User talk:PhilKnight/Archive69

About KolibriOS Page Deletion

Dear Sir, I herewith ask you ro restore the page KolibriOS.

In our opinion, the reasons for its content's removing were incorrect:

1) the auditor ignored numerous references to this special-interest & hobbyist Operation System on flatassembler.org: [1]; also, the system has been listed along with many other similar OSes in LinuxFormat Magazine// No.4, 2009.

2) we always stressed [2] that KolibriOS had been forked from MeOS-32 following its original GPL licence to avoid any reason for allegations in copy-paste and plagiarism. V.M.Turjanmaa and other MeOS pioneers are listed in a honourable place in our developers' list despite huge difference in source codes accumulated during last six years. MenuetOS might forget some moments of their history, but we remember our origins.

Yours Art zh (talk) 11:36, 2 February 2010 (UTC)Art_zh (on behalf of kolibrios.org developers team)[reply]

Hi Art zh, the KolibriOS article was deleted in June 2007 following this discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KolibriOS. The version posted recently was essentially similar, and so was deleted as a reposting of deleted material. In this context, the best course of action is probably the article is restored and moved into your user space, for example to User:Art zh/KolibriOS, and only moved back into article space after the concerns raised in the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KolibriOS discussion, particularly in regard to establishing notability are resolved. If however, you want to appeal the deletion, then you could do so at deletion review. Let me know if you want the article to be restored and moved into user space. PhilKnight (talk) 12:02, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

About MHT-CET Page Deletion

The page you deleted was not sourced from the link you assumed(http://www.piit.ac.in/admissions.htm). The data was sourced from Director of Technical Education website (http://dte.org.in/fe2009/), this is the official website of the organisation which conducts MHT-CET exam in Maharashtra(India). All the websites(including you suggested) source the information from DTE(http://dte.org.in/fe2009/). There is no copyright involved as this data is under Right to Information Act of India (RTI). Let me know what is the procedure for resubmission of article as I am new to Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gijyo9 (talk • contribs) 11:20, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gijyo9, thanks for explaining. I've restored the page, and linked to, instead of copying, the content. Hope that's ok. PhilKnight (talk) 11:46, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ping

I have sent you an e-mail. --Tenmei (talk) 17:13, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User 24.128.111.134

Hi. You just blocked User 24.128.111.134. However, he or she is continuing to post personal attacks on their talk page. I was wondering, should I revert these or just let him or her wear themselves out? In the meantime, I'll revert them. Thanks. -- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 13:56, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lear's Fool, I've modified the block to prevent editing the user talk page. PhilKnight (talk) 14:03, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. -- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 14:06, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Vandalizer

Hello. I'm Hotel5550. I just found recent vandalism on List of Criminal Minds episodes and I reverted it. I told the unknown user, 98.14.218.176, to not do that. To make sure that doesn't happen again, could you block this person? Hotel5550 (talk) 03:50, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hotel5550, if the user continues to vandalize, then I suggest you report the account to admin intervention against vandalism. PhilKnight (talk) 11:58, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Gee thanks! You are a bunch of help! I sort of go around Wikipedia and check for vandalism and make sure that everything is nice and organized. Talk with me sometime! Hotel5550 (talk) 03:38, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reuqesting Articles

Hi PhilKnight! I was wondering where you can make requests for articles to be created. Do you know how to make requests? Hotel5550 (talk) 04:56, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Drug Therapy Problems

Hi. You speedied this article as a copyvio of http://www.molinu.org/drug_therapy_problems, which it now turns out is a Wikipedia mirror. I've restored and userfied it for the author to work on. Just thought I'd let you know in case you come across the site again. Cheers! Olaf Davis (talk) 18:56, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Olaf, thanks for restoring the page. PhilKnight (talk) 20:36, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request to userfy a template

Can you userfy the Template:Rachel Talalay.--TheMovieBuff (talk) 20:33, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TheMovieBuff, I've restored, and moved the page to User:TheMovieBuff/Rachel Talalay. PhilKnight (talk) 22:49, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Now how do I get it kept without creating it again and it be deleted.--TheMovieBuff (talk) 22:52, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question...

Phil, a quick question (I hope). Are you aware of any prohibition in MOS against using boldface in an infobox? I have never heard of such a thing, can find nothing in MOS on this subject, and have seen boldface used in numerous infoboxes. So... I am a bit perplexed. Any clue? ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 16:28, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (infoboxes), I can't even find a mention of italics. Why do you ask? PhilKnight (talk) 16:36, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I mistyped. What I meant to ask was about the use of boldface in infoboxes. I ask because an anonymous editor keeps removing all boldface from the Blade Runner infobox. I would just like to sort this out so I can set the anon. straight. Thanks. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 19:46, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The anon. user says an editor named "bovineboy" (I assume it is User:Bovineboy2008 pointed him to WP:MOSBOLD for an explanation of why boldface should not be used in infoboxes. But, I do not see the infobox discussed anywhere in this policy. If this user is, indeed, making these changes, as the anon. indicates, he needs to be set straight. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 14:59, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Tamaskanwolfdog

Hi User:Tamaskanwolfdog has restored the CSD templates to Tamasakan Dog after you declined them. I removed the templates, but Tamaskanwolfdog restored them within seven minutes.

From what I know, there is an off-wiki dispute between two factions over whether the Tamaskan Dog has recent wolf content in it. The breed founders claim that there is no recent wolf content and the other group claims that there is wolf content and that the founders are lying. Tamaskanwolfdog is very likely part of the second group. The user createdTamaskan wolf dog, which was quickly put up for deletion at AFD. Since the user could provide any third-party sources, the article was deleted.Coaster1983 (talk) 18:41, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Coaster1983, thanks for explaining. I've given the user a warning, and removed the tags. PhilKnight (talk) 18:48, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of charities accused of ties to terrorism

I would like to move forward with our agreed upon actions in this case. I dont consider this matter resolved and dont want to see this case fall through the cracks. Thanks in advance for your help. Bonewah (talk) 14:51, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bonewah, thanks for your note, and sorry I missed your post on the MedCab case page. Hopefully we'll be able to move forward now. PhilKnight (talk) 17:26, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sock puppet?

Hi, I noticed that last December, you blocked user:Chacufc. I have reason to believe that he is back as user:Blockski because, 1) He vandalized Charles' page, and 2) He edited a page that Chacufc was editing but being reverted by Charles on... Could you look at that? Thanks! The Arbiter★★★ 22:46, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'm not so sure about this now. Still, could you take a look? The Arbiter★★★ 22:47, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi The Arbiter, I've blocked the account as a sock of Chacufc. PhilKnight (talk) 23:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Participation at my RfA

Thank you for taking the time to weigh in on my RfA. It was successful, in that the community's wish not to grant me the tools at this time was honored. I'm taking all the comments as constructive feedback and hope to become more valuable to the project as a result; I've also discovered several new areas in which to work. Because debating the merits of a candidate can be taxing on the heart and brain, I offer this kitten as a low-allergen, low-stress token of my appreciation. --otherlleft 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

72.189.164.148

Stuff a cork in the lad, would you? HalfShadow 02:53, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. That's better. HalfShadow 02:55, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bdanthony

Bdanthony (talk · contribs), fresh off their block, is back at it again. 76.102.12.35 (talk) 02:47, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nintendo Zone

Hi Phil, I recently requested that Nintendo Zone be deleted as a copyright infringement, which you promptly deleted. Looking at it now, I believe it would be adequate to redirect the page to Nintendo World Store, but since its protected, I can't. Could you please unprotect the page, or perhaps just create the redirect, but leave it protected, to prevent the re-addition of the copyrighted material. Thanks, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 00:55, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SuperHamster, I've created the redirect. PhilKnight (talk) 00:58, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 00:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Picture in picture image

How was that non free; it was my image of my TV and wasn't it a blank screen? As I recall it was blank and so was the PIP channel. So why was it deleted and why was I not warned? Daniel Christensen (talk) 06:39, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The image was of a TV showing the weather report, and you were notified. PhilKnight (talk) 19:43, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A recent image deletion

I'm curious why closed this discussion as delete and then deleted the image? The image was being used in an article.--Rockfang (talk) 02:15, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rockfang, I've restored the image. Thanks for letting me know. PhilKnight (talk) 11:47, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

why deleted my page? I used hangon template, I'm contesting deletion --Di Natale Massimo (talk) 17:19, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

what about her? She's on Wikipedia, but she's not notable. Is notable the background, though --Di Natale Massimo (talk) 17:31, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Di Natale Massimo, as you were writing the above post, I was drafting a note which I've now posted on your talk page. If it's ok with you, I'd prefer to discuss the article on your talk page. Thanks. PhilKnight (talk) 17:31, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
ok --Di Natale Massimo (talk) 17:33, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Admins' watchlist

Hi there. It might be a good idea to watch out for the Sarah-Jane Hilliard article to be recreated. Amsaim (talk) 17:20, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just as I suspected, the deleted article has now been recreated by the same editor. Amsaim (talk) 18:35, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know. PhilKnight (talk) 18:38, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Problematic_admin Di Natale Massimo (talk) 18:48, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you comment on something?

Hi... I'm involved with an Article for Deletion discussion that desperately needs some independent opinion. I've been out of touch with Wikipedia lately and I'm stuck for people to turn to so I've just been going through my watchlist to find people to ask. Anyway, the issue is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Grays Harbor. Please feel free to tell me that I'm totally in the wrong, I just want to get some clarity on the situation. Thanks! PageantUpdater talk • contribs 00:37, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

UC Berkeley Undergrad needs assistance regarding Wikipedia Research project

I am an undergraduate student at UC Berkeley conducting a research project dealing with bureaucratic justice. I was hoping someone at Wikimedia/Wikipedia/Wikipedia Foundation could give me some QUICK guidance that would greatly help me in my search for a viable case study.

I am looking for a large organization, like Wikipedia, that regularly receives claims of harm or injustice against it, then analyze the way in which it responds to such claims (i.e. programs, mechanisms for dealing with those claims) and finally discover how well that organization has done in reducing the number of such claims over time.

While Wikipedia provides much of its mediation/arbitration/dispute-settlement information online, I would still need an actual contact within Wiki's formal dispute resolution apparatus who could provide me some personalized context. Would it be possible to obtain your email address for this purpose? I am an inexperienced wiki user an I do not know how to get your email address off your user page, if it is even listed there. Thank you.PS150Researcher1 (talk) 05:04, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could we bother you to ping RSN?

This is about our mediation case; Bonewah posted to RSN, I linked from the List talk page, but on RSN we got 3 short responses, no consensus, and a week since anyone said anything. Could we ask you, as our mediator, to ask RSN folks to weigh in a bit more, or maybe you have other suggestions? Thanks. --GRuban (talk) 14:37, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2010-02-17/

I hope I opened the case correctly (not sure). Thanks. John Hyams (talk) 07:23, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arif solak BanazHamambogazi1.jpg deletion

Hi, I was trying to verify that File:Arif solak BanazHamambogazi1.jpg was indeed uploaded to Commons, per your comment on the FFD nomination, but it was closed too soon. The link provided wasn't to the same image, and I couldn't find it in the uploader's contributions. If it wasn't moved over there, I would be willing to crop and move it. Let me know, thanks. — Bility (talk) 07:49, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bility, I've temporarily restored the image, so you can crop and move it to the commons. PhilKnight (talk) 14:59, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I've moved it. — Bility (talk) 19:42, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Google Sidewiki

Hello! I'm sorry for asking this menial favor, however, I would appreciate it. You see, the article Google Sidewiki used to be a redirect. I took it and created the article that stands there today. The issue was, that because of Wikipedia's automated article creation counters, I don't get credit (from the Toolserver thing). I came to you because you declined the speedy delete and I would like some guidance on what to do. Thank you!-- iBen (talk) 02:03, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi iBen, I suggest you speak to whoever wrote the script and discuss the possibility of modifying the script to detect whether the article 'author' merely created a redirect, and the body of the article was in fact written by someone else. PhilKnight (talk) 15:09, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Breed Name Change

Hello. I am wondering if you could please help with the Alsatian Shepalute page. You see, the breed club and founder have recently changed the name of the breed and I am wondering if the references to the breed club I've sited are reliable enough to warrant a redirect to a new page. There is debate and I would really appreciate your thoughts. Thank you for your time. Shepaluteprez (talk) 06:18, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shepaluteprez, I've posted on the talk page. PhilKnight (talk) 15:10, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy call re your "Metal Gear" speedy

I don't want you to be surprised to find that i reversed the Dab deletion at Metal Gear and move from Metal Gear (series), which you carried out pursuant to a {{db-move}} G6, placed by User:Zxcvbnm, that also claiming "[obviously] unnecessary Dab". I am certain that you would have rejected the speedy if you had realized that

that user proposed such an elimination of the Dab at 05:59, 22 February 2010 (UTC), having already tagged for speedy at 05:55, 22 February 2010;
that proposal was part of contentious discussion of whether to let stand a unilateral move that reversed a properly requested move that
went unchallenged for 7 days, and
was called and carried out by an admin who defends those actions.

I have been too busy evading alligators to have drained that swamp even to the level of being sure whether there are only two contending sides in the matter, but it is clear that even if there are more, the issues are heavily entangled and speedy-requests re the related pages are a further disruption of the already horrible breach of collegiality and process.
Thanks.
--Jerzy•t 09:24, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm intentionally half separating this from the above, partly bcz i don't think it is (at least presently) clear enough to be part of the basis for my action in this: Dab'n is not entirely a science. But i read carefully tonite, for the first time in at least a long time, WP:Dab#Disambiguation page or disambiguation links?, and found it corresponds to my own gut criterion in the Dab-heavy editing i do. I'll summarize in relevant part (even tho it's only 112 words):
If there's a primary topic, there should be a Dab page rather than just a HatNote, when there are three or more pages to be Dab'd among;
if there's no primary, then two or more call for a Dab page.
If i were doing speedy processing more often, i think that would be my standard for the "obviously unnecessary Dab" referred to at the {{db-disambig}} row on Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Deletion templates (and the "unnecessary Dab" in the context of non-controversiality at WP:G6, but i had to do some dicey searches to get from that language to the guidelines.
Speaking as a speedy-processor, does it seem to you a good idea to get lks from CSD and that template page to that section?
(There's also what i think of as "the harmless clause" at WP:MoSDab#Disambiguation pages with only two entries, which i think probably is of interest for limiting churn when deletions of articles and creations of new articles in a "Dab family" of articles move the count back and forth across one of those thresholds; IMO not nearly as interesting or valuable.)
Thanks again for your attention.
--Jerzy•t 09:24, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Jerzy, thanks for explaining. Obviously it wasn't my intention to undo Stifle's move, and so thanks for undeleting the page. PhilKnight (talk) 16:44, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]