User talk:Anetode/archive 11


Deletion of Young Arcan and the Garden of Loc

I logged in to Wiki today to continue editing my article concerning the novel Young Arcan and the Garden of Loc and was surprised to find it had been deleted. I do not understand the reason for this, as all of the information concerning the book and its author was legitimate, and more so the article was not yet completed. I have spent a week now creating this article, with contributions from the Fantasy Taskforce, who had no issues with the articles content.

The reason given for deleting the subject was that the topic was not notable enough to warrant having a Wiki article dedicated to it. I am not sure how one can go about making such a unilateral determination without a consensus from other editors or those in the subject matter’s field. I feel this decision was arbitrary and made in haste and could have been handled in a more professional manner with respect for those taking their own free time to expand the Wikipedia database.

I would appreciate having the article undeleted, and in the future if such a determination should be reached again, having the proposed deletion reviewed rather than tagging the article for speedy deletion.


proposal

I put a proposal at User:CBM/NFCC Proposal‎. Please feel free to edit it. — Carl (CBM · talk) 19:09, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

If everyone is mostly satisfied with User:CBM/NFCC Proposal‎, I think we should make it live while it's still relevant. Would you be willing to support the wording as it is right now? It's been sitting untouched for a few days. I also made a mockup of an image description page at User:CBM/Sandbox. — Carl (CBM · talk) 17:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Template:Unreferenced

Please remove the icon you just added to Template:Unreferenced, there is an active discussion and consensus has not been reached. Jeepday (talk) 04:22, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I can tell you don't care about debate, but you made the change to a protected template and I would appreciate it if you would undo the change. Thanks Jeepday (talk) —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 04:29, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Deleted Archive Page

I found the following, but I don't understand what happened. At this point, all I want is to review the deleted material. Then I'd be interested in doing whatever is necessary so that the archived pages are safe from bots.

Notice: You are re-creating a page that was deleted.
You should consider whether it is appropriate to continue editing this page. Information is available on what to do if a page you created is deleted. The deletion log for this page is provided here for convenience:

I clicked on TW -- don't know what it is, don't care ... but if this edit summary is saying that I'd done something other than save to archive in an unremarkable way, there is some sort of error. --Ooperhoofd 12:21, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I now understand part of what I myself could have done differently. Maybe this is one of those small (but important) lessons which are best learned the hard way. --Ooperhoofd 23:15, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Meganfoxjpg.jpg

Antedote-

Bohemiandelight here, uploader of Meganfoxjpg. I am writing to clarify the deletion of this image.

The producer of the image has given me express permission to assist in publishing her images for Wiki pages. I contacted her previous to uploading the image and received her endorsement.

I will be uploading more of her images which are typically celebrity photos.

I want to avoid future deletions and seek your advise as to why the image was deleted and how to prevent future complications.

As far as my research has shown the image license establishes free attributed use of the image. Combined with her specific permission for use in this forum; I do not see where the problem is.

I do not want to be divisive or contradict Wiki policies, yet I am intent on assisting Wiki's content by providing images that are suitable for use on pages that benefit from their submission.

Please advise, Thanks,

Bohemiandelight 20:55, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Wow, Anetode, thanks for the very thorough response!

I am in the process of contacting the author with the information you provided.

It is most likely that she will decide to change the licensing on Flickr. Otherwise I will forward a permission letter as advised.

I apprteciate your help and time on this matter.

She has a ton of very high quality images that will add to Wiki's appearance and presence on the web.

Thanks, Bohemiandelight 21:43, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Transcend Tsonic

Hey dude, all the images of the Transcend Tsonic, that were uploaded by me 3 days ago, are free to use for non-commercial reasons, so can you please change the copyright status, as I will be going out of town soo. --Rsrikanth05 15:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC) Thank you, I'll try and see what I can do. --Rsrikanth05 09:26, 22 September 2007 (UTC) I'll take a few pictures, at the store and post them, that way, I can release them under the GNU license right? --Rsrikanth05 09:29, 22 September 2007 (UTC) -Okay Thanks. --Rsrikanth05 09:34, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Also, how did you make that signature of yours?--Rsrikanth05 09:34, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD "The Fragments

Even though I'm listed as the creator, I merely moved it to avoid the obvious naming conflicts. I've notified the original creator and voted to delete per nominator. Thanks. Mbisanz 06:09, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Hey

Thanks for keeping an eye on my userpage and talk! Much appreciated :) ~ Riana ⁂ 12:34, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Just want to say

Thank you for deleting my bands page, and not giving them a chance. That was very considerate of you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Forever88 (talk • contribs) 01:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Nice find!

On these photos at Flickr. I notice that a lot of the actresses aren't identified by name in the pictures, could you use some help from the WP:P* people on identifying folks? Videmus Omnia Talk 03:06, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Monica Bellucci

Please note that your language in my talk pages was particularly disrespectful. Please behave.--Barateiro 21:21, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

You said that one does not add photographs of a famous woman's breasts because you find them more titillating. That is not the issue; and that's precisely where you are disrespectful. Her bresats are more famous than herself, and her reputation is mainly because of her mammary glands. --Barateiro 21:29, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
As you have noticed, I always try to explain facts to users. When they do not understand, and instead suggest that "revolution" is a better way to change things than consensus, it means mediation is just a waste of time. He is just about to be blocked for 3RR, from what I see. -- ReyBrujo 21:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Good block. I'm afraid that was the most efficient solution, I saw no sign of any willingness to abide by community rules on his part. Videmus Omnia Talk 21:44, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

commons ok

Hi there - I noticed you put a template on George Reids page... it would be so great if you could go through the Prime Ministers of Australia and get as many of the PD-Australia/PD-Australia-CC images in to commons as possible. If you don't mind the work, any objections? Timeshift 02:30, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Cheers!! Timeshift 01:50, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
If you could tag this one that i've replaced/fixed, that would be very much appreciated. Thanks. Timeshift 09:31, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
This one seems to have run in to trouble as someone has already uploaded it. How do I fix the bot? Timeshift 00:47, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Would you be so kind as to tag the four images on Kevin Rudd? Thanks heaps if you can, keep up the good work :-) Timeshift 12:13, 27 September 2007 (UTC) If you're willing to nominate me that would be great! Thanks! Timeshift 12:34, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Am I not looking hard enough or has the source pages for the Kevin Rudd images been removed during commonsing? Timeshift 15:17, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! Fixed some dead links and stuff, all looking good now. Timeshift 06:07, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

thank you for all your help last week

I appreciate all your attention on my first day at Wikipedia and I look forward to learning alot from your efforts here.

Thanks for the 'education' and now I understand the responsibility of notability and reliable sources when adding content to the Wikipedia Encyclopedia.

cheersErichnwise 14:16, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


Working Man's Clothes

Antedote-

colewimpee here, creator of wikipedia page content titled Working Man's Clothes deleted by your account on 22 September for reasons "failed to clarify importance or significance of subject"

what more clarification was needed? it seems the information included in the opening "..a multiple award winning (New York Innovative Theatre Awards) company in New York would justify the subject for Wikipedia".

can you elaborate on what reasons you deemed it fit for deletion and what would be needed for further clarification of significance?

regards, C —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.224.0.122 (talk) 22:45, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Meetup RSVP

Minnesota Meetup
Sunday, 2007-10-07, 1:00 p.m. (13:00)
Pracna on Main
117 Main SE, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Map
Please pass this on! RSVP here.

Jamie

The photo is from Halloween 4, and its a cropped screenshot. I'll add that into the page info though.--CyberGhostface 22:31, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Radio Kaleidoscope

I think G12 does apply because the linked website states it's copyright. I deleted it and now will restore it so that this isn't viewed as a wheel war - but there it is. Carlossuarez46 00:11, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Any way, it was more in the nature of an edit conflict - I checked the history - you weren't there (yet) then went on to complete the deletion and in the between you declined speedy. Oh well, no harm no foul. :-) Carlossuarez46 00:18, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
    • I chimed in at the afd - I'm still not convinced that the author of the article (the user name matches a former DJ's handle and is called Steve T.) is the same as the website's copyright owner. If not, the article's author may not have a right to submit it under GFDL - but that's a lawyer question. :-P Carlossuarez46 00:33, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Salting an IP's talk page?

Granted, it's clear that 66.141.23.10 was used by banned user Mmbabies (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), but salting that IP's talk page seemed to go too far. He's not using a static IP, so the potential for collateral damage is really high here. And I say this as someone who's dealt with him fairly often. Blueboy96 13:17, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

It's a lot worse than pelican-shit trolling ... this guy has also made graphic death threats against several celebrities. That's why some of us who know his tactics have been somewhat jumpy whenever he shows up. Blueboy96 16:31, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Family Guy screenshots.

Still violated WP:NFCC. I don't really think the FUR is adequate either even with the article name. Will (talk) 08:45, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

It violated 10(c) without article name. With, it still reads very boilerplate, and it might violate 3(b) right now, as "dvdrip" can be applied to any .avi file ripped from a DVD. Will (talk) 18:25, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Team Hybrid

Anetode, you've deleted my page, Team Hybrid, and I do realize it sounds like an advertisment. Would you allow me to repost the page if I reworded everything? Were there anything specific I should have definitely left out? Thanks. --Chapman Chan 01:52, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

My recent RfA

I am sorry you felt it necessary not to support my RfA at this time. As you probably know, my RfA did not succeed. I will attempt to get some more experience and diversify myself before applying again in two month's time. I hope I will have allayed your concerns by then, but if not, feel free to comment the way you feel you should. Thank you for participating in my RfA. -- Cobi(t|c|b|cn) 18:36, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Psychiatric ethics DAB

Hi, Anetode. Noticed your comment, in the 2nd AfD on psychiatric abuse, about the merit in deleting the DAB I'd set up. You're welcome to move to delete it, as you deem appropriate. If you don't mind, I would prefer that you move to do so thru an AfD (i.e., not PROD or speedy). Also, I would ask that you wait until after the current AfD is settled. Thanks very much. Best wishes, HG | Talk 23:46, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time for your thoughtful reply. I agree with most everything you said. I disagree somewhat regarding the DAB, insofar as it serves to disambiguate -- differentiate and keep at a distance -- the mainstream and the incompatible (aka "fringe") discourses. Furthermore, once it is set up, then it helps record and clarify the situation for future editors, so they won't have to deal with any future efforts (as well meaning as they may be) along the lines of the current article. Catch my drift? That said, I won't fall on my sword to save the dab. Be well. Thanks again, HG | Talk 13:30, 12 October 2007 (UTC)


Jack Daly

I just noticed, as a result of a link removal, that an article on actor Jack Daly was deleted. I just was wondering if something might be done to get this undeleted. While I don't recall ever actually reading the article, and it might be a mess, I can attest that he was a notable B-picture actor of the 1950s. Perhaps I can whip it into shape?--Silverscreen 21:15, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Ha! The jokes on me. I guess it was a bad link. Thanks for clarifying.--Silverscreen 15:57, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


Uluguru Bush-shrike

I requested this page to be deleted as the word does not have a: "-" between them. I hope you wont redirect the page again as there is no point in having this page as another already exists. Besides, I was the author of that page. AliFazal 11:53, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Rumi111

Hey you, you removed my image rumi111.jpg from my own userpage. I am to accept this even though those pics of Rumi were granted to use and all, it is only me who havent figured out how to use the proper licensing and all wich ever one I use ends up with warnings of deletion anyways, (those damn uploads). Anyways I will do a REmake of that pic of "Rumi" and use it on my userpage, please dont delete my works! Thanx Cyrus111 12:18, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Rumi111

BTW here is the link to the website [1] as you see it is ok to use the pic. Think you can show me the correct lic.? Thanx Cyrus111 12:33, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of LightSpeed.

I don't understand why the article I created was deleted. The reasons stated for deleting it were totally and utterly invalid. If you don't believe me about LightSpeed look it up! I use it every day at work!

Do some research before making a decision, and stop being a mindless automaton!

I don't appreciate my attempt at making Wikipedia better being deleted.

Google it! http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=LightSpeed+Mac+OS+X&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

Notice how it is the SECOND ENTRY returned when you google POS for Mac OS X?? http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=POS+Mac+OS+X&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

Do your research before deleting some ones work and show a little respect for the people that try to make Wiki Better.

If you had a problem with the page, let me know! Don't just go and delete it!

Deletion of Karpophobia

I don't understand why the article for Karpophobia was deleted. "Obvious hoax" was listed as the reason. It clearly was not a hoax. Karpophobia (fear of wrists) is a real thing. I know people who have it, and you probably do to. Try Googling it if you don't think so. Please explain to me why it was deleted. Thanks. ---Julian (http://beautifulrecords.org/) 19:25, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

It's true. Fear of body parts exist. My girlfriend is afraid of feet, but only to a certain extent. Tyler Warren (talk/contribs) 10:50, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Deletion Of Talia Madison

This article is based on a notable wrestler, and there was a reason for it to be deleted back before Talia was in TNA. Now that she's in TNA, why you deleted it again, even though it was brought up to Wikipedia standards, is beyond me. I am willing to fight this to the end. Tyler Warren (talk/contribs) 10:50, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch

Someone vandalized my Userspace! But a little angel came along and fixed it! Thank you! You can thank others by using {{subst:Vangel}}! ~~~~Phgao 15:14, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use image response

Hi, I've posted a note regarding your invalid fair use warning on my talk page. Tuvok[T@lk/Improve me] 03:51, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Help

Could you help me with this? - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Runewiki777&oldid=166809202 I added the rationale but according to that bot, something is still wrong. I don't get what. RuneWiki777 19:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Whew. Thank you so much. RuneWiki777 20:04, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For you revert of vandalism by User:Pteep, I award you the Barnstar of Reversion as a matter of thanks. Chris 20:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Rationale for speedy deletion of Image:Xbox360 scratch.PNG

Dear Anetode, on the history page Image:Xbox360 scratch.PNG I saw that you made this image a candidate for speedy deletion because it has "a fair use rationale that is disputed" because of WP:NFCC#10c, "each fair-use rationale must include a link to the specific article in which fair use of the image is claimed.". As to that I can comment that:

  • The article where the rationale for the fair use of this picture can be found is "Xbox 360 technical problems", and in particular the comment no 37, which points to a broadcast of the Dutch public broadcasting company VARA, which in a broadcast from a the TC program KASSA, which is publicly as a YouTube movie, published by the VARA itself, as can be seen on their website here [2]. The picture itself is simply a screenshot of a single frame from the movie itself.
  • The picture is -not- replaceable with any other generic picture, because its not simply any random scratched CD, but is the visible proof of the result of the tests that were conducted by the VARA/KASSA.
  • I therefore feel that this picture is irreplaceable, and is in the public domain, and should therefore -not- be a candidate for speedy deletion! With best regards, Mahjongg 23:46, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Dear Anetode, thank you for your reply on my talk page. Generally talking I have to say that I understand your point of view. Still, I have a few more comments:
  • Firstly, the material (video) does not actually fall under the copyright status of the VARA web-site, because the VARA itself uploaded the movie (with added English subtitles) to YouTube! See the VARA web-site (the link provided above). Not that this matters much, (YouTube will undoubtedly also have a copyright disclaimer, although I could not find it) but at the least it shows that the VARA did not mind that the material was used on another web-site than its own.
  • Secondly, Yes, if the picture was placed in the alinea about the generic disk scratching problem you would be right. But the picture is not meant for that but is placed next to the paragraph about the series of tests the VARA did, and in the video it is presented as -the- proof that the Xbox 360 will scratch disks spontaneously. Therefore it does -not- have the same status as any other scratched disk, not even your scratched copy of perfect dark zero :-) .
Whether this means that the use of this picture falls under "fair use" I do not know for sure. I am not a lawyer (I am not even from the USA), so I am not too familiar with American jurisprudence. What I understand about American "fair use" policy is that it was mainly meant to make it impossible to prevent use of material for satirical or critical use, which in this case clearly is not the case. However, I would be -very- surprised if the VARA would object to its use.
I hope this clears up my POV further for you. Mahjongg 21:23, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Dear Anetode, by "the first criterion of NFCC", I think you refer to the availability of another picture that -is- completely free, and therefore I assume that you are of the opinion that just -any- old picture of a scratched disk would do. While I certainly respect that point of view, I still am of the opinion that the original poster used -this- particular picture to demonstrate the proof the VARA had that the Xbox 360 will spontaneously scratch disks, and in that sense there is no other picture that the VARA published of -this- particular scratched disk. But maybe you are right and nobody will care. Mahjongg 15:20, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Inappropriete external links[3]

Hi Anetode, I'm retired(so could you please respond on this page, as my talk page is protected) but regarding the Bill Gates page, sorry for adding inappropriete external links to the article. I now know that they're aren't reliable, and don't meet WP:EL guidelines, either. Again, please accept my apologies.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 01:17, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[4]--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 10:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Don't worry about it, I can't even remember the edit you're referring to. But hey, you appeared to enjoy contributing here, have you thought of coming back? I must admit that I'm not aware of the circumstances behind your departure, yet looking at your contributions I see you've jumped back in now and again. There's always more to do at Wikipedia, your help would be most welcome! ˉˉanetode╦╩ 18:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

TheCapt

Sorry about that! Seems I was tagging right as you were deleting. --Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 19:55, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Wendi deng murdoch christopher peterson.jpg

Thanks for your message. On the image creator's website, several images, for example this one are made available under a Wikipedia friendly license, so it is not possible to assume that he allows derivatives of Image:Wendi deng murdoch christopher peterson.jpg when the image source states a CC-BY-ND-3.0 license. He really needs to clarify the situation by updating his website. I have left a message for him on his talk page. In the meantime, the image may stay here under a claim of fair use in a limited number of articles. Papa November 00:35, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

If the user wants to allow a different license on Wikipedia, he should send an email to OTRS as there's no way of confirming his real world identity. I'll assume good faith and leave this, but I hope he corrects the license on his website to remove the issue. Papa November 09:44, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. I'm not concerned by most self-uploaded free images - 99% of the time, it can simply be taken on good faith that the uploader is the creator. However, the fact that this particular image is available from the creator's website with a more restrictive license tag makes me think this is either an OTRS job or should be clarified on the creator's website. If the creator released the image here under a free license, it seems strange that he would release it under a more restrictive license elsewhere. The No Derivatives license on the creator's website seems useless if it's OK to make derivatives when obtained from Wikipedia. Papa November 02:28, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Prin logo.png

Hi! Why do you do such unformat inscription with tags </br>? --Aleksandrit 12:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Привет Александр, I made that edit in order to address BetacommandBot's WP:NFCC#10c concern, the image description page has to link to the article (Pringles) where the image is used. The formatting was a personal change, you are free to alter it, but please don't revert it or remove the link itself. Cheers, ˉˉanetode╦╩ 16:47, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, all is clear now ~ Aleksandrit 17:23, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Vicente Fernandez image

Please see my comments concerning this photo on the discussion page.--Lyricmac 17:35, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Ewa Sonnet image

You wrote, "Great job, just checking in since you originally uploaded this image under a non-commercial license." I don't understand, is any action necessary on my part? Briankaz 08:46, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Vf4arcflyer.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Vf4arcflyer.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 20:50, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

My (Remember the dot)'s RfA

I never thanked you for participating in my RfA a couple of weeks ago. Thank you for your support, though unfortunately the request was closed as "no consensus". I plan to run again at a later time, and I hope you will support me again then.

Thanks again! —Remember the dot (talk) 06:38, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Virgin Killer.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Virgin Killer.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. VanTucky Talk 21:17, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Classification of admins

Hi Anetode. Please consider adding your admin username to the growing list at Classification of admins. Best! -- Jreferee t/c 23:00, 28 November 2007 (UTC)