User talk:PhilKnight/Archive43

Nikki Creswell

Would you be so kind and recreate temporarly the article on the actress; Nikki Creswell and place it in my Talk Page. I know it's possible. Thank you in advance (Kyleall (talk) 21:23, 31 August 2008 (UTC))[reply]

RfA thank you

PhilKnight/Archive43, I wish to say thanks for your support in my successful request for adminship, which ended with 82 supports, 3 opposes, and 1 neutral. I will do my best to live up to your expectations. I would especially like to thank Rlevse for nominating me and Wizardman for co-nominating me.
— JGHowes ^talk - 19 August 2008

Help again (image copyvios)

I am very sorry that I have to bother you for your help again, but the admin involved earlier in this situation and I had a rather uncivil exchange several months ago and I don't feel 100% comfortable asking him to get involved. User:Wjmummert recently uploaded 4 images of baseball team logos from the same website (Sportslogos.net) and, I believe, knowingly tagged them in violation of copyright. Here are the relevant links:

IndefBlocked/warned/ReducedBlocked last year about repeated copyright violations: [1]
Uploaded [2] and labeled it "Public Domain, I own this picture.... it is off my web page."
Uploaded [3] and labeled it public domain
Uploaded [4] and labeled it public domain
Uploaded [5] and labeled it "I created this work entirely by myself"

Given what was written in the first one (and it's not even his web page), it looks quite deliberate and not like a series of honest mistakes. Thanks in advance for taking the time to look into this. dfg (talk) 15:22, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Grange Hill Online

Will you please explain why you deleted the above page? I fully intend to restore it. User:Bidefax 20:10, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Hi Bidefax, the page I deleted was empty - have a look at the deletion log. PhilKnight (talk) 19:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian Human Rights Commission

I think this can be unprotected now. User:Frank Pais was the lone dissenter, and he contacted a few of the other users and stated that he'd changed his mind. See the MEDCAB page and Frank's most recent contributions. Cheers, JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 01:30, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jeremy, I've unprotected the page. PhilKnight (talk) 12:57, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Logia de la Republica de Venezuela

I was able to verify that the org in the article is the one started in 1824 in Caracas, though there is another one claiming the same date. It basically comes down to whether the book you cited says the Grand Lodge is recognized by UGLE or by someplace else. I couldn't find an article in Spanish on it, but the Grand Master was killed during a kidnapping attempt in 2007, and when I cross-referenced, I found his name in my recognized lodges book, so I know that that's the group it claims to be. MSJapan (talk) 14:44, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so are you going to reinclude the citation? PhilKnight (talk) 14:47, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:157.203.42.50

Hi, you just blocked this IP from AIV while I was writing the edits were not vandalism. I still don't think it should be blocked, and the requestor should be slapped on the fingers IMO (this looks like a content dispute) :) -- lucasbfr ^talk 11:53, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi lucasbfr, I've unblocked. PhilKnight (talk) 12:00, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks! (Ow god my English is terrible today) I've slapped User:Alexnia a bit too. :) -- lucasbfr ^talk 12:09, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

slaps lucasbfr back*(couldn't resists saying that)

hanks for protecting page : Roman Abramovicht that user has been giving me a hard time now flaming on my talkpage about the incident but at the end the results were in my favour ^_^ I also want to note that I removed the false warning from the user's talk. I saw that you commented edit war as a result of protection (why didn't I get a Edit war warning?)Alexnia (talk) 15:32, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now that is complete nonsense Alexnia and you wonder why people are pissed at you. The user was not flaming your talk page - he/she was asking you legit questions. You could say I am flaming you but that would not even be accurate

I would also like to point out that there is no win/loss senario and its that attitude that got me pisse at you to begin with. I never cared that you changed the users edit, I cared about the way you and the other admin were treating people in connection to the edit. The user writing you wanted to edit, and was asking if you agreed he/she was correct to do so - you dismissed that persons comments and that person has not posted since - good going admin, you ran off someone, even if for a little while. Great win

But you say the results were in your favor? Could you explain that comment? Does that mean you do not feel editors should be able to edit articles and you would prefer to see them all locked? I ask because that user never made a change after the first ones and was asking for you guidance since you took on the authority to threaten him/her to begin with. On top of that I never made any changes to the article at all so what is your meaning?

In fact there is no edit war at all, GroundZero has made sure of that and now the problem has reached the absolute worst outcome it could get.

We have a very poorly written, libeous article, that despite many users requesting a rewrite, locked so that it can not be fixed. And this falls competely on the shoulders of the admins because from the start it has been them who has blocked progress

Phil review the facts verify what I am saying, once you have done that please take the correct action and unlock that page]

TruthWay (talk) 14:41, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A request

Phil, I would like you opinion about TruthWay's comments here and elsewhere about how I have handled the Roman Abramovich situation. If you think that my behaviour has been inappropriate for an administrator, I would like to know. Thank you. Ground Zero | t 15:47, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ground Zero, no I don't think your conduct has been inappropriate for an administrator. I'm still not sure what the best course of action is. Obviously, at the moment the page is protected, and given the situation is at the moment somewhat tense, I'm inclined to keep the page protected for a while longer, but perhaps not the full week. PhilKnight (talk) 15:51, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments, Phil. I will watch your talk page so that if you decide to make additional comments or change your comments apropos of TruthWay's statements below, I will see them. Thanks again. Regards, Ground Zero | t 17:30, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Attacks on Wiki

In regards to your reply to GroundZero I suggest you read Wikipedia:No personal attacks again, as you seem to have missed the line "Insulting or disparaging an editor is a personal attack regardless of the manner in which it is done. "

The comments made by myself, which prompted him to post that comment to you, are regards to me alleging he has made such attacks against myself and other users.

While reviewing my own conduct I also see some of my own, mine are of course from being provoked and are of a self-defense stance. TruthWay (talk) 16:41, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lee Sawyer

Not sure if you noticed, but I actually asked for the AfD to be withdrawn as he ended up passing WP:ATHLETE because he played during the AfD's run. Can you restore? Cheers, пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 17:09, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Number 57, I've restored the article. PhilKnight (talk) 17:14, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 13:46, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Khwaabh

I notice from the log that Khwaabh, one of the Indian TV hoaxes, was created and recreated five times, going back to July 2007. The only user (that I have discovered) whose account was old enough to be creating Khwaabh originally was User:Karanbt. Is it possible for you to look and see if there is another account involved? Phlegm Rooster (talk) 21:28, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rooster, good work in uncovering this hoax. The article was originally created by Ektasharan, who subsequently recreated the article a further 3 times. PhilKnight (talk) 22:03, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, looks like he stopped editing long ago. Thanks. MichaelQSchmidt actually figured it out. Phlegm Rooster (talk) 22:59, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Phil, I was trying to give a factual account of a company I cited in another article when it was deleted

I was trying to set up a factual statement about what the entity AFFINITY MODELS & TALENT AGENCY was, and several times during the process my article was deleted.

Now normally, this wouldnt be a problem except for the fact that multiple agencies of lesser and greater esteem have been noted all over Wikipedia so I'm not understanding the need for "IMPORTANCE" as Affinity is very well known in the industry.

This all came about because I was adding a notation about Affinity as one of the 'boutique agencies' in an article on Model Agencies elsewhere on Wikipedia. So, how can we come to a reasonable resolution on this? Maximuslumiere (talk) 22:49, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Maximuslumiere, have a look at the notability guideline. PhilKnight (talk) 22:51, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Missed AfD closure

Hello, PhilKnight ... you closed the AfDs for 12 Minutes to Heaven and Sofia Mendez, but missed the related Evan Davis (actor) by the same author, another WP:SNOWBALL ... Happy Editing! — 72.75.91.179 (talk · contribs) _{22:58, 24 August 2008 (UTC)}[reply]

AfD of Clan Steverson article

Would it not be good etiquette to notify editors who have objected to the proposed deletion of an article of the AfD discussion?

Judging by the criteria used to justify the deletion of the article, especially the last comment at the AfD discussion page, then by that logic all of the other clan pages within Wikipedia (there are many) are candidates for deletion.

The article very clearly explained the history of the clan and significant members, however, I do agree it lacked enough relevant third party references. But to suggest that we don't exist at all is an insult to your intelligence.

So - there we have it - a future project for me if time permits - namely - to revive the article - complete with relevant references - and convince you and the other two that an article about my clan is just as notable as an article about any other clan. What, after all, makes one clan notable and another not notable? How fast they breed (sheer numbers - like MacDonald)? Notoriety of one member (like the usurper Macbeth)? Or perhaps we should also consider what great contributions individual members have made to society (like George Stephenson, for example)? I know, I know ... you'll give the stock Wikipedia answer ... third party verifiable references ... so ... until then ... to be continued... Cheers! Garth of the Forest (talk) 05:45, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

Sorry Phil, but i've indented one of your !votes at Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Malcolmxl5. I guess its been a busy day :D - Happy editing :-) John Sloan (talk) 13:08, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! PhilKnight (talk) 13:10, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

John Michell Article and Talk Page

Please take a look at this article. There is a serious attempt to nullify and water down all credentials of everyone who is mentioned in this article. Christopher Gibbs, an artist, gallery owner (see the link for his artwork and a long list of his teaching posts, shows and juror experience. The ditor who remove my information on this did a 3 revert edit on me. I do think that DougWeller (who has followed me to my talk page, lost some of my edits, and has followed me to other editors talk page, who has turned the discussion page into a chat board has encouraged this beyond reason discussion of the article. SageMab (talk) 15:08, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Teleocichla

Hi PhilKnight -

The anonymous editor who keeps adding unsourced claims (and won't discuss the issue) has returned to Teleocichla. Wondering if I could seek your advice on the matter? MidgleyDJ (talk) 21:06, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MidgleyDJ, I've protected the page for a month. PhilKnight (talk) 21:09, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neptune

I've recreated Neptune (planet) which you deleted, I can't see what the old page said so I don't know why it was deleted or who requested it. Pirate^Argh!!1! 03:28, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pirate, I've restored the history, and it seems the version I deleted was a redirect to a temporary location that was detected by SQLBot. Obviously, I should have just fixed the redirect. Thanks for recreating it, and for letting me know. PhilKnight (talk) 15:06, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFARB#Eastern Mediterranean University

Your input is appreciated. --Adoniscik^{(t, c)} 07:04, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Technical metal deletion

Thanks for closing up the debate regarding this article, but I'm wondering if something else needs to be done: the article still seems to exist as it was. Is it just awaiting deletion, or was it because of the capitalisation of "metal" in the discussion page as opposed to the page itself? Thanks, and apologies if I'm just jumping the gun. Prophaniti (talk) 21:15, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Prophaniti, are you sure it still exists? Have a look at this link, which indicates that it's been deleted. PhilKnight (talk) 21:18, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick reply. Looking at that, I guess it must've been the capitalisation thing, because it's definitely still here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technical_metal

Yep, a capitalisation thing. I've deleted the other version. PhilKnight (talk) 21:34, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for your help Philknight :) Prophaniti (talk) 21:43, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just for you

with me Its hard for me to notice mistakes and as it seems about one on nine reverts are not vandalism, because I have gotten hell from other users for what I percieved was vandalism, perhaps its just I leave "edit summary" blank. I wouldent call it "accusations" however I think the summary usualy defines my actions, perhaps when I see "vandalism" I should just leave the summary blank or with just revert. have a nice day I realy mean it, how do you think I could get rid of vandalism more efficently how do you do it? --Zaharous (talk) 21:24, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Glen Gilmore

I don't think that this editor is in an edit war (at least as he is probably utterly unfamiliar with the concept). I think he is trying to add content in good faith but doesn't understand what should -- and should not -- be in an article. He has content, some of which would be useful, but he seems not to understand that pasting his version over what's there is not the way to do it .A 3RR block might technically be correct but would probably be inappropriate at this point in time given this editor's levels of ignorance of Wikipedia protocols. Any other suggestions on the Glen Gilmore article would be greatly appreciated. Alansohn (talk) 22:01, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

213.42.2.24

wow, harsh for a proxy. Some edits the last few days seemed legit... -- lucasbfr ^talk 14:29, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lucasbfr, there have been 2 previous blocks for a week, however I hear what you're saying. I've reduced the block to 12 hours. PhilKnight (talk) 14:37, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I personally issue 3 hours blocks most of the time on shared IPs (that's enough to drive hit and run vandals away), escalation can always be done if they start again immediately after the block :). -- lucasbfr ^talk 14:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment about me on the John Michell talk page

Hi, can I ask you what you meant when you said I don't understand OR? Sagemab (who I would say really doesn't understand OR), keeps quoting it to me telling me I need to learn WIkipedia policies. I am pretty sure none of my edits on the article constituted OR, and I really think I understand the difference between an encyclopedia article and an essay. Thanks Doug Weller (talk) 15:01, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And thanks for fixing the Prince's school ref, I knew there must be a better way to do it but I admit that some of the reference formats I still don't understand. But I'm trying to improve my knowledge of them! Is there a WP page that described that particular format? Doug Weller (talk) 15:08, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I wish Sagemab would take up the suggesting of getting adopted, he is enthusiastic and that's great, it just needs to be channelled. Doug Weller (talk) 15:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

John Michell (writer) article

Hi PhilKnight, thanks for your help with this JM article. You are right about my comment and I have stated so in history, thanks for the guideline. What would be the proper edit summary in this case? Please take a look at the article again Moreschi keeps removing this quote. I also think a lot of OR is going on with this article and would like to know the proper way to rectify this. I keep remindng various editors of OR and BLP but they seem to not want to reread Wiki's wise guidelines. I keep rereading them myself. SageMab (talk) 15:39, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please help restore the JM block quote. There is so much slanted towards a particular viewpoint information going on in the discussion page from editors who have no familiar with either the subject matter or the work itself that misunderstanding results and OR keeps getting inserted into the article itself. I do not know if it is intentional or misguided but it is messing up the article. The block of detailed information quote also tells the reader what they need to know about John Michell. SageMab (talk) 15:48, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Drake and Josh

It looks like we both nominated for deletion at the same time.

As there are now two nominations open at once I suggest we non-admin close one of them and transfer the comments from it to the other.

Ros0709 (talk) 22:24, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As the second should probably be the one to close last and it is the one in the daily log I'll non-admin close your nomination if you do not mind. Ros0709 (talk) 22:26, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. PhilKnight (talk) 22:27, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now done - thanks. Ros0709 (talk) 22:37, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And perhaps if I'd noticed you are an admin sooner I'd have let you do it better :-) Ros0709 (talk) 22:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]