User talk:Nick/Archive14{{ConfirmationOTRS|source=URL|otrs=Long Number}} A barnstar for you!
TalkbackHello, Nick. You have new messages at Antiochus the Great's talk page.
Message added 13:20, 22 April 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Antiochus the Great (talk) 13:20, 22 April 2013 (UTC) Hakan Erbaslar at ANHi Nick. For the sake of peace now that you've dug out some references for them, I'm going to ignore his battleground mentality and his refactoring of my comment. De728631 (talk) 16:22, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Hakan, againHakan has once again deleted the second table from List of countries by military expenditure now claiming it is your decision to remove the second table (obviously not true). I don't know why he feels the various discussion pages are a place to do battle rather than communicate in a productive manner and to be honest I am not too keen to engage in any sort of discussion with him. He has a very contentious attitude and myself and other editors have already tried to reason with him. As other editors also feel the same as I, it cannot be all my fault can it? At the moment I am currently active on various other articles and article talk pages and I don't really have time to update the second table as per the updated SIPRI citation you provided, but I will get around to it soon. Thus far, Hakan has clearly shown he has no interest in updating the second table but rather he just wants it deleted without consensus.Antiochus the Great (talk) 19:48, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Roger Windley's scrapyardHi Nick. A useful update at the Pan Am Flight 103 article. But are we now in effect saying that the Daily Mail story was false? Or is it just that the acrapyard storage is no longer considered notable? Both of those possibilities seem a little unlikely to me. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:21, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
???I am not "boasting" or "gloating" about blocking or banning users. I saw someone else do it, I figured I would, too. I do not brag about it, though. Alex2564 (talk) 01:01, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 2Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tayside House, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Refurbishment (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:33, 2 May 2013 (UTC) Hope you don't mind...But I changed the bullet into a numerical for your neutral comment at Legoktm's RfA. It seems clear to me that you had intended as such to begin with, and I went ahead and fixed it for you. If this was in error, feel free to revert my edit. =) Kurtis (talk) 04:20, 3 May 2013 (UTC) Thank youThe new notification system made it impossible to properly communicate with the IP.—Ryulong (琉竜) 10:39, 3 May 2013 (UTC) Thanks for deleting survivalcraft, the page I made. I couldn't find a way to do so and it was bugging me since it was a useless page Techbrewson (talk) 19:04, 16 May 2013 (UTC) NotificationsJust stopping by to say thanks for your kind words on the talkpage :). It's a rather rough atmosphere, and commentators like you are one of the things keeping me sane. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 14:20, 6 May 2013 (UTC) A barnstar for you!
Regarding the Creation of page "SCAD College of Engineering and Technology"hi you have speed deleted the page i have created on "SCAD College of Engineering and Technology" due to some copy rights problem, so now i am unable to recreate that page. how can i create that page now and i assure you that i will follow the rules will creating that page....GentalMan (talk) 03:13, 16 May 2013 (UTC) I will not make any copyrights issue, for that you can see this page (simple:SCAD College of Engineering and Technology) which is also created by me, so now can you allow me to create that page, RegardsGentalMan (talk) 05:56, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Project QwortyHi there. You've been in discussions on my talk page regarding Qworty, so might wish to contribute ideas, etc., to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:NaymanNoland (section: "Project Qworty"). If you haven't read today's Salon article addressing this disaster, it's here: http://www.salon.com/2013/05/17/revenge_ego_and_the_corruption_of_wikipedia/ NaymanNoland (talk) 22:06, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
In response to Rak-Tai's accusationsI wrote the following on Rak-Tai's talk page a few days ago after he had reposted his rant against me for the umpteenth time:
Rak-Tai also accuses me of "enlisting fellow cronies" to harass him. I assume he is referring to the people who were involved in the AfD discussion concerning the Worldwide Faith Missions. I can't prove this but I have never met or contacted these people prior to the AfD discussion other than to inform them (because they were involved in another AfD discussion on an article that Rak-Tai had written) of this new AfD. I contacted all parties involved, also those who voted "keep" for the Johannes Maas article. Strangely enough though, in the AfD's concerning Rak-Tai's articles, new users and IP-users, who have never edited before or thereafter, suddenly crop up in support of Rak-Tai's articles....
Article notability notificationHello. This message is to inform you that an article that you wrote, Mathew Knowles, has been recently tagged with a notability notice. This means that it may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Please note that articles which do not meet these criteria may be merged, redirected, or deleted. Please consider adding reliable, secondary sources to the article in order to establish the topic's notability. You may find the following links useful when searching for sources: Find sources: "Mathew Knowles" – news · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images. Thank you for editing Wikipedia! VoxelBot 19:45, 24 May 2013 (UTC) MessageI left you a message on my talk page. Matty.007 16:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC) A pie for you!
Need helpHi, I am editor on the duchess of Cornwall's page and recently got into the edit war with another editor, you also posted on the articles talk page on the incident, anyways the other editor just recently deleted half of the article's contribution which I and others editors made, basically the editor is saying all those information was copyrighted, I thinks its best if a third party intervenes, and I am wondering if you could so to solve this out [2] this is what the editor deleted (Monkelese (talk) 21:13, 8 June 2013 (UTC)) Hi Nick, can you please add protection template on that page? -sarvajna (talk) 19:09, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
Block requestCan you please block User:Daredevil7 with an expiry set of indefinite, because its user was vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.171.176.131 (talk) 01:33, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
BlahTest Nick (talk) 19:17, 29 June 2013 (UTC) Talkback - SDPatrolBot minor issueHello, Nick. You have new messages at Kingpin13's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Preciousclarification I translated, duck attack on the German Main page ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:39, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted article talk page left live?I'm referring to the the Montagu article. Talk pages go away when articles are deleted/redirected. See no reason for an exception in this case, particularly given how the talk page is being used at the moment.Dan Murphy (talk) 20:32, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Alexander Montagu.2C 13th Duke of Manchester and canvassing at Wikipediocracy. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:35, 30 June 2013 (UTC) Before the ANI discussion becomes overheated, I'm going to suggest that you reverse your deletion of the article. You made a clear and critical error in your close. As one of the news articles cited in the discussion [3] pointed out. the subject was a member of the House of Lords as a result of the title he held prior to his (supposed) accession to the dukedom. This article is an AP piece (out of Canada) (see [4]) and clearly qualifies as a reliable source. As both DGG and I pointed out, this demonstrates notability as a member of a national legislature, and your close recognizes that standard (but erroneously presumed that his membership hinged on the dukeship rather than his prior title). Since no one disputed either the fact of his prior title nor his membership thereby in the House of Lords, the article should have been kept. All the huggermugger over his status as Duke of Manchester was irrelevant, and obscured what should have been the determining issue. Any content issues could have been resolved by routine editing processes. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 21:57, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Just a quick note - it's midnight here. I'm more than happy to continue this discussion tomorrow, but if any administrator wishes to reverse the deletion because the feel notability has been established (especially if it becomes clear Alexander Montagu has sat in the House of Lords or has had some sort of legislative role in the UK), please feel free, just let me know and let me have a source, this whole thing has rather piqued my interest somewhat. Nick (talk) 23:01, 30 June 2013 (UTC) Hi, I noticed that shortly before you closed this Afd, the page in question was moved to Alexander Montagu. So that page was deleted and a new page Alexander Montagu, 13th Duke of Manchester was created as a redirect. This had the effect of deleting the page history. It seems entirely possible that this person may become notable in the future, especially considering his involvement in financial services and his jail time for fraud. As you said in the Afd, the keep/delete debate was fairly evenly balanced. So can you restore the old page history to Alexander Montagu, 13th Duke of Manchester in accordance with WP:PRESERVE ? Thanks, Dingo1729 (talk) 23:16, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Arbcom caseI cited your statement about IRC canvassing at the current ArbCom case (request for arbitration). Unfortunately, a clerk who already has participated in the case as a community member hid it. I believe that your witnessing was important and should not be hidden, but I cannot cite it without it being hidden again. Perhaps you can cite it? Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:20, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
TalkbackHello, Nick. You have new messages at Jetstreamer's talk page.
Message added 21:58, 10 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Jetstreamer Talk 21:58, 10 July 2013 (UTC) Page protection on Narendra ModiHello, Nick: the biographical article on Narendra Modi has been locked since 23 May 2013. I would like to request that the page protection be removed to facilitate changes to the page that are not under dispute. It is likely that the old disputes might flare up once again once the page is unprotected, therefore I would like to propose a one revert restriction (1RR) for all users be enforced for an indefinite period of time. Additionally, we have consensus on replacing the present infobox image with a free licensed image available on the subject's Flickr account. Would you be so kind as to make the change? — Nearly Headless Nick {c} 05:24, 11 July 2013 (UTC) Thank you, Nick. It is possible that the page may require semi-protection, in the event of which, I will seek your counsel. — Nearly Headless Nick {c} 07:48, 12 July 2013 (UTC) Regarding deletion of page PJ NormanHi Nick, We see that you've deleted the page for one of our artists, PJ Norman citing: (A7: No explanation of significance (real person/animal/organization/web content/organized event)) We have to dispute this, Norman is a real person with documented proofs of his contributions in the fields of music, photography and literature. If you feel the page did not fully explain the significance of Norman's work we would be happy to add to it along with any suggestions you might have. Please kindly reinstate the page. Many thanks. 100mrecords (talk) 20:12, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Umm...[5]. Your interpretation of the blocking policy, especially for an admin with your tenure, needs work. Cheers. Doc talk 10:52, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
"Baiting", widely construed, is not any sort of policy violation. It can be construed to be tantamount to harassment, which needs strong evidence. Your block of me would have been overturned. Read up on baiting before threatening good-faith editors with punitive blocks. Doc talk 11:08, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
NoticeHello. Please participate in the current discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Disruptive editing by Darkness Shines. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 19:47, 13 July 2013 (UTC) Phil MickelsonI saw you made the page locked down totally and reverted edits that had Mickelson winning the BO already. Fine, except you also inadvertently undid this edit of mine[6]. As I noted on this person's talk page[7], Mickelson was eliminated with birdie not par at the 2000 Byron Nelson. Also by locking down the article, you're keeping a legit golf editor(me) from doing the necessary edits when the Mickelson win is official....William 16:36, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Jaguar XJ220Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Jaguar XJ220 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:26, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Mail CallHello, Nick. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. at any time by removing the Kiefer.Wolfowitz 15:06, 27 July 2013 (UTC) Your GA nomination of Jaguar XJ220The article Jaguar XJ220 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Jaguar XJ220 for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:48, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!
@Nick: Did you notice the list of participants?
It's heartwarming to see such a list of IRC regulars looking after the 7 years old who want to edit Wikipedia. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:49, 1 August 2013 (UTC) Free images (Obsolted a Vector)[6=1&templates_yes=Vector+version+available&templates_no=protected+generic+image+name%0D%0Aprotected+image%0D%0App-protected%0D%0App-template%0D%0ACopy+to+Wikimedia+Commons%0D%0ADeleted+on+Commons%0D%0ADo+not+move+to+Commons%0D%0AKeep+local%0D%0ANow+Commons%0D%0Adb-nowcommons%0D%0AShadowsCommons%0D%0AConvert+to+SVG+and+copy+to+Wikimedia+Commons%0D%0Am-cropped%0D%0Ac-uploaded%0D%0Affd%0D%0Apuf%0D%0Absr%0D%0Afile+at+CCI%0D%0Adi-no+license%0D%0Adi-no+permission%0D%0Adi-no+source%0D%0Awrong-license%0D%0AFree+in+US+media+%0D%0ANon-free+in+US%0D%0Aout+of+copyright+in%0D%0AOTRS+pending%0D%0AOTRS+received%0D%0AWikipedia+screenshot&sortby=uploaddate&ext_image_data=1&file_usage_data=1|This query] Most of these should ideally be at commons, your assistance greatly appreciated. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:30, 5 August 2013 (UTC) You've got mail!Hello, Nick. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 20:32, 14 August 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. at any time by removing the AGK [•] 20:32, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Overwriting my editNick, please do not overwrite another editor's comment as you did in this revision, even if you disagree with how often that editor is editing the page. CaseyPenk (talk) 16:01, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Article Feedback Tool updateHey Nick. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles. We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article. Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 21:34, 1 September 2013 (UTC) A barnstar for you!
Evidence phase open - Manning naming disputeDear Nick. This is just a quick courtesy notice. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute/Evidence. Please add your evidence by September 19, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Seddon talk 23:29, 8 September 2013 (UTC) Talkback from Technical 13Hello, Nick. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 September 19.
Message added 13:51, 19 September 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Notifying all users that were involved in the same discussion a few weeks ago which involved deletion of this category. Technical 13 (talk) 13:51, 19 September 2013 (UTC) YatridesIn case you don't have the page watchlisted User_talk:Yatrides#Yatrides_strong_references -- I'm not really following what he's sayin. NE Ent 23:11, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
_____________________________
Yatrides answeringHello Nick, My page about my life of June 06th, 2013 was the result of one labor of 2 years of not professional discussions. I simply claims that can be handed online my biography of 6 June 2013 supplemented irrefutable strong references, scanned, easily visible to the moderators no longer intervene on my life. Their behavior is detrimental to small Collectors whose heritage is made of pictorial elements of my work, but also important Private Collections which can not be undervalued[8]. On 20 September 2013, I have provided all the information, including numerous strong references[9][10][11], more than eighty which prove that my biography of June 6, 2013 was strictly just and unjust it was to change at 14:30 pm. For it is not attempted again to blur the main subject, I demanded that I be formally confirmed that the content of my message of September 20 has been read. This message emphasized the correctness of my formal request to return my biography online from 06 June 2013 (37.594 bytes) before its amendment at 14:30 pm, but comforted by the references scanned. Among these numerous references are several dictionaries,[12][13][14] [15][16] very concise style of which is however more informed about my long life of 82 years, more informed than my Wiki bibliographic page of June 06th, 2013. Although I am not litigious and do not want to be, after 110 days of misunderstanding (June 6 to September 24), this situation really calls for a quick goal. Kindest regards, Georges Yatrides, 24 September 2013 --Yatrides (talk) 15:51, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Reich/Karr deletionI hadn't visted the page recently, so I don't know if it turned into an "attack page" as you claimed, but surely it wasn't a week or so ago. Can you please fill me in on what happened?Two kinds of pork (talk) 19:46, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Greetings. Because you participated in the August 2013 move request regarding this subject, you may be interested in participating in the current discussion. This notice is provided pursuant to Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:40, 4 October 2013 (UTC) Re:HurricaneFan25I believe I've said my piece; I don't see any obstacles to entertaining an appeal, and I similarly don't see any reason to unblock from a personal perspective. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 13:04, 11 October 2013 (UTC) Really need to tone it down a notchI, as a non-administrator, wouldn't have been allowed to get away with this. Why should you? Eric Corbett 22:43, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
TalkbackHello, Nick. You have new messages at Ryulong's talk page.
Message added 19:35, 20 October 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. —Ryulong (琉竜) 19:35, 20 October 2013 (UTC) Commons images on the main pageHello! When placing a Commons image on the main page, please remember to first upload it to the English Wikipedia and tag it with the {{uploaded from Commons}} template. Otherwise, it will not be protected until KrinkleBot detects the transclusion and updates Commons:Auto-protected files/wikipedia/en accordingly. (In this instance, File:Sebastian Vettel 2012 Bahrain GP.jpg remained unprotected for more than five hours, during which it was subject to replacement by a vandal.)
I guess it's easier to automatically protect images used on other wikis since Extension:GlobalUsage was installed in 2009 than it was in 2007 when I wrote cascading protection in the first place. I think you may need to poke somebody from the security team; say, Chris Steipp. Before it's implemented, though, there should be some consideration of what sort of solution you'd like — it's all very well for Commons to protect any images used on the en-wp main page (though I don't know if even that would fly), but imagine scaling that up to lots of other wikis. It seems like Commons wouldn't be too happy if they couldn't edit an image just because it's used on the main page of some tiny Wikipedia. Maybe there's a better way, for example, being able to specify a specific revision of an image to show? Lots of potential software solutions here, and I suspect you'd probably want to investigate options and find consensus before committing to one solution. — Andrew Garrett • talk 07:58, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure. I'd actually say that making a copy of the image is less likely than referring to a specific version, if I'm honest. It wouldn't necessarily mean making work for administrators, though – the version of the image could be determined automatically on-save or by reading the revision time of the page. It could then be updated when the page is null-edited. — Andrew Garrett • talk 01:16, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Commons Candidates[6=1&templates_no=protected+generic+image+name%0D%0Aprotected+image%0D%0App-protected%0D%0App-template%0D%0ACopy+to+Wikimedia+Commons%0D%0ADeleted+on+Commons%0D%0ADo+not+move+to+Commons%0D%0ANotMovedToCommons%0D%0AKeep+local%0D%0Aesoteric+file%0D%0ANow+Commons%0D%0Adb-nowcommons%0D%0AShadowsCommons%0D%0AConvert+to+SVG+and+copy+to+Wikimedia+Commons%0D%0Am-cropped%0D%0Ac-uploaded%0D%0Aduplicate%0D%0Affd%0D%0Apuf%0D%0Absr%0D%0AImagewatermark%0D%0Afile+at+CCI%0D%0Adi-no+license%0D%0Adi-no+permission%0D%0Adi-no+source%0D%0Awrong-license%0D%0AFree+in+US+media+%0D%0ANon-free+in+US%0D%0Aout+of+copyright+in%0D%0AOTRS+pending%0D%0AOTRS+received%0D%0AWikipedia+screenshot%0D%0AVector+version+available%0D%0ANFUR+not+needed&ext_image_data=1&file_usage_data=1 | This list] contains possible images for transfer to Commons, I've been trying to reduce the backlog so it's empty. Your assistance in getting the last few images on it tagged accordingly would be appreciated. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:24, 29 October 2013 (UTC) baitI DID NOT bait eric into a block. He was blocked PRIOR to my comment. He responded to the blocking admin by calling them an impotent sanctimonious arse, which resulted in an extended block. My comment while uncivil has ZERO to do with his block. Gaijin42 (talk) 19:50, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
RE:SignatureFixed (239 characters, no images) ~Frosty (Talk page) 00:04, 1 November 2013 (UTC) Thanks for handling that. I had to go offline. Much obliged. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:55, 13 November 2013 (UTC) New sockpuppetHello! Can you please check the connection betweeen User:Litricsor and User:Depleths? Per behavioral similarities, I am 99% sure that we have the same sock master 86.127.31.73 (talk) 16:06, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
User pageHow about to re do my user page without any Age Info and Stuff Please reply — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tristan.andrade.136 (talk • contribs) 01:26, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Frederick SangerI'd be the first to support his inclusion, but there is an agreed process for this, as all sections on the main page, and admins should follow it. Espresso Addict (talk) 12:56, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Regarding The Last SamuraiI noticed that you posted here, chastising User:TheOldJacobite for reverting my changes to the article. As he did not respond to your post, I re-added my plot summary to the article, but he has reverted it again (for the fourth time). While he did reply on the talk page after reverting it, I do feel that he's grasping at straws to justify his reversions, and I'm concerned that he may continue to insist that I'm not adequately addressing his points and to completely undo my revision. I asked for advice in #wikipedia-en and was told to report him here for edit warring, but I'm not completely comfortable escalating the situation like that, being a new user and all. Expressing this, it was suggested that I ask you what should be done, and so here I am. How is this sort of situation generally handled? --Guest206125 (talk) 07:36, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
DYK for Carmyllie Railway
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 29 November 2013 (UTC) Which of the sources are secondary (as opposed to primary news reports) and how do they demonstrate it meets WP:EVENT and does not fail WP:NOTNEWS ? LGA talkedits 02:55, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Kafziel arbitration case openedYou recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kafziel. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kafziel/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 29, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kafziel/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 22:33, 15 December 2013 (UTC) Devyani KhobragadeI guess we were discussing about the page "Devyani Khobragade" not "Devyani Khobragade incident" for which discussion is going on. Also, there is absolutely enough content for creation of individual page for "Devyani Khobragade" and it should not depend on keeping/deleting of "Devyani Khobragade incident". --KakaDesi 17:04, 18 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kakadesi (talk • contribs)
I guess you should give your humble opinion only when asked, i agree it is a copy paste work. If she was arrested then whats wrong in taking the arrest paragraph from the incident page with references? Wikipedia is completely based on references, so according to you everything written in wikipedia is a work of copy paste ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kakadesi (talk • contribs) 17:17, 18 December 2013 (UTC) rezaty adminiv - wikinger rezunЗдохніть Туски-виродки, мало вас бандерівці вирізали ПО-ляхи курви, смерть ПО-ляхам СЛАВА УКРАЇНІ --Лябловбивця — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.246.53.55 (talk) 17:18, 20 December 2013 (UTC) HTI 483Can you please rev del the edits, this guy's harassment is getting excessive. See User_talk:DeltaQuad#Troll_sock_series Werieth (talk) 17:29, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Indefinite block change for RyulongCan you change 2 weeks block to infinite block for Ryulong? He's blocking repeatedly many times. I'm on here to me. (What? | Changes to you.) 16:07, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Merry Christmas!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Hey I noticed that you recently moved the WWE Championship article to WWE World Heavyweight Championship, with your reasoning being "per consensus on Talk page" when there was no discussion on the talk page. I do have the article tagged to be potentially moved back to WWE Championship, with a discussion on a possible move on the talk page, since I don't see WWE referring to their main title with the longer name long-term and the move was only done a week after the two titles were unified. If you want to chime in why you moved the page, go right ahead. Thanks! Jgera5 (talk) 06:46, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
A block Secret made and evidently intended to revisitHi Nick, the notice on Secret's talk page refers us to you and Wizardman for issues regarding his/her past administrative actions, so I intend to put an identical note on their talk page. There's also a relevant thread on HJ Mitchell's talk page where I intend to leave a note ... Ryk72 was blocked indefinitely with reference to an Arbcom decision and on the strong suspicion of being a returning user. I've checked their talk page history and do not see their having been warned of the applicable Arbcom sanctions (the first post there was a series of questions that they reacted badly to; I wish there had at least been a welcome template first) and I consider it to be possible that they merely have an expert interest in the field of the discussion to which their edits were made, and/or that their expertise in Wikipedia comes from either being a quick study (they're right, some of us are) or an editor exercising the right to a Clean Start. They have been advised to e-mail Arbcom and that avenue is of course still open, but they might have privacy concerns ... and in any case I see that Secret himself/herself was inclined toward revisiting the situation, and I can see several possibilities even if we think of it as a WP:ROPE situation. I suspect what has happened is they've dropped through the cracks because of the holidays (and attendant angst) and the coincidence of Secret's retirement from adminship. I may be being sadly naïve, and I do appreciate the stress of these seemingly insoluble problems of duelling nationalist interests, but I don't see leaving this editor blocked as clearly benefitting the encyclopedia; there's a chance we're depriving ourselves of someone useful who just started out in a strife-torn area. Perhaps one could ask them where else they would like to edit, and go from there. However, their unblock request was declined, and Arbcom sanctions are in the picture - and I may indeed be being very naïve. So as one of Secret's two designated go-to fellow admins, could I ask you to have a look? Yngvadottir (talk) 21:59, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
AFC submission templateHello there. I saw that you edited Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jaro Institute of Technology, Management and Research here. As a FYI, That template is supposed to be substituted. When you substitute it it pulls in the revision timestamp and the revision user so that there id a definite submission date to when the submission was requested. If there is no submission date the submission will end up in Category:AfC pending submissions without an age which is intended to be the very last cateogry checked in a pending submissions sweep. The template really should look like this when properly substituted as it adds the ts and u parameters. The TS parameter is important as it allows us to "age" the pending submission. The U parameter is important because it determines who the acceptance or decline notice goes to. Thanks for your time.Hasteur (talk) 03:36, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Invitation to join WikiProject Freedom of speechThere is a WikiProject about Freedom of speech, called WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech. If you're interested, here are some easy things you can do:
Thank you for your interest in Freedom of speech, — Cirt (talk) 02:54, 12 January 2014 (UTC) User:DriftchambersHi, idk if it acceptable to just message you, considering i'm currently blocked (really i should maybe continue to pursue my own unblocking through the appropriate channels only), but on the issue of my having no access to the User:Driftchambers account....just a couple of things....firstly to clarify if you don't know, I sent a change password request to an email address i knew i had access to, to find i then had no access to this gmail account, but i don't know why this is, which i understand isn't very reassuring, but just is the situation. I hadn't used the gmail account for a while, i just don't understand currently why i have no access. Which leads me to the question, do you know if it is possible to return the password to the original (prior to the requested change being sent, obviously)? because i think i know the original, (but hey i just found i didn't know the gmail password, so who knows if i won't just find frustration my answer somehow a second time, but hopefully i won't / wouldn't)..Lastly, i'm not sure about this question, but since i have no access currently to the account, is there any question to the legitimacy of this individual (being myself) being the actual same person who was using the Driftchambers account prior to blocking. If there is, then i remember putting into my homepage some desription of myself, as a security, should i ever have become seperated from the account, and this kind of doubt should arise. Currently i haven't checked to see if the description is enough to prove i'm the same person.But if you feel it's necessary i'll have to trawl through the old edits to find it/ them. Thanks 109.204.66.81 (talk) 01:04, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
ok. yes useful, thank you.87.112.32.97 (talk) 14:33, 13 January 2014 (UTC) why?i'm getting sick of how bias wikipedia does to cater one particular editor, despite the countless of times he's been vandalizing. i only reverted the revision he undid from mine. he shouldn't have undid my edit in the first place per interaction ban.Lucia Black (talk) 17:47, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
About that guy, Ryulong.U should report him, i heard he was on 1RR so he should automatically be re-blocked. Did i mention he was formerly an admin.? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miami Bleach (talk • contribs) 18:35, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Block?Hi Nick. I'm guessing that you had good reason to block 50.162.86.254 - presumably a self-evident sock of somebody - but you haven't left a talkpage message or given a reason in the block log. As it stands, it looks as though the only reason for the block is his one silly edit to WT:RIGHT, which wouldn't be enough in and of itself to warrant a 72 hour lockdown of the IP. Any chance you could elucidate on the reason for blocking, so that I can deal with his unblock appeal? Thanks, Yunshui 雲水 14:44, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for nothingYou put in a "block" for no reason that I had to ask for removal. Then when I tried to do anything, I get another one from some "Fluffernutter" freak saying I was "Autoblocked." This why your shitty encyclopedia doesn't get anyone new wanting to help any more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.162.86.254 (talk) 15:14, 22 January 2014 (UTC) Your draft article, User:Nick/sandbox/2Hello Nick. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "sandbox/2". The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Dwpaul Talk 19:25, 23 January 2014 (UTC) Thanks
--Jeffrd10 (talk) 17:52, 7 February 2014 (UTC) YGMHi Nick - since I didn't want to continue the discussion on Eric's talk, and since I suspect continuing it anywhere on-wiki will result in unnecessary drama, I've sent you an email. Please respond. I'm genuinely curious. Kevin Gorman (talk) 16:38, 9 February 2014 (UTC) Heart AttackHello Nick. I am an individual only. I used the word we so that if any user uses non reliable sources like i was said to used, i could have told him to not to use them on Wikipedia citing this experience. I do not work on behalf of any person either natural or artificial (organisation, company etc.). Hope your doubt is cleared. Regards Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:54, 12 February 2014 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for February 18Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cyclone Winifred, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Russell River (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 18 February 2014 (UTC) Request for arbitrationI have requested an arbitration case regarding a matter in which you recently expressed an opinion. If you're interested, it's here. Regards Giano 12:35, 18 February 2014 (UTC) Hello, my friend the IP is back. [17] I've tried debating with him but he refuses to listen. -- Scorpion0422 17:30, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Template:FIFA Ballon d'Or recipientsHi Nick. I see you template-protected Template:FIFA Ballon d'Or recipients in January, but I'm not sure why, as it only has nine transclusions. Did you have any special reason for protecting it? Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 06:07, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
re: Mass PROD of articlesI don't think there is any reason to treat this editor with kid gloves, he has been active for years, had some of his work subject to various deletion processes before, and hence WP:BITE does not apply. Further, considering that my only prior interaction with him has been a prod, which he reverted without bothering to reply even with an edit summary, I am not inclined to go out of my way here. You and others are of course entitled to deprodding, even if it wastes two hours of my work and costs us at least one DYK (I was just about to write one, now I have to compile a lenghty AFD instead) and is further going to require others to review what I believe is a series of clear violations of WP:N; still - I am not holding it against you, perhaps I am in the wrong here, and I do appreciate your message on my talk page. We will discuss this at an AFD at which I will certainly ping you so you can present your side there. PS. That said, upon further review of your edits, I am somewhat disappointed that while removing the prod, as well as the notability template, you didn't bother to explain your rationale, neither on article's talk page or even in the edit summary: [18] and others. I'll kindly ask you to stop deprodding the article in such an unconstructive fashion, please go back and provide on the talk pages of the articles you deprodded an argument for why they are notable first. Thank you, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:07, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
derpuser:FeelYouUp is derp on Wikipedia. Danger^Mouse (talk) 14:11, 11 April 2014 (UTC) TalkbackHello, Nick. You have new messages at GeneticVariation's talk page.
Message added 05:09, 25 April 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Acalycine(talk/contribs) 05:09, 25 April 2014 (UTC) Why revdel?Hey, Nick, why did you revdel the mistaken EPH edits by T13? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:22, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
Title change (Andrez Bergen/Little Nobody)Thank you kindly for the way you've managed this Nick! I greatly appreciate the assistance, but feel even more grateful due to the quick time frame and respectful communication from you. Warm regards,--Soulparadox (talk) 12:58, 30 April 2014 (UTC) IndjijaHi Nick. I just saw that you changed few of the deletion tags, and also you removed the website ref that I had on the Indjija. Might you advice why you stated "remove text merged from page without attribution"? I had cited the reference after looking at it and rechecking it. Also you stated that the Deletion does not stand valid, as "speedy deletion declined - doesn't qualify as A1 and G6 isn't valid". Please advice for it as well. Once you let me know, I can revert to you. Also your talk page size is too much. Suggest you to archive it, so that the page does not take much time to load. Danke. Vishal Bakhai 19:30, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
A brownie for you!
A barnstar for you!
User:78.150.236.72Doesn't there need to be something on his talk page? --JustBerry (talk) 23:00, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
JustBerry declineHello, Just added a message to JustBerry, after he quickly declined an entry I made, with very spare and vague feedback, and I saw right above my note your note and his response, saying that he is now not reviewing anymore after many too quick declines...would you mind taking a look at the page? I believe I made the "sentences flow" better. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Dave_Malloy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.164.155.109 (talk) 15:28, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
Adoption (Copied from my talk page)@Nick: Hello Nick, after responding to this long list of complaints regarding my AfC reviews on my talk page, it's perfect timing for your message to be the last one on my talk page. I will stop reviewing new AfC submission for the time being, but I will be "fixing" or trying to address the old ones I have made. Yes, I think I did review a little too fast, as I was trying to clear the backlog. Although speed has value, I see how the quality of my reviews has declined a little while speed has increased. I will try to visit the IRC channel, definitely. I just wanted to address one more thing: is adoption with you a possibility? I realize that some administrators are very busy and do not have the time, but I would like to offer myself as a mentee if you are willing to be the mentor. User:GorillaWarfare used to be my mentor, but I believe she is currently busy/inactive. Let me know your thoughts upon my proposal --JustBerry (talk) 14:13, 22 May 2014 (UTC) Waiting for Nick to reply.
The Banner's violation of unblocking conditionThe Banner has been troubling editors on Ireland project till he got blocked twice and then conditionally unblocked. Since then his participation on UE Boom was one-directional and simply consisted of contradiction to any changes that I would propose and creation of [| hot air] that was noted by unrelated editor. His participation on the talk page of UE Boom was lacking AGF in my opinion and even without entering into this, his PA has been [| noted]. He violated one of | conditions: "You conduct yourself properly on talk pages, in a manner consistent with good-faith discussion intended to improve the encyclopaedia" Dmatteng (talk) 18:11, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
Mendaliv's comments on WP:ANII'm not sure I should reply to Mendaliv on WP:ANI considering what Dennis Brown has said. But I would like to clarify. 1) WP:IRC. I haven't used WP:IRC in "extensive" manner, not that I think it would be bad if I would. I have used IRC about 8-10 times in the last few months. From all of this, The Banner was mentioned only once in relation to his posts on the article's talk page. I asked if something could be done about him using the talk page of the article inappropriately. Sam took a look at the talk page and posted a message advising The Banner to stop personal attacks. 2) Infobox. When I was developing the article I found that there is no suitable Infobox and went to the WP:IRC to ask for an advise. I was advised by you (if I'm not mistaken) that I can use any suitable Infobox. After that Samwalton helped me to correct some formatting issues on the infobox [21]. 3) I think it is distressing that Mendaliv hasn't introduced himself as an involved editor in ANI (who is in a content dispute with me). And now, as he said: "about a freaking wireless speaker" I'm not sure how to interpret it. Is he a good-willed editor whose interest is to improve the quality of the article? That comes along with his posts on the talk page: "Oh for the love of Pete, would you stop replying to comments all over creation?"; "I'm not a man that likes to use a five-dollar word needlessly."; "What really, really pisses me off.." [22], [23]. I'm not sure if such posts are being appropriate on the article's talk page and if they are not decreasing the quality of the discussion. Dmatteng (talk) 07:15, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
New Russia moveHi Nick - As per your decision to move Federal State of New Russia (2014) back to Federal State of New Russia, I believe the same reversion should be made to New Russia Party (2014), which was also moved there by User:RGloucester for apparently the same reason. --Nizolan (talk) 15:43, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Nick, if you're free could you make a decision or comment on the 'Move proposal'[25] at Talk:Federal State of New Russia?Haberstr (talk) 08:59, 2 June 2014 (UTC) Request for commentHello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC) Re: Ticket #2014052910009223May I see a copy of this email? I do not currently have OTRS access and would like to see the relevance to your finding of File:An image of Michael Jackson's "Pepper's Ghost Illusion" at the 2014 Billboard Music Awards.jpg as an unambiguous copyright violation. Ellomate (questions? talk/consult my lawyer) 04:53, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
Copyvio and promotion at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Trinity ArmyHey, I was wondering if you'd reconsider returning Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Trinity Army to the mainspace and just go ahead and delete it again. It has three problems with it: first, part of it is copyvio from here. Secondly, it's fairly promotional in tone and at the very least, reads like it is the group's personal webpage. Finally and most importantly, I can't really see where the group will ever pass notability guidelines as a whole, so restoring it won't really do anything except for give the user (whom I've blocked for their username) false hope that the group will eventually have an article. At the very most it could be included in the main article for the college, but I don't think it'll ever really pass GNG for organizations. There just isn't anything out there that isn't primary or trivial in scope and the one source I found above appears to be a press release that the Sunday Times reprinted. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 10:36, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Might want to extend your block to User 85.210.177.155Nick, You may want to extend the block for User:85.210.177.155 , because after you blocked him, he issued an unblock request that had a definite legal threat on it. Kosh Vorlon 16:52, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Miss MultiverseHi Nick - Did you delete the page Miss Multiverse before making a research to find out if there are any advertising? did you see the references? furthermore what happened to collaboration and making articles better?. I'm genuinely curious. Jose Cuello (talk) 16:38, 13 June 2014 (UTC) Jose Cuello (talk) 13:46, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Rape during the Congo civil warsExplain how my edit was vandalism please. As you appear to have used rollback here Darkness Shines (talk) 15:06, 15 June 2014 (UTC) And do not accuse me of editwarring, and do not threaten to block me, I have but 1 revert, you are on two. Darkness Shines (talk) 15:15, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Request to UndeleteHi Nick. I was reading in The Register, a UK based IT site, about a new switch Facebook is building. Referenced in the article: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/06/18/facebook_open_switch/ was a company, Pluribus Networks. When I came to WIkipedia looking for more, I got this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluribus_Networks saying the entry had been deleted with undelete being blocked. The company has been written about in the US as well http://www.networkworld.com/article/2165116/lan-wan/move-over-sdn--startup-looking-to-go-where-only-cisco--vmware-tread.html and entries for the guys who started the company that reference the company are on WIkipedia as well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chih-Kong_Ken_Yang https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Drost Considering that the company demonstrably exists and is influencing the likes of Facebook with regard to data center switch design, does it not make sense that they have at least a minor entry similar to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumulus_Networks or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nutanix? Cheers, Budbandit (talk) 17:47, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
AR FreeflightHello Sir, with due respect, I just wanted to let you know that there were discussion about "AR Freeflight" on ANI here and you deleted it without going through the discussion. A.Minkowiski _Lets t@lk 14:58, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Can you add citations to your original large text addition...at the Patent slip article, please? The state of the article is under question, following detection of plagiarised text from a magazine in the UK. This has led to the rest of the article material being scrutinized for WP:Verifiable. The following was material you added in Nov 2006, without citation:
The text is spread out a bit now, so you may have to add the citation(s) more than once. Please note the attention that the earlier plagiarism has called to the article, and ensure that your material is suitable paraphrased and edited. Will look back, cheers. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 01:38, 1 July 2014 (UTC) David HedlundI notice you haven't edited since yesterday, but since you unblocked David Hedlund I'm bringing to your attention that at continuing discussion WP:ANI#Reblock recommended, several people are arguing he needs to be reblocked. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:43, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Nick. I added "Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, Edit on your own user space when warned about block." in User:David_Hedlund/Links. --David Hedlund SWE (Talk) 18:52, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Arbitration Committee and request for comments closuresHi. Re: Special:Permalink/617134022#Statement by Nick This section confused me a bit. Are you suggesting that ArbCom can act as a supreme court over the RFC process and overturn closures it disagrees with? I alternately read your statement as you possibly thinking that the RFC closer could be at fault, but that also seems wrong. No offense intended with the probing, of course. I'm just not sure I see the connection between RFCs, even ones with low turnout, and ArbCom. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:40, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Media Viewer RfC case openedYou were recently recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Media Viewer RfC. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Media Viewer RfC/Evidence. Please add your evidence by July 26, 2014, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Media Viewer RfC/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. Before adding evidence please review the scope of the case. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:10, 18 July 2014 (UTC) TelanganaThe IP User talk:124.123.122.128, continued to remove the page content.--Vin09 (talk) 16:50, 22 July 2014 (UTC) Why did you hide my vandal reverts on User talk:69.94.24.53? Dustin (talk) 22:27, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Media Viewer RfC draft principles & findingsHello. This is a courtesy note that the draft findings and principles in the Media Viewer RfC case have now been posted. The drafters of the proposed decision anticipate a final version of the PD will be posted after 11 August. You are welcome to give feedback on the workshop page. For the Committee, Lord Roem ~ (talk) 02:40, 4 August 2014 (UTC) cool! fuel!I am adding this to the global blacklist on meta. Defer to Global blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:07, 4 August 2014 (UTC) 2016 Formula One seasonThe deletion discussion for this article was closed way to prematurely. An AFD typically runs for about seven days, this one wasn't even allowed to run 24 hours. That's a clear breach of policy. You cannot expect every Wikipedia user to be logged in and contributing 24 hours every single day. That's why the seven day running time is there in the first place. Acting on AFD's this way simply prevents the wider community to became aware and give their opinion. If you read Talk:2016_Formula_One_season you'll clearly see that there were users questioning the creation of the article. They simply were not given the time to respond in the AFD. Tvx1 (talk) 14:14, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
File:Tom Carstairs In Concert.jpgGiven the possibility of timed camera shutters and the consequent possibility of photographing oneself, this is clearly not a blatant copyright infringement, so a DRV will be filed should you leave the closure as "delete". It would be advisable if, in the future, you would refrain from assuming that others had failed to investigate the situation, for I at least did investigate, or I would have deleted it or advocated deletion. Nyttend (talk) 19:53, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
I came here to say that I'm a little confused by your close. Mainly what confuses me is the part where you state it is standard procedure to delete the image "in cases such as this". My long term understanding is whenever there is a question about copyright permission, the standard procedure is to take to WP:FFD, WP:PUF or tag as {{di-no permission}}. I'd like to know where you got this idea that deleting an image in this situation instead of having discussion is "standard procedure." While I think you were trying to handle a situation quickly, I think your decision to close was made to hastily and this has caused, and will cause unnecessary confusion. Now I see that you've "moved" the discussion to PUF but your close still stands at FFD. At this point, I would recommend that you amend your close to state that you've re-opened discussion at PUF and possibly invite the editors who participated to also participate in the second discussion. It would also be wise to include a link to the prematurely closed FFD discussion in the new discussion as there is relevant comments. Maybe next time we shouldn't get in such a rush. It would've been perfectly find to let the discussion play out. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 22:26, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
I would like a response pleaseI ping'd you so that i could perhaps get a more constructed, and considerate response to the situation that i provided. I'm currently Banned from ANI to bring up such subjects, but i'm asking permission to bring it up anyways. The situation is "highly" irregular. Lucia Black (talk) 18:45, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
|
Portal di Ensiklopedia Dunia