, want to pick an afd date and I'll do another as we keep bumping into each other I was merging bank road while you closed as no consensus, Gnangarra 14:52, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Protect on BNP

When you've time, can you please review this protect? It looks suspicious to me in light of some statements being made. regards Marcus22 15:49, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for protecting the article. The fact is that the sources are outdated and pre-date the party's reformed constitution which shows they tolerate dissent within the party. This shows that they abid by the concept of Democracy and being pro-Democratic is incompatible with being Fascist. This is a point that nobody was able to refute and there was an argument where some wanted the label Fascist completely removed, the part in brackets was the concession which everyone agreed upon, Marcus22 explicitly agreed upon that for instance.--Sviatoslav86 02:09, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

RfA Spam

Just to let you know I passed my RfA. Thank you very much for the nomination. I'm not going to SPAM everyone, as I have 96-6=90 better things to do with my new (not very shiny after all) buttons. However I am thanking my nominators, because, well you are all fab! Happy Editing! Pedro |  Chat  12:26, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

William M. Jennings Trophy

I decided to try giving the page a quick clean up and it soon became apparant why nobody wanted to do it. There are a lot of w per year winners and at first I tried modeling it after the Vezina Trophy, but after I tried adding the active player colours, that format was shot down. I've tried something different and removed the sortability option, but in my opinion, it doesn't look very good. Any ideas? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:44, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

On a side note, I think the rest of the page is ready to go, so if you approve, I'll nominate it. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:19, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

So, you're giving a userpage another crack, eh? How long will this one last. Anyway, I think Jennings could pass an FLC at this point so if you approve, I'll nom it later tonight. And, the Adams Trophy is ready for promotion and could be promoted right now... If I wasn't so lazy. I'll give it a few more hours and promote it tonight, unless you beat me to the punch. And, I'll leave a message for any other Trophy drive participants and see if we can get things going again. With luck, we'll be ready for an FTC by November. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:55, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Ouch!

Ouch! Check the time, sweetie - we both protected it the very same minute... looks like we stepped on each others' toes! :) I'm truly sorry, my friend, but trust me: it's not the first time something like this happens (ask Alison! ;) We'll go with your 2 weeks time tho, as you protected it first, k? Love, Phaedriel - 22:49, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I feel a little silly now - but I won't return the protection to 3 weeks myself, I'd feel even dumber! ;) Let's try with the 2 weeks, and keep an eye on it later, k, sweets? Love, Phaedriel - 22:57, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Not sure "consensus" was really reached at that point

An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of media using the Wilhelm scream. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 22:50, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

RFPP

Hey - thanks for all your work on WP:RFPP. Please remember to use the templates when you approve or decline a request - that's the only way the bot knows to move them. I fixed the ones today, but it's easier if you do it yourself. Thanks!! - Philippe | Talk 01:12, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Why does it have to be so bloody bureaucratic? Can't we get MiszaBot II to archive? Maxim_(talk) 01:14, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

No idea, but the current bot requires a template to move it out. :-) The good news is that the bot moves them pretty quickly, and leaves the ones without templates (the ones that haven't been dealt with.) - Philippe | Talk 01:29, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Email

You will have to re-send it. I had to change my email address recently, and forgot to update it on Wikipedia. I've since corrected that error. Thanks, Resolute 01:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Re:Userpage

Heh, it is a brilliant piece of code! How are you doing? Love always, Neranei (talk) 01:47, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

CSD stressful, eh? Love, Neranei (talk) 01:55, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Ugh, well, give me a call if you need any help/WikiLove! Love, Neranei (talk) 02:36, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

wow

How in the world did you conclude there was a consensus to delete the list of media using the Wilhelm scream page? I understand its not a vote but there was just as many keeps as deletes and even if its not a vote thats no consensus. Not one person who was educated enough to know about the scream voted to delete it was all people who were ignorant of the sound effect.

Well Wiki just lost this contributor. I will not contribute to an encyclopedia that is run in this disgraceful manner. Viperix 03:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I'll respond to this user, Maxim. Glad to see you liked my footnoting :P Now your sig needs a userpage link. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 04:37, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Yay! :)

I'm so very, very happy that you liked the designs, dear Maxim! :) Let's make a deal, shall we? If you ever, ever feel like deleting your userpage altogether, come and see me instead; and I swear I'll make a new one for you, so you don't leave us red-linked again... promise? ;) Love, Phaedriel - 22:46, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Image:Aloha Airlines Logo.svg

I noticed you just deleted Image:Aloha Airlines Logo.svg on the basis that it lacked sources or licensing information. However, I do not believe this to be correct. From the version in Google's cache of the page, I see that it did have a fair use rationale (though not using the template) and also an instance of {{Brands of the World SVG}} which indicates the source. -- Hawaiian717 23:58, 19 September 2007 (UTC) YRestored. My error. Maxim_(talk) 00:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

NHL award template

I'm not sure making the image field mandatory is great idea. I'm working on Lester Patrick Trophy and I basically can't use the template until I find an image (which I can't find). --Spike Wilbury ♫ talk 15:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, I can fix it - I just thought I'd ask you first since you created it. :) --Spike Wilbury ♫ talk 19:36, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

A username

Did you mean to block this user for only a year? Acalamari 21:09, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Anime convention logos

You deleted the logo for Anime Boston. Not only did I upload that logo, but I was also the person who created it for the convention. I have been on the board of directors for The New England Anime Society (Anime Boston's parent organization) since it was founded. We were all perfectly fine with the logo being used on Wikipedia. I'm going to upload it again soon. Please do not speedy delete it this time. --PatrickD 21:19, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

You didn't have a source. Please read the instructions on top of the page: Check the deletion summary. Doesn't look like you did. Maxim_(talk) 21:27, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually

Actually, you're supposed to subst {{UsernameBlocked}} and {{UsernameHardBlocked}}. Happy editing! Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 22:04, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I never do. Never remember to. Maxim_(talk) 22:06, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Irmo Middle School

Hi Maxim,

The Irmo Middle School AfD you closed was brought to DRV here. I assume the lister didn't understand that he was supposed to notify you.

Best, — xDanielx ^T/_C 02:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

hello maxim, i am not sure if this is how i should contact you but i am not a vandal, i am simply trying to rectify a page that was made about me. i feel i should have the right to what is put on my page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.94.178.239 (talk) 09:05, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

JkDefrag

Thanks for your efforts on the JkDefrag page. it is much appreciated. --RitaSkeeter 17:43, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Footballer sketch

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Philosophers' Football Match. Can you please point out to me which of the keep arguments has any validity? The arguments were: more worthwhile than anime fancruft; well organized; not a hoax; philosophy students have heard of it; and "clearly notable" with no sources to back up the assertion. Otto4711 18:07, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Come Otto, you're biased here, as you nominated it. Badgering me with such questions won't do you good. Maxim_(talk) 19:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of The Philosophers' Football Match. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Otto4711 20:37, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar!

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For helping out with the boring CSD backlog. You seem to be one of the only admins doing it! CO2 00:14, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

CO₂ 00:14, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Cannabis culture

I just stumbled on a red link to Cannabis culture. It appears you have deleted it in error. At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cannabis culture I find six deletes, five keeps, and a merge -- hardly a consensus. Furthermore, the argument that the article is full of glorification of marijuana is specious; it's about glorification of marijuana. Category:Cannabis culture has 49 pages, and Special:Whatlinkshere/Cannabis culture shows 111 main space links, so the need for at least a stub article (about glorification of marijuana) is clear. Please put it back.  Randall Bart   Talk  14:50, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

See, consensus doesn't count votes. I saw consensus in the AfD to delete, so I'm not going to put it back. You are free to rewrite it, as long it's not the mess that I deleted. Maxim_(talk) 20:44, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Deletion request

Hi, I was wondering if you could help me out with something. Two redirects, Bart Has Two Mummies‎ and Little Big Mum, were recently deleted because they are unofficial alternate spellings of an official title. However, the user who created those pages has recreated them, as well as a third (Pokey Mum) and continually removes the speedy templates. Could you please redelete them, and possibly protect the former two, because they have both been deleted twice. Thanks, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:30, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Before we do something daft and inane again, can we please rather discuss the matter first? Reginmund 20:35, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Page Deletion

Hi Maxim,

I'm new to writing/editing on Wikipedia, but I'm busily reading all I can about the standards required for contributing. I created my first page today, an article about a Christian camp that has been in existance for 85 years and is part of a larger organization of Christian camps known as CCCA. Shortly after posting my article it was flagged for deletion. I posted the suggested tag for a request for more time, but before I could get back to adding what was needed to make it useful according to Wikipedia's standards, it was already deleted. There are many other pages out there for other Christian camps; I feel it is worthwhile to add this particular one to Wikipedia's collection. Would you kindly please give me a chance to fix the Camp Kanesatake page before it is permanantly deleted?

MrsKiwi05 —Preceding unsigned comment added by MrsKiwi05 (talk • contribs) 23:41, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Protection of David Suzuki Foundation article

When you protected this article, you froze it on the version that had been restored by an anon IP (216.240.13.13, now User:Vryadly), who had been editing Wikipedia since September 19 (and almost exclusively on this article). I have nothing against anon IPs editing if they are willing to follow WP policies and learn. However, this guy has engaged in continuous reverts and refuses to accept advice from two experienced WP editors who have both stated that what he is doing is essentially original research (plus adding a questionable source to support what he wants to say).

Background: I had moved a section of text from the article for discussion in accordance with WP:V which states:

Any edit lacking a source may be removed, but editors may object if you remove material without giving them a chance to provide references. If you want to request a source for an unsourced statement, consider moving it to the talk page...

Do not leave unsourced information in articles for too long, or at all in the case of information about living people.

Currently there is an RfC on the page. Only Victoriagirl and I have commented thus far. However, I am concerned about what will happen when the page is unprotected. Evidently Vryadly is not going to accept my judgement about this. I think we need the intervention of an admin. Would you be able to return the section I removed to the talk page with the instruction that it should only be reinstated if there is a consensus to do so on the talk page? You would be most welcome to participate in the RfC, as well. Sunray 02:53, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

______________

I, unlike Sunray wouldn't advice anybody to leave page as it is or to return it to the talk page. Returning it to the talk page would certainly serve Sunray case, for he so far has been uwilling to discuss any changes to the section or contribute to its editing, but has shown all signs of being motivated to remove the section completely. Leaving it as it is would rather serve my case. I believe that arbitration could be useful, but beforehand I'd like to try the two other options: third opinion and mediation. Until the dispute is resolved either by consensus or by arbitration, I'd like to see the article protected. I hope it will be resolved either way in no more then 10 days. To remove the section to the talk page is to freeze the dispute for eternity.

BTW I've been editing wikipedia not "since September 19 (and almost exclusively on this article)" but since 2005. It's just that I never before had a conflict over my editing and therefore I didn't feel any urgency to register. Vryadly 05:34, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Mini FT?

I was thinking, once we get the main trophies stuff to FT, we'll have three Stanley Cup related articles at GA or FL status (Stanley Cup, Anecdotes and the List of Champions), and the requirement for an FT is 3. What do you think? The only page I can think of that might be missing is the article for Lord Stanley, but it might be worth trying it without his page. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 15:14, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I actually looked deeper into the topic, and we'd have to include the finals and playoffs articles as well, plus it would be an ill-defined topic, so it wouldn't be as easy as I thought. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 15:21, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps it could just be stuff relating directly to the trophy - so, the trophy page itself, the stories surrounding it and those that have won it. Again, we might need to include Lord Stanley in that, but I wouldn't be against trying to improve his page. It would be nice to see the page of an important historic hockey figure reach GA (or even FA) status. Finding sources wouldn't be very hard, there are hundreds of books out there with sections about him. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:18, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, we could aim for GA status then. It isn't hard, it just has to be well-sourced, well-organized and be decently well-written. Besides, I'm sure some other hockey people would be willing to help. But, before we do that, perhaps we should try for an FT with just the three cup pages. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:48, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Samuel Luo terrorising Falun Gong article

Hello, I once noticed your vigilance in keeping this person from vandalising these pages. I don't know if that was automate d or what. Do you have the power to ban people? Samuel Luo is attacking the page again under some random meatpuppet account.--Asdfg12345 06:46, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

He is doing it again, just half an hour ago. Sometimes his vandalism stands for several hours--this time it was just half an hour. Special:Contributions/G43211 He just uses G4 something with a bunch of numbers... isn't there some way to ban the IP, or can wiki contact his service provider and shut him down like that? --Asdfg12345 22:57, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

AIV Response

We don't have time for this! Wikipedia is ablaze with so many vandals! And cyberbullies have also been found as well! --Dynamo_ace 19:17, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, the crisis is over now. I may have overreacted on the "ban them now" thing, but with the threat of cyberbullying on the rise. What can Wikipedia do to combat it?

Also, i think Wikipedia has been hit big time, i think this mass vandals went on for 2-4 hours. I managed to revert as many as i can. -Dynamo_ace Talk —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 19:25, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Maybe that was unfair treatment

I understand that a lot of what that user did to the moose article could be considered a candidate for the title of "vandalism", but maybe you were too hard on them for it. They did mention several times that they thought they were making the right edits. Couldn't you have asked them to talk it over with you instead of block them unfairly like that? Wilhelmina Will 19:48, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Which user? Maxim_(talk) 19:52, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

The one mentioned two discussions down the page from here. Wilhelmina Will 23:21, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Your Recent AIV result

I just posted [16] to the AIV listings and you denied it due to no final warning. Doesn't this [17] count? Excuse me if I am wrong, this is my first vandalism report. Thank you. monkeynoze 19:48, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for asking! : ) It unfortunately was about a month ago, and those warnings are more or less ignored by then. Maxim_(talk) 19:54, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

User:WoopLoop

Here, in case you care to reply. - CobaltBlueTony 19:59, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

ibero-american literary awards deletion

Hello there, i'm curious to know if it is possible to retrieve source of an article you recently deleted titled "Ibero-American Literary Awards" -- some of the information there was useful for me personally. thanks --Rubbersoul20 01:12, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Award

		The Invisible Barnstar
		For your ability to so much work. →AzaToth 20:06, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! :) Maxim_(talk) 20:09, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

How do You Experiment on Pages?

I've been trying to test edit, but the sandbox only suggested editing in itself. I know by looking at the history of some of the pages that test editors have notified other users that they are going to test with that page, and when they are done, the other user removes their experiment for them. How do you do that? 24.64.223.203 00:21, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

You shouldn't make test edits in artices. Stick to the sandbox. :) --Maxim_(talk) 00:42, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Imprint: Culture Lab deletion

Though sponsored by two corporations, IMPRINT is still just a trade conference, just as Book Expo America (which is also sponsored by a corporation, and has a wiki page), or the Anime Expo (which is a paid-entry trade show also). I can change the entry to not reflect the corporate sponsorship, but as the conference itself is planned out three years forward, and has grown in size, I think the listing is valid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ill Iterate Anne (talk • contribs) 22:40, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi

~ Riana ⁂ has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

~ Riana ⁂ 22:44, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! :D Maxim_(talk) 22:46, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Eric_Mittelmann

Hi Maxim. Isn't the above page a content fork of Ol'_Dirty_Bastard (or possibly the other way around). Just wondering why you reverted User:W_guice's edits. Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 23:05, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

He tagged it as nonsense. It's not. Maxim_(talk) 23:10, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the redirect. I'm not knowledgeable enough to know whether Eric_Mittelmann was a real name or not. I had originally thought the pages creation was some sort of nonsense vandalism. But kinda moot now, so thanks for fixing it. Cheers, --Bfigura ^(talk) 23:30, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Information on Prior Deletion

Hi

I was hoping to get more information about the proposed deletion on June 27 and subsequent deletion on July 3 of Judith Lasater. I did not write the entry and have never attempted to reinstate an entry, but was interested in learning about the process for this situation and in the future.

Thanks Schear 23:06, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

See WP:PROD. Maxim_(talk) 23:10, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for being so super-fast right after I reported a user to the Admins. Sorry about the minor edit conflict on his talk page. -Domthedude001 01:56, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Can't do it now

I can't do it now. Just leave it and someone will get it - there are several new FLC closers now, or I'll do it tomorrow. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:21, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

That's low. You must be pretty insecure about how much the Senators suck. It's not my fault that a team of 80 year old women has as much of a chance of winning the cup as the Senators do. After all, "Senators" in Ancient Slobobian means "Sucks", so therefore the Ancient Slobobian translation of "Ottawa Senators" is "Ottawa Sucks". -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:27, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

And there is a way to make Infobox images optional, I guess it's just too complex for a Senators fan to figure out. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:29, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

At least I'm a fan of a team that's a legendary and storied franchise. Plus, how many cups have the Senators won? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:03, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Protection of Portal:Current events

You do realize that since you added the cascading feature to Portal:Current events no one can add news to the portal until October 2? Do you think you can fix it? – Zntrip 01:37, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response. – Zntrip 02:37, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Signiture

How do I make a signiture like yours? It's cool!

Maxim_(talk)

I want one like that!

Superior _(talk) —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 02:00, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Try this: Sup3rior_(talk) . Here's the code:

'''<font face="Arial">[[Special:Contributions/Sup3rior|<font color="#FF7133">Sup3rior</font>]]<sub><small>[[User talk:Sup3rior|<font color="blue">(talk)</font>]]</small></sub></font>''' 

Maxim_(talk) 02:03, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Roger Crozier Saving Grace Award

I've done as much to the page as I can do. There is very little on the official website, but there is a headline article from 2006, so it was awarded as recently as last year. There is also some stuff on the Wild website about Backstrom winning it too, so the award is still out there, they just don't acknowledge it. Due to an amazing lack of sources, I decided not to include the pre-trophy Save % winners. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 17:19, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I hate to bug you, but would you mind taking a look at this request? It has been up for over an hour and the page in question is repeatedly being hit with IP vandalism. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 21:49, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Reply

I didn't copy it from any movie poster, I based the design on an image I found at TheSimpsons.com. So, I DID copy an image, but I designed that particular doughnut myself. Which movie poster are you talking about anyway? If you think it will be an issue, then I'll replace the image, but I didn't copy it. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:31, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Juan M. Garcia

This article was vandalized at the time you deleted it. I'd gotten interrupted in the middle of reverting the vandalism. I've restored already, but am letting you know as a courtesy. GRBerry 20:40, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

AMP NHL Winter Classic

I responded to your comment on my talk page. Feel free to respond there to continue the discussion. Ksy92003(talk) 01:43, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		Just for working hard in deletion and being helpful ;-)Phoenix 15 18:07, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Why?

Why did you delete the ANI post? Just respond if you disagree. Bill Ayer 20:16, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Furthermore, why are you removing Bill's comments on the bot RfA? If you think it's a SPA, tag it with {{spa}} and let the 'crats sort it out. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:20, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

EVula, he reverted Aillema, so I thought I was reverting to Aillema version... it's a mess. Also, I just don't like going through such a pointless process, by first tagging it, then let a 'crat sort it out for me. I don't want to sound harsh, but is my judgment not trusted? Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 20:32, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

We don't need unconstructive comments like that, but I added it back anyway. – Aillema 20:22, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Because you are very wrongly accusing Aillema of a. vandalism and b. you know too much policy for your own good. You have less than 20 edits and have found WP:RFA and WP:AN/I? Review, WP:VAND, please. Users with less than 100 edits usually don't participate in such things. Those that do are almost always sockpuppets or signle-purpose accounts. And WikiLawyering is kind of strange from a 20 edit account. Oh, and your username is strange; you editng Bill Ayer; are you Bill Ayer, and if you are, editing your own article is strongly frowned upon. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 20:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not saying your judgement isn't trusted. However, using the rollback is extremely unhelpful sometimes, as there was no clue as to why you were doing it. The only reason I had a clue was because of the edit summary from someone else. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:30, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I thought Aillema full-reverted a sock, so I re-reverted it. That's one of the uses of rollback, did I read the guideline right, which the last time was when I was sysoped? Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 20:32, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

There's probably rules, but most admins don't follow them anyway. – Aillema 20:34, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

That attitude is entirely unproductive. Daniel 11:52, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Slipknot's fourth studio album. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Jasca Ducato 22:43, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting vandalism on the page United Kingdom. --SnakeBot 12:51, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Regarding this

I can understand your concern, but do you really think that an unjustified "cooldown" block by an unruly admin affects my judgement? I just don't see how another's actions influence my standing here - could you please elaborate? Cheers :) --Ben^chat 12:42, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Just as a heads-up, the RfA was withdrawn by Bennyboyz3000 at (0,5,0). Daniel 13:36, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

He's exercised his RTV. It probably could stay deleted. Daniel 02:47, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

He's been renamed. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 11:44, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry im bored and live in the middle of nowhere there weather shit and i have nothing to do, May you give me a link an intersting mind thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.27.136 (talk) 13:22, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

• 0.99... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.137.25.192 (talk) 22:00, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

???

Just curious, why did you UsernameHardBlock User:Traveltraveleverywhere for a year? Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 01:57, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I presume deleted edits, which are administrator-view only. Daniel 02:00, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Use headphones in green jack

User:Use headphones in green jack asked you a question but put it on your userpage: "why did you delete my article?" Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 21:51, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Copt protection level

Just to let you know, Copt (which you protected in July) is still semi-protected. The sockpuppetry from then seems to have calmed down and it's probably safe to lower the protection level; especially considering the level of general activity on the page anyway. :) Regards, AllynJ (talk | contribs) 21:53, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Editor review

Hello, Maxim. I have always wondered why admin candidates are so often criticized because of little experience writing articles. May I ask, how much admin work involves that? The vast majority (and the activity I plan to engage in) are reverts and blocks, not article writing. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 23:02, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

And also, looking at your contribs, I see no article writing. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 23:06, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

You'd be surprised. They're just stuck behind my Twinkle stuff. I've written one DYK, 3 GA's and 3 FL's, and I maintain several more. You should realise that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, first and foremost, and article writing is something RfA goers look for. Like it or not, you're hard-pressed to press RfA without any article writing, and the two users I know who passed in similar circumstances, the first is an Arbcom clerk, and the other is a very prolific contributor to the German Wikipedia (you can easily guess the identity of the users in quest), and I don't you are so occupied by something else to not be able and to write a few articles. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 23:24, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I know that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, but what I'm saying is a lot of the admin tasks do not involve article writing. Why is that such a factor in RFAs? Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 23:31, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Because RfA's screwed up. Surely you've realised it by now? Have you seen the RfC on it? You need the tools, but you're not going to pass RfA with this level of article work. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 23:34, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Parsonline logo.jpg

It seems you've deleted this image, which had been used in the Pars Online page. While it was indeed flagged for deletion, I had outlined in the image's talk page why it should stay, for several valid reasons. As you (or anybody) have not reponded or refuted any of them, I'll be restoring it shortly. I look forward to any discussion from you if you still feel it needs to be deleted. --Commking 01:36, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I see your statement there, but, no offense intended, I kinda don't care about the fact it's a logo. It failed WP:NFCC#10c and that's why it was deleted. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 19:11, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Your deletion/edit summary script

Please take a look at the deletion summaries you're using when deleting images, and the edit summaries you use when removing the links to them from articles. There isn't, and as far as I know has never been a csd I10, and linking to that when deleting stuff isn't very helpful. Thanks. - Bobet 16:53, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

It's just a fake criterion; it's similar to twinkle, but I wasn't able to properly change the link so I just put in a fake number. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 19:09, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Blocked

I think you missed that I protected the page. I really think you should unblock now, because this block is something other than preventative, I have already prevented the disruption. Regards, Mercury 00:29, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Yep, I second that. These two blocks were unnecessary. Fut.Perf. ☼ 01:39, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Question regarding editor review

Hello, Maxim. In my editor review, you said I should focus much less on vandal fighting and much more on article writing. Unfortianatley, the english Wikipedia has so many articles, it's hard to find something not there. Would it count if I made encyclopedic entries on another Wikipedia? Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 03:18, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Taleb

An unregistered user deleted the definition "scholar" etc. from Taleb.

It does not make any sense.

While selling lots of books, Taleb's sceintific stand is very high. Enough is to mention over ten papers published over last three years in respected journals. A dozen "keynote" speeches in conferences each year (if you have been to the conference and sceince business you would have knew that most university professors never made it to a keynote talk.

Not to mention various professorships, etc.

Let me know what you think. and I am sure we can make between us an understanding. Last thing I am looking for is editing wars! YechezkelZilber (talk • contribs)

23:50, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

The Restoration

Hi Maxim. You recently (well, recently-ish) moved The Restoration to English Restoration. There had been a discussion about making this move, but it hadn't reached a definitive conclusion, and it certainly hadn't reached a conclusion to move the article to English Restoration. As myself and others noted, this is simply an inaccurate name. My own POV is that better an article title with "the" in it than one which doesn't accurately reflect the subject (we don't have to always follow the rules). Anyway, I was wondering if you could explain the move back over at the talkpage. Cheers, --Plumbago 12:40, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Deletion Review notice

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Kanakuk Kamps. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 66.90.145.25 16:58, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

A new message…

…just as you requested. —[[Animum | talk]] 00:45, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Jojomaloco is back

You recently blocked Jojomaloco1 in september for vandalisim, he's back at User_talk:Jojomaloco2 and needs to be blocked, see Beef. I've reverted the edit, but the account needs to be fixed. Thanks in advance. Timmccloud 02:53, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

FL Main page proposal

You either nominated a WP:FLC or closed such a nomination recently. As such, you are the type of editor whose opinion I am soliciting. We now have over 400 featured lists and seem to be promoting in excess of 30 per month of late (41 in August and 42 in September). When Today's featured article (TFA) started (2004-02-22), they only had about 200 featured articles and were barely promoting 20 new ones per month. I think the quality of featured lists is at least as good as the quality of featured articles was when they started appearing on the main page. Thus, I am ready to open debate on a proposal to institute a List of the Day on the main page with nominations starting November 1 2007, voting starting December 1 2007 and main page appearances starting January 1 2008. For brevity, the proposal page does not discuss the details of eventual main page content, but since the work has already been done, you should consider this proposal assuming the eventual content will resemble the current content at the featured content page. Such output would probably start at the bottom of the main page. The proposal page does not debate whether starting with weekly list main page entries would be better than daily entries. However, I suspect persons in favor of weekly lists are really voicing opinions against lists on the main page since neither TFA nor Picture of the day started as weekly endeavors, to the best of my knowledge. See the List of the Day proposal and comment at WP:LOTDP and its talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 19:24, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Creighton process

Thanks for undeleting the page. I think you'll like the way it looks now (and if you don't, this is a wiki: need I say more?). Cheers, Shalom (Hello • Peace) 20:50, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Tyler Warren (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

I didn't see your thread on WP:ANI about Tyler Warren (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) until now, when I checked to see how long his block was remaining. I got a couple e-mails from him as well, but I basically ignored them. I think a week is sufficient, though I'm doubting that he'll have anything positive to contribute once his block expires. Thanks for blocking his e-mail, though.

Basically, he's been railing against Bushcarrot (talk · contribs) because Bushcarrot made a mistaken sockpuppet report about Summerluvin (talk · contribs). Bushcarrot apologized, but Tyler Warren continues to fuel his rage against anyone who's wronged him. So, if the one-week block turns into an indefinite block, he can only blame himself. As an aside, I think there are a couple users within that group (Summerluvin (talk · contribs), Polarwolf (talk · contribs), Tyler Warren (talk · contribs), and a couple others) who are spending more time socializing on Wikipedia than editing articles. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 21:09, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

FTC

I'll start work on some of the older FLs. I think we should wait for the +/1 FLC to have a couple more support votes, then go for it. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 00:31, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Kristian nedrevåg

Constructive criticism: I have since been informed by someone else as to why this article does not qualify as nonsense, but since you are an admin, I would have expected you to post a notice on my talk page as a courtesy to help me out. It is being considered for other reasons now. In the future, a head's up would be appreciated. Maybe you usually do so and just forgot this time; if that is the case my apologies. Regards.--Old Hoss 21:44, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

RE:Request for adminship

Wow! Messages in English, Spanish, French, Portuguese, and Russian. I've never seen so much languages in one page before :-) Благодарите Вас! До свидания! --Agüeybaná 00:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Alkivar

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Alkivar. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Alkivar/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Alkivar/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Picaroon (t) 21:25, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiCookie

For stepping forth in response to a call to duty to close a difficult AfD, I hereby award this WikiCookie to Maxim. -- Jreferee t/c 00:40, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Sock

I am pretty sure that the user is a sock of User:VaughanWatch. He edited International Hockey Hall of Fame almost immediately after joining, and several of his edits have added the IHHOF to pages, both of which are trademarks of VaughanWatch. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:36, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

So what? They're good edits. --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 02:38, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Still a sock of a banned user. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:42, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Doubtful. Maybe a meatpuppet at most. And a checkuser would be stale. But contributing constructively. If a rule prevents you from contributing to the encyclopedia, ignore it.. --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 02:44, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

== Problems with User:Anonimu ==

Hello

I encountered non viki-civilised guy who seems to be interested in subject of Romanian fascism and communism. He reverts all my contributions and do not engage in discussion. From his talk page and links it is clear he was already banned at least once. Could you please help me starting some action to moderate him? He even removes my contributon to his talk page.

Cautious 20:43, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Image deletion help

You are listed as deleting an image I uploaded: Image:Hancock Esther.jpg. You cited the reason as "Fails WP:NFCC#10c" and I'm trying to understand what I did incorrectly. After seeing a note on my talk page that the fair use rationale for this image was disputed, I responded by uploading a lower resolution image and updating the rationale to address the dispute (i.e. I included information about the name of the article for which I claimed fair use). As far as I can tell, I had satisfied NFCC 10c. What was my error? Bryan H Bell 23:27, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

You didn't make the error. I did. :D I didn't look carefully enough, and on second look, you addressed the issue correctly. --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 01:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for 'fessing up and reverting the deletion. It's good to know I correctly understood my original error. Bryan H Bell 07:06, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Ukrainian military insignia

Hi, Maxim, got your note on my talk page. I appreciate the pointers - I do understand the concept of public domain; the vast majority of the work I do is with images, free and non-free. The problem with the ones that I tagged is that they were not produced by the Ukrainian government, but by a commercial website (http://www.uniforminsignia.net), which produces digital images of military insignia based on official descriptions, and claims copyright on the resulting derivative works. This issue of images from this site has come up before at both WP:ANI and WP:AN (links back on my talk page, under your comment) - I ran across this issue while cleaning up images using the deprecated {{Military-Insignia}} license template, and there's been a lot of heartburn from some established users regarding deletion of these images. In the noticeboard discussions, there were other users, experienced in copyright, who also felt that there may be enough original authorship in these particular images to sustain a copyright claim. I also think we're morally in the wrong stealing these images from them, as Wikipedia is directly competing with the purpose of that commercial website, which apparently survives based on Google ads and by donations from visitors attracted to the site. If people can see those images on Wikipedia, why should they visit the site that created them?

In any event, the copyright-encumbered images can be replaced by images either produced directly by the Ukrainian government, or by user-created images (Zscout370 has already started doing this). Since the supposed {{PD-UA-exempt}} images seem to be particularly contentious, I'll send them to IfD when I get time, instead of re-tagging them for speedy deletion. Thanks, by the way, for working the image backlogs - we don't have anywhere near enough admins who specialize in that area, which is why it always a mess. Drop me a line if I can help with any questions you may have. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 14:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Did you know

On 17 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Brian Elliott , which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 15:10, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Davidderothschild.jpg

Hi, Maxim - I was curious about your "keep" decision on the above image. This would seem to me to be a pretty clear-cut violation of WP:NFCC#1, as the individual is still living and a free image could be made or obtained. Or am I missing something? Videmus Omnia ^Talk 20:03, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm missing something. Thanks. :D — Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 20:06, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

It was a press release. Wouldn't that mean it is a free image? It was from the subjects official website. Kevin 20:29, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately the owner of the image retains copyright in such instances. You can, however, request that they give the image to us under free license - I've written a how-to on this at User:Videmus Omnia/Requesting free content. I've had pretty good luck with the technique so far. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 21:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

No Please

Give me one more chance. Please don't erase my namespace or block my account. I would love to conribute to Wikipedia but I don't know what to edit. Please help me find a page. All do anything just spare my account. Please! --Angel David 01:18, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• Religion and Mythology. I used to contrubut to Wikipedia. But know I'm just styling my naimspace. Probably you'll find a religious or mythologic things. Probably I will.--Angel David 01:21, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Don't delete them please, you musn't, I'll do anything. Especially not the God page!--Angel David 01:25, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Note

Hello, Maxim, I'd like to note something.

Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 01:57, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay

From day foward I will not edit my user page until November 30.--Angel David 02:19, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Walor

I am pretty sure he is a sockpuppet of atleast 1 if not more other accounts. I know for sure he is a sockpuppet of atleast one other user as he edited my talk page with one user and signed it as Walor. I would have to go through the archives to find the exact edit. He is mass reverting the changes because concensus was against him that the Blueshirts were spelled as one word. He only comes back to the Walor account to revert anything to do with the blueshirts. I mean its pretty odd that he knew I changed back all his old reverts the day after I fixed them the last time when he hasn't been around for 2 months. --Djsasso 23:02, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll look into this. I'll probably file an SSP or get a checkuser done if I get a second account. I'm too involved to block, IMHO. --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 23:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

The other user is User:Garywill but I haven't be able to find the proof I was talking about yet. I am going through my talk pages, its possible it was on some other talk page but I could have sworn it was on mine. --Djsasso 14:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

fixed

 Resolved _→AzaToth 21:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:United_Nations_Service_Medal_for_Korea.png

You recently deleted this image, which had been tagged with a "Replaceable fair use" tag - however I had disputed that call, and started a discussion on the talk page, which has had no responses. Shouldn't the discussion be finalised before summarily deleting the iamge? PalawanOz 06:55, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I've undeleted it. _→AzaToth 11:28, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Image of Harry Smith

Why did you remove the tag from the image of Harry Smith? The image does not provide a source. Did the uploader take it? Did he get it online somewhere? That's why I tagged the image. If you know for a fact that the uploader did indeed take the image, you need to edit the page accordingly. Nikki311 22:32, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Had a bad day with that one. Over a good night's sleep I realised that I was quite wrong. I've deleted it since. --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 13:00, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Forth & Towne logo

Can you please undelete this image? You deleted it because you thought it was orphaned, but it was used in the page Forth & Towne at the time you deleted it. It had actually been in an article for 5 days (diff). Would upload it back myself, but it's not available on the website anymore. Thanks. tiZom_(2¢) 05:25, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks :o) tiZom_(2¢) 03:21, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

User:72.75.72.174/Harley-Quinn.com Argument

Whoops, it seems like I forgot to remove the speedy deletion tag (an incorrect tag, for that matter) after restoring the subpage upon user request. Just wanted to let you know, Nishkid64 (talk) 15:12, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 13:00, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

pipelogo.jpg

Hi, my bands logo was deleted for not having a source. What do I need to do to have it sourced correctly? I had filled out the fair use. Was something missing from there?

No fair use rationale. Please add one. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 19:16, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:IndianBankNotes.JPG

You have recently deleted this image, you mentioned non-compliance of WP:NFCC#10c as the reason. I agree that I didn't mention all the pages and the rationale behind it, mainly because I didn't realize that it was required. Can you please undelete it? I'll make sure I include this information as part of the copyright. Also isn't it better\fair to edit the pages where its incorrectly used, instead of deleting the image itself? Anyone can use this image on any page without updating the copyright information for the image, even one non-compliance will result in its deletion leaving all the other legitimate pages with an orphaned link. Let me know if I have misunderstood this clause. Sachincrai 20:31, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

It's not the admin's responsibility to fix your image problems. It's yours. Also, I've undeleted it so you can fix the problems. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 13:00, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Angel David

Just so you know, there is an RFC on him. See Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Angel David. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 21:23, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I've certified it already. --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 13:00, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

No

Stop erase please any thing bu my God page please No. Why?--Angel David 21:31, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Read the nomination page, David. I clearly specified reasons there. --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 21:32, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

It's still my namespace. I'm afraid there's no reason.--Angel David 21:34, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

You do not own your userspace. It's not yours. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 21:35, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Again, one of the reasons for my RFC. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 21:35, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

• Then who owns it? And how can I find him/her?--—Preceding unsigned comment added by Angel David (talk • contribs)

• Everyone and no one. Leebo ^T/C 21:46, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Maria Capovilla image

Can you re-create the history of this image? I note I took several pictures myself and could give permission to use a photo...

23:46, 19 October 2007 Maxim (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:WbOLDWOMAN narrowweb 300x405,0-1-.jpg" ‎ (Deleted because "CSD I6 - Fair use image with no fair use rationale". using TW)

Ryoung122 07:30, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

You really should upload it under a new name. The one your are specifying right now is excruciatingly confusing. --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 13:00, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Vintorez_Sniper_Rifle.jpg

What's the point of disputing a replaceable fair use claim and writing an extensive rationale to that effect if nobody even looks at it? I believe I've rather exhaustively explained why a freely-useable image cannot be created for this article while achieving maximum accuracy, and considering that this image was uploaded in 2004 before the current image policies were even nearly as developed as they are today, I believe caution should have been exercised. The rationale can be found here for your review. At any rate, if a replaceable fair use claim is set in stone, as the original editor who added the template claimed, then these procedures are kind of irrelevant... MalikCarr 07:21, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

If I deleted 300 images in an evening, I'm gonnna make one, or two, or three mistakes at the very least. I've restored it, as I simply didn't notice your disputed tag while deleting. Sorry for the mess... Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 13:00, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that. It's quite nice to have an admin with a reasonable position on executing policy actions for once. MalikCarr 07:53, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:06563957.jpg

You recently deleted the above image. Just for my benefit, for future reference, could you please let me know why you deemed it necessary to delete the image. I believe I had added an acceptable fair use rationale - it identified a particular historic aspect of The Street, Wormshill that could not be replaced by a free-use image. Many thanks Dick G 08:28, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

It was considered replaceable fair use (see the link in the deletion summary). You uploaded it rather strangely, with disputed tag on it that put it in the deletion category. You should upload it as "fair use" and a good fair use rationale. And also, it's the person who tagged your image to notify image, but as you somehow did that to yourself, you're kinda responsible for this mess... I suggest just reuploading it, as image names that are just numbers are very confusing. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 13:00, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

To be fair the upload form is at fault. When you use the drop down box to select the licence type, if you select a 'fair use' option for an existing building, the form pre-tags the image. All I did was add my fair use rationale to the automatic tag. If I uploaded it and then tagged it myself it would've notified my talk page wouldn't it? which it didn't - so it must be pre-tagged. Presumably then an admin trawling the listed images should have seen the fair use rationale and removed the tag, keeping the image? This "mess" is therefore not of my own making in my opinion. Until this anomaly is fixed, or an admin is capable of actually reading the text of the automatic tag and acting accordingly, I won't be able to re-load the image.Dick G 22:36, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

hi

Why you removed the Nobel Prize icon I placed on Naipaul's page ? Jon Ascton

You usually don't put a symbol like that near a person's name. If you look at every other similar bio, it's not done that way. Hope that answers your question, --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 14:56, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Vandalisim on my User page

Thanks for getting rid of it. Your help is appreciated. :D —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dadude3320 (talk • contribs) 15:21, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Duncan, Oklahoma

Thank you for your help eliminating the vandalism to our city page. Since they reverted again, I hope you have already blocked them per your warning. Thank you!!!!! Eljay53 18:22, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Groove Page deletion

Hi, I noticed recently that you deleted the page Groove Phi Groove Social Fellowship Incorprated, which I and a few other members of the organization were working on. I'd like to know why such action was taken and also how we can prevent it in the future. Specifically, what was wrong with the page that warranted deletion? We are not familar with wikipedia's standards, and would appreciate your patience in our attempts to learn it. Thank you for any help and answers you provide.

Arien Young —Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowledge3754 (talk • contribs) 20:18, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Boku (software)

Hi. You speedy deleted Boku (software), citing CSD A7. However, WP:CSD says "There is no consensus to speedily delete articles of types not specifically listed in A7 under that criterion.". Software is not among the A7 categories, and thus the deletion should not have been made. Could you revert the deletion? Thank you for your time! — Ksero 00:30, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

No, I cannot. I prefer to abide by the spirit of the policy not the letter. The article clearly didn't not assert notability. --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 00:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I remember at least one reliable source that established notability [18], and two more dubious references [19] [20]. I thought that would at least save the article from a speedy. — Ksero 01:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Maxim; I think this was a hasty edit. Please forgive my ignorance of wikipedia protocol, but this software has been widely reported both online and offline (please google 'boku maclaurin') to see - it's been featured in print newspapers internationally, as I've linked to the (australian) article and there are others. How else can I establish this? There are numerous comparable research projects already on wikipedia - I think this is a valid entry and, if not, I'd like to know what more needs to be added...thanks Mmaclaurin 02:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Please also note that there was a dispute tag and a rationale that you did not respond to...surely a moment of discussion was in order? I'd like to build out the article and can provide many more references. Thanks again...Mmaclaurin 07:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm restoring it. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 11:49, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

History of apple

Just so you know, you're recent edit of "History of Apple" succeeded but also deleted the 1st half of the article. It has been restored. TimL 03:12, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I use the script I mentioned above... its unlinker has been rather buggy recently. I'll try to see to either fix or disable it.

Yea, It was my fault, but it has been fixed. _→AzaToth 12:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

User:A strizzle dizzle doggy dogg vandalism.

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user pages. User:Johnny545 is also being disruptive. -- Alan Liefting talk 12:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Removing backlinks

Hey, just curious do you remove these red links automatically? I only notice cos you made this edit to remove a link to Cathy Martin, even though this is clearly a different person. This didn't seem very helpful so I reverted. Flowerparty^☀ 02:00, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

A script does that for me, and you where linked to the article I deleted,

So the script just removes backlinks indiscriminately? Maybe you could be a bit more selective about when you use the script, then. (It's admirable to want to prevent a page being recreated, but not all red links are bad - just because a page has been speedied doesn't mean there should never be an article there.) Cheers, Flowerparty^☀ 14:09, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

It indiscriminately removes them. I don't get to see which ones it removes. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 23:25, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Gamma Ray - Land of the Free II - Cover Art.jpg

It seems that my above image above was deleted even after I contested it, made a discussion explaining what was wrong, and after adding Image:IMG01.jpg to the image deletion page. Just wondering why the more informative, in-use, uploaded first (I'm pretty sure by 2 minutes, can't check now) image was deleted. Thanks. Narian 13:13, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

restored. _→AzaToth 16:39, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Appreciate the help. Narian 17:56, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Amatory

I'm very surprised that you deleted this article. The band is notable and easily passes WP:MUSIC, which would be clear to you since you know the Russian language (unlike the person who tagged it). Certainly the article was in a rather sorry state, but this is not a reason for deletion too. You should be more careful when processing CAT:CSD in the future, a lot of them are tagged incorrectly.  Grue  —Preceding comment was added at 19:12, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Oops, I was going too fast... :( I speak Russian, but I'm not Russian, nor am I interested in alternative metal bands in Russia... Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 23:25, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Eugenics in Showa Japan

Oops thought I had protected it. Thx -- Samir 23:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I do that thing all the time. :D Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 23:25, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

About that block

Maybe I'm missing something (I'll admit I don't speak the language) but why did you give a block for this bit of nonsense? Does it mean something I'm not aware of? Friday (talk) 14:24, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

The block just lifted, and he goes harassing me again. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 20:34, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes

I'll do anything Neranei and Yamakari say. My account is in their hands. And again, I'm sorry. Maybe now we can...start over?--Angel David 20:33, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, David. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 20:34, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

RPP Islam and antisemitism

Hi Maxim. I've asked a question after your decline. Both parties seem to agree that page protection would be acceptable. They have been edit warring, so I don't think this would be preventive. Would you reconsider? Please reply to my Talk. Thanks. HG | Talk 22:50, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

You have been awarded...

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Great job reverting and doing work at the RFPP! Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 23:23, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Truce

Well I'm glad we were able to forgive and forget and about the monobook, it's okay--Angel David (talk · contribs) 01:15, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Request unprotection: Ferenc Gyurcsány

Please let the protection on Ferenc Gyurcsány articel! I was one person of edit-war, I think the that edits which I deleted are vadalism statements, but I won't continue the fight, beause I think the improving of artical is more improtent. Thank for help --Beyond silence 12:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Sure thing.  Done Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 19:04, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Protections

It's annoying when this happens. Don't worry, I've restored your protection time. :) Acalamari 19:28, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

That explains the mysterious edit conflict... I wanted to add {{sprotected2}}, and I get an edit conflict. Yet there was nothing that indicated a change in the text... :D Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 19:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I received an edit conflict as well when trying to add the semi-protection tag after accidentally changing your protection. :) Heh. Acalamari 20:20, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Google aerial view of kibbutzim

Now that Google provides better aerial views of geographic sites in Israel, would it not be a good way to use an aerial phoograph from Google to show where the kibbutz is located relative to it's geographic highlights, and how the kibbutz (and in addition, moshavim) is laid out? And if so, how would you advise we provide such an aerial view from Google, as you have removed the photo for kibbutz Eyal because the Google photo and rights did not conform with Wikipedia standards.SZAgassi 12:32, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Can you give me a link to the image like this: [[:Image.foo]]. Thanks. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 23:25, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Not sure what you want, Maxim. I had used Google Earth to get an aerial view of kibbutz Eyal. I then did screen capture of the important section of the aerial view, which showed the layout of the kbbutz, and it's position relative to Qalqiliya, Khokhav Yair and the Eyal Interchange for Kvish 6. My question is, why can an aerial shot of a site not be valid for an enclyclopedia - and what creditsand/or releases are required to publish the content? SZAgassi 12:30, 22 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.49.94.201 (talk)

What I have requested is some means to show the layout and relative location of the kibbutz - one option is to provde capability to display screnshot of Google Earth or Google Map aerial view of the kibbutz (or moshav) to show where it is located relative to surrounding sites, and how it is laid out - many people have the idea that all kibbutzim and moshavim follow the same layout pattern - which is far from true. The second option, actually a recommendation (see my proposal on Infobox kibbutz page), to enhance the kibbutz infobox to add more data, better mirroring fields in the towns infobox (add longtitude and latitude, provide capability to add pushpin map of Israel to show location in Israel, etc.) and to extend this to moshavim as well.

Re aerial photo - what can be done, or what should be done to enable the photo to exist on a Wikipedia page? SZAgassi 17:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

The copyright situation of Google Earth stuff is very problematic, and Wikipedia doesn't accept such images. Sorry for not getting back to you quickly enough, Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 21:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Help from Adoptee

Hi, I was wondering if you could take a look at the latest Wikipedia page I created and offer some criticism/suggetions. The page is group development. Thanks! Jsarmi 15:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I suggest reading WP:MoS rather throughly, as the article looks very promising, but it's not in a very good state right now. I'm glad to see that you're editing again. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 21:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Image: Elfi von Dassanowsky.jpg

OK--I admit it, I am a newbe here--but can you replace this photo you deleted from the site? I recall mentioning that not only is the use "fair use" and was used internationally in all press releases stemming from APA (Austrian Press Association) at her death. Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atmundi (talk • contribs) 04:28, 25 October 2007 (UTC) Please MAXIM, help me get this photo pack to its rightful place. Its free use by APA. Atmundi 26. October, 2007

Pseudo-random request

Hi.

You are an admin. Sort of chose you at random. Sort of not.

I was just wondering if you could take a quick look at the behaviour of IP User:67.135.49.147 which is currently being used by User:Jinxmchue. I'm not sure if this comes under sockpuppetry or not.

He has deleted a behavioural warning against disruptive editing and the appearance of sockpuppetry at PZ Myers and its talk page. [21]. But as asserted my claims, even when I explained them, were baseless. Other editors have reached similar conclusions about his behaviour [22].

I'm not expecting any quick action, or indeed any action at all. I'm just asking for you to have a look at the situation, and perhaps leave any comments on my talk page about the matter. Especially if my behaviour has somehow been innapropriate.

Thanks--ZayZayEM 06:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

List of Paper Mario series characters

You recently protected List of Paper Mario series characters as a redirect page due to an edit war. However, it should be protected as the full article. User:TTN has a recorded history (just see his talk page) of turning pages into redirects without any discussion at all, much to the ire of other editors. This is another instance of that. Please keep the page protected, but revert it to the whole article. Thank you. -Zomic13 00:31, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I concur. User:TTN deliberately violated standard procedure but A) not contacting anyone about the merge tag (I'm aware it's unnecessary, but it's polite and shows respect.) and B) He merged it, and put almost no information into the merged article, completely undermining the processes that article went through. I beseech you, please revert it to its original status, and protect it from more attacks from TTN. C. Pineda (クリス) 05:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't see any active editwarring, hence there is no need for protection. --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 21:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Well...there's no edit war, because it's still protected. Could you lift the protect please? Because otherwise we have to wait until the 29th, and no progress will be made. C. Pineda (クリス) 02:39, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Unprotected per WP:RFPP request and per your assent here. Thanks, Maxim! - Alison ^❤ 16:44, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

It started up again, apparently, and Jeské has applied the brakes again. Heh - Alison ^❤ 23:05, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Please, no Twinkle on the backlogs

Hello Maxim. You have recently used Twinkle to mass delete every image in the Now on Commmons categories. This is a very bad idea for several reasons. For one thing, many of these images do not meet the requirements for speedy deletion. In fact, I often find images in the category where the image is not on Commons or has been deleted from Commons. Others have less serious problems that may still need to be dealt with. Most typically, the original uploader is not acknowledged on Commons, which means that their deletion here breaks the GFDL. Some don't have a category on Commons, meaning that they are basically lost in the vast neverland of uncategorized images on Commons. The reason there is reluctance to use bots to clear backlogs is that most of these backlogs require an ounce of human judgment. I see that you've done the same for some I4 images. Again, this is not desirable: there are often cases where the missing source can easily be identified, where the source has been added without the template being removed, or where the image was simply incorrectly tagged. So please, no Twinkle on these backlogs! Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 20:28, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Pascal, I always check the images I delete using the Bad Old Ones Tool. I never do it blindly; the time when I do that is when hell freezes over. Twinkle is just a tool that does deletions all a time, after I've inspected the category I want to delete. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 20:34, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... Guess I feel like a complete cretin then! Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 20:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Y did u loc The Naked Brothers Band (TV series)

U locked The Naked Brothers Band (TV series) page? Y? I think as ep show (air) fans add info. Anywho, pls add the link 2 their imdb page under ref. Imdb is reputable I think. Thx. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.156.42.173 (talk) 21:50, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Can you rewrite your question so I can understand it? Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 21:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

October 2007

You recently removed the Fair Use Rationale Missing or Incomplete template from the following images without completing the Fair Use Rationale:

• Image:General Sturnn.JPG
• Image:DawnofWar-Judgement.png

As these images are screenshots of a computer game they may only be used in the article about that game. -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 08:50, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Per [23], I have reverted JediLofty's edits to these image pages. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 10:23, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I highly suggest for JediLofty to read WP:CSD#I6, and remember that it's not an admin's responsibility to add an rationale. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 21:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

The Co-operative Union

Why have you removed the redirect to Co-operatives^UK? Can you please restore it. Thanks, Chrisieboy 12:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

No clue, as I don't have a link to the redirect in question. --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 21:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

01:23, 25 October 2007 Maxim (Talk | contribs) deleted "Co-operative Union" ‎ (content was: '#REDIRECT Co-operatives UK{{dated prod|concern = see talk|month = October|day = 19|year = 2007|time = 14:13|timestamp = 2007101914...') Chrisieboy 23:14, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Somehow got caught in a WP:PROD category. Restored. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 23:20, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

AN/I closed topic

Maxim, while I was posting, I didn't realize you had a closed a topic at AN/I, so my post shows up 3 mins after you closed it; do I need to revert/remove my comment, or is that a common occurrence?[24] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:24, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

oh, well, someone else removed the closing tag, so now I'm really in limbo. <eeek> SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

You shouldn't pay attention to the "archive". I was merely being a bit sarcastic. Users are voting on Jimbo's ban. So at 12 supports, I decided to "close" the vote. :D Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 22:26, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

LOL, ok, thanks. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:28, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

BTW, I'm glad I ran into you. I have a question about an article. Stanley Cup You strongly opposed its FLC FAC (typo six months ago, and I asked for some advice about 2 months ago, but GimmeBot crashed/bugged up etc. It's gotten some copyediting from User:Awadewit, and I was wondering whether you can give it a little review. Thanks, Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 22:30, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't do FLC, must be an FAC. I'll have a look; should I put my comments here on your talk page? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:33, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Oops, typo. It's OK to put the comments here. Thanks, Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 22:35, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

You're in luck; no ball game tonight :-) I'll have a look in a bit. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:38, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Can you point me to the discussion?

Can you link me to the discussion you refer to here? Friday (talk) 23:03, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

IRC. --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 23:04, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Was there a legitimate need for privacy or extreme speed? I don't see an emergency here. It's better to do this stuff on the wiki, where everyone can participate. Friday (talk) 23:05, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I just asked him quickly about the block, and he told me that it's ok to reduce it. I don't it's a big deal, and if it is, I'll keep that in mind. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 23:08, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't see it as a big deal, but I suspect if there had been broader discussion, things may have been decided differently. I was going to ask if you'd seen his block log or the RFC, but I see that you have. Still, as a general rule, unless there is a legitimate need for privacy, there's no good reason to decide on Wikipedia matters in a chat room instead of on the wiki. Friday (talk) 23:12, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I respect your opinion on IRC, and I've read your essay. However, we have differing opinions on this, and again, I respect yours. It was more of me finding the blocking sysop chatting a minute after the block, and just asked him about it. Respectfully, Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 23:23, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. Like I said, in this case I don't see it as any kind of big deal. I can see how a chat room is handy for a quickie discussion like that. I still have strong reservations that this editor is able to contribute constructive (I don't doubt the willingness), but there's no harm in a "wait and see" approach. Friday (talk) 23:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:CapeVerde.png

Hi Maxim. I'd like to ask you about Image:CapeVerde.png. Not being a bit-by-bit exact copy of the Commons' one is a perfect reasoning for an automated process of elimination not to delete an image. But in a human perspective, in this case it seems to me that the image is indeed deletable, since it is visually the same, and might even have less detail than the commons one, which has 8KB while this one only has 7KB. What do you think? Waldir 19:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

It has a different name on Commons. If I delete the image, I'll break the display of the images in articles. --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 21:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Only about 3 articles link to it. If I change the links on them, will you delete it? Waldir 19:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

It's working!

Thank God! Oh and you too Maxim. Thank you too! And this time I'll make constructive edits to Wikipedia.--Angel David 16:11, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Stanley Cup

Wow, I'm not often a Stong Oppose, but that was one heck of a mess a year ago :-) MUCH improved!

• This section is really awkward; can it be generalized somehow to avoid all of these acronyms in a section heading? 1.3 PCHL/WCHL/WHL vs NHA/NHL
• Section heading, "Stanley Cup today", not crazy about "today", but don't know how to fix it.
• Would this be better in the singular? Not sure. "Traditions and anecdotes"
• Saw lots of inline comments left by Awadewit that still need to be dealt with.
• Page ranges, sports scores, dates, and numbers are separated by endashes (–) not hyphens (-), see WP:DASH. You can contact Brighterorange (talk · contribs) who can run a script to fix some of them, but his script is still in development, so you'll still have to check them all after he's done.
• Citations are not all completely formatted, see WP:CITE/ES, I left a sample edit. All sources need publisher, author and date should be given when available, and all websources need last access date. Link the date parameter on cite templates so that dates are consistently formatted.
• Found and fixed some sample incorrect WP:DASHes on dates, check scores and all date and number ranges after Brighterorange has been through, because his script may miss some. Also, see WP:MOSNUM on date formatting and dashes.
• Ideally, See also should be minimized. Can any of those be worked into the article? If they're already linked in the article, they should be removed from See also.

Since Awadewit already copyedited, I didn't check the prose. Overall, it looks good, but my sample edits indicate work still needed. Good luck! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:02, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for this review. I'll try to address all the concerns, and hopefully submit an FAC soon. Sorry for the delay in the reply, I've been busy, and kinda swamped with notes; see below. :-S --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 00:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

You may wish to know

Please don't take this as canvassing, but I wanted to inform you of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Angel David/Yahweh. I'm not asking you to vote, heck even oppose if you want. YДмΔќʃʀï^→Г_C← 10-27-2007 • 00:48:15

Thanks. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 00:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Help! Disappearing images

Hi Maxim, please see the discussion from User talk:BrownHairedGirl's page:

Three apparently random images were deleted from apparently unrelated articles by a Bot on 26th October. Got any idea why? (Licence was fine). Bot says "Removing deleted image" but the article record shows no prior deletion and the history of the image disappears completely along with the image.

Greystones

1. (cur) (last) 17:36, October 26, 2007 ImageRemovalBot (Talk | contribs) (15,488 bytes) (Removing deleted image) (undo)
2. (cur) (last) 03:14, October 26, 2007 Ww2censor (Talk | contribs) (15,456 bytes) (revert unsourced edit about Lotto) (undo)

Lough Ree

1. (cur) (last) 05:35, October 26, 2007 ImageRemovalBot (Talk | contribs) (2,758 bytes) (Removing deleted image) (undo)
2. (cur) (last) 22:25, October 19, 2007 Cydebot (Talk | contribs) m (2,779 bytes) (Robot - Moving category Loughs of Westmeath to Loughs of County Westmeath per CFD at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 October 14.) (undo)

Glenamaddy Turlough

1. (cur) (last) 05:35, October 26, 2007 ImageRemovalBot (Talk | contribs) (1,442 bytes) (Removing deleted image) (undo)
2. (cur) (last) 22:22, October 19, 2007 Cydebot (Talk | contribs) m (1,410 bytes) (Robot - Moving category Loughs of Galway to Loughs of County Galway per CFD at Wikipedia:Categories for dis:cussion/Log/2007 October 14.) (undo)

Something sinister going on? (Sarah777 11:13, 27 October 2007 (UTC))

I don't think it's sinister, though it does look a bit messy. Just checking the last article, I found this entry in the deletion log for IMG GMaddyTlough2758.jpg ... it seems that the reason for the image's deletion was something to do with commons (WP:CSD#I8 was cited). I do v little work with images, so I suggest you raise the issue with the deleting admin Maxim (talk · contribs), who I'm sure will be able to explain it all. If the image was deleted because it was on commons, it seems a pity that the links to it were not updated to point to commons, but as above, I have little idea of the procedure with images. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:29, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

(Sarah777 11:40, 27 October 2007 (UTC))

Revert the bot. I deleted the image because they are on Wikimedia Commons, and that shouldn't make any difference in how they are shown. A bit strange. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 00:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Hay (company)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Hay (company), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hay (company). Thank you.

(You denied a Speedy Deletion request on the article in August.) --B. Wolterding 15:11, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 00:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Please restore the Barnard's Star images

Please restore the Barnard's Star images you recently deleted. I have contacted the author, and he has confirmed in email and on the source web page that he put the images in question into the public domain. The pages where the images were used are Barnard's Star and proper motion.

Thank you for your copyright diligence! --IanOsgood 17:06, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I can't restore anything without being given the links like this: [[:Image:Whatever]], nor even look at them :-S. I can't refer to an article; I deleted around 600 images today (correctly!), and I'm afraid I don't have the capabilities to remember each one. :) --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 00:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, the images are:

• Image:Barnardstar2006.jpg
• Image:Barnard2005.gif

600 deletions! No wonder you got so many messages today! --IanOsgood 04:12, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Removal of backlinks to deleted articles

Hello, you have used Twinkle to remove links to deleted articles, as in this edit. This should not be done. Links to a page that does not exist can be deleted under CSD R1 (or tagged for SD); alternatively, they will be listed automatically on Special:BrokenRedirects, and someone will take care of them. Simply removing the link make the dead page much harder to find afterwards, and this should be avoided. Thank you ! Schutz 17:07, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

That's a non-issue now, as it was a temporary error in the code. _→AzaToth 18:32, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks for looking into this problem quickly. Schutz 18:55, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Logo Deletion

Hi There,

My name is lschluter, and I am new to the wikipedia world. I am working on a wiki entry for West Vancouver Public Library, and until recently, there was a logo image on this page. Apparantly, you deleted it a few days ago, with this rationnale: Deleted because "CSD I6 - Fair use image with no fair use rationale". using TW) I have tried looking into the wikipedia fair use rationale policy, but alas, I am presented with link after link that gets me nowhere. Might you be able to explain to me what I need to do in order to keep the logo on the page, AND abide by the copyright laws/policies?

Thank you! lschluter —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lschluter (talk • contribs) 19:36, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

You need a fair use rationale. See WP:NFCC. --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 00:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Subject: YLD_Black_Logo.jpg

You have recently deleted an image I had uploaded (2 actually. But one was had no links to it) If you read the image correctly, I had been given full use to use it by a member of the band, whom I contacted via E-Mail The E-Mail...
Dear Daniel, Rich, and Brad (or whomever may read this),
I am Kevin Niemann, a member of Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia (which
you may have heard of, if not, go to en.wikipedia.org for more info). I am
asking for permission to use the images of your band for the article on your
band (en.wikipedia.org/Year_Long_Disaster).
These include, but are not limited to http://www.yearlongdisaster.com/images/yld_header_img.jpg,
http://www.yearlongdisaster.com/images/gallery/YLD_presstrees_casella.jpg,
http://www.yearlongdisaster.com/images/gallery/MM-danielredWS.jpg and http://www.yearlongdisaster.com/images/gallery/MM-YLDWS.jpg.

From,
Kevin (User:IAMTHEEGGMAN "en.wikipedia.org/User:IAMTHEEGGMAN")

...And the Reply
HI Kevin,
Rich here from YLD. I love wikipedia. It is the homepage of all my
computers. Anything you need Kevin we will give you. Information, photos,
etc...if you want band shwag just let me know and I will have it shipped off
to you.
You have our permission to use everything.
I will attach some new press photos.

(Non Important Parts of the E-mail extracted)
Cheers,
.R.

So get back to me, so we can set this straight. And maybe if I did something wrong, you could tell me for future reference. Thanks. IAMTHEtalkMAN^{Goo Goo G'Joob?}19:44, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

That's not enough. Firstly, under what license does the band release the images? Also, we can't be sure if it is really the band. Please see this page, I believe for the correct place to email permissions. --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 00:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Forever in Blue

Hello. I saw you deleted an article I was looking at the other day, which was Forever in Blue (film). This should not have been deleted, and in fact should stay put and be moved to The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2, which is the proper title of the film. Could you fix this please and replace the "backlinks" you appear to have removed? Ed Wood's Wig 00:07, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, the complaint was that the film was not notble enough. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 00:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

i dont see how thats possible, but should that matter anyway for a prod that is being contested? Ed Wood's Wig 00:30, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Not really, but it depends. This is the first line from the article:

Forever in Blue is an upcoming sequel to the 2005 film The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants. You seem to be confusing the two films. Do you want me to restore the article as a contested prod, irrelevant of the reason? Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 00:35, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, and please move it to the proper title which may have been causing some of the problems, as the films are the same thing and the title apparently changed between formation. Also please restore the backlinks since you appear to have an automated program to do it. Thank you. Ed Wood's Wig 00:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Never mind I took care of it. Thank you for the restore. Ed Wood's Wig 00:50, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Wash23.jpg

I was under the distinct impression that I had reviewed all the Firefly characters' pictures for source and rationale. Could you send me the text from the deleted picture so I can see what I missed? Thanks.--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 00:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

There was no fair use rationale at the time it was deleted. I think you forgot to add one. :-S Thanks, Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 00:06, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Again, can I please see the text that was there? Thanks.--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 00:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Album covers

Please do not delete album covers used to illustrate an article about the album. By long practice we have used fair use album covers in this way. If a "rationale" is missing, it would be less disruptive to provide one than it to delete the image. Indeed, the fair use album cover tag actually contains the fair use rationale within it. If you have any questions about album covers, please don't hesitate to ask. I've deleted album images from hundreds of articles, and I'm well familiar with the rules. Rklawton 01:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

How funny, so am I. It is really not my responsibility to add rationales. It's the responsibility of the uploader (and usually, the fact the that image is going to be deleted is noted in its caption). Those images were left there for seven days, and nobody attended to them. There is a basic fair user rationale, but it's not enough. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 00:06, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Image: Elfi von Dassanowsky.jpg

Image: Elfi von Dassanowsky.jpg Maxim, can you please replace this photo you deleted from the site? I recall mentioning that not only is the use "fair use" and was used internationally in all press releases stemming from APA (Austrian Press Association) at her death. Thank you! I am also the rights holder to the press relesae and thus the photo. Is there any ohter info you need? i don't know how to replace this. Thank you. Atmundi 28. October, 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atmundi (talk • contribs) 05:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

It is not my responsibility to replace photos or to add fair use rationale. See WP:NFCC for more info, and reupload it with a proper fair use rationale. Thanks, Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 00:06, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

User page semi-protected

Hdt83 requested your user page to be semi-protected. I agreed with his assessment and semi-protected it for 24 hours. -- Gogo Dodo 06:42, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not a big fan of semi-protection of userpage. I'd rather have my userpage vandalised rather than articles. But I can make an exception in that case. Thanks for the 24 h, Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 00:06, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Mail

I just sent you an email, I would really appreciate it if you took a look. Love, Neranei (talk) 00:21, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Oops!

We clashed on that archive repair. Sorry about that :) - Alison ^❤ 00:51, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Groove Page Deletion

Why was the page "Groove Phi Groove Social Fellowship Incorporated" deleted? I plan to restart it but would like to know why it was deleted so we can prevent repeated mistakes. Thanks

Knowledge3754 15:20, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

It was a copyright violation. It says so in the summary. --Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 21:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

How do I check this summary? Are there more details there? Because I'm confused as to how there could have been a copyright violation. Knowledge3754 21:58, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind I see what you mean now. Didn't realize that copyvio(G12) stuff was the summary. I'll be restarting the page soon w/o the copyright errorsKnowledge3754 21:38, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Palma.jpg

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Image:Palma.jpg. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Jreferee t/c 00:35, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. :-) Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 22:38, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Article on Ruben Figueres Alario

Hi Maxim, you deleted an article on "Ruben Figueres Alario". I had included the references that were asked, but it seems that I did not remove the tag on time. I thought just editing the contents and adding some references to prove notability was enough. Could you please review the article and let me know what needs to be done in order to publish it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mineswright (talk • contribs) 01:12, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Restored as a contested prod, sorry for the delay. Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 22:38, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Jamie Frosty Frank black white.PNG

Please restore Image:Jamie Frosty Frank black white.PNG. If the only reason to delete was a failure of WP:NFCC#10c (presumably because lack of a link back to the Jamie, Frosty and Frank Show article), then that is pathetically easy to fix. DHowell 06:52, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

There was no rationale period. It's just how the Bot tagged the image. I suggest you re-upload it. Thanks, Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 22:38, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Atkinson.jpg

Why was this deleted as a redundant image? There is now no picture of Mr Atkinson and so I can't see that it was a duplicate. Brookie :) - he's in the building somewhere! ^(Whisper...) 17:03, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Some one overwrote it with another image, which also exists as a copy under a name. I've deleted the overwriting image and the edits, and everything should be back to normal. Cheers! Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 22:38, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:CSCDGR.jpg

I noticed you were the admin who deleted the Image:CSCDGR.jpg today. I have reloaded the image and tried to provide a more accurate description of the logo which is displayed. Could you please look into this and let me know if this meets the standards necessary and if not, what I may do to provide a proper rationale. --Renrenren 12:31, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Your rationale is something that use to justify a picture's use in a specific article. If you don't mention the article, the rationale's invalid. Thanks, Maxim_{(talk) (contributions)} 22:38, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Quick help

Could you block user:172.164.82.195 for me? No one seems to be watching AIV. Thanks! Gscshoyru 22:46, 31 October 2007 (UTC)