User talk:Butseriouslyfolks

The best way to reach me is by leaving a note at the bottom of this page.
I stop by here much more often than I check my WP email.

---

promotional follow up

Granted, such a statement as the one you point out here "Over 100 years after its inception, the firm has emerged as a leader in several of its litigational and transactional practice areas in response to the increasing demands and complexity of its clients' needs" may be in violation of being "promotional", but how do you reconcile your ruling here with the following pages:

Skadden#Reputation - if this entire section isn't considered promotional then I'm afraid you've completely lost me. Debevoise_&_Plimpton using the word "prominent" - promotional? Simpson_Thacher_&_Bartlett#Associate_Compensation - "led the market" - promotional? Sullivan_&_Cromwell#Founding "From its earliest involvement in the formation of Edison General Electric Company in 1882 and United States Steel Corporation in 1901, to its present work with leaders of the global economy in the 21st century, the firm has been closely involved in the affairs of some of America's, and now the world's, greatest industrial, commercial and financial enterprises" - promotional?

Even if such statements, are in fact promotion, is it your policy to delete the entire page without warning?

My main question is: Can all of these pages be rewritten rather than automatically deleted?

EDIT: nevermind, I just read the Why was my page deleted? so I see it is possible to put the page back up just so long as it is formatted correctly.

I will be sure to remove anything that could even remotely be confused with promitional statements, and I will also be sure to comb through the article to make sure that no text is copied.

Can I run the page by you in the near future to get the thumbs up?

Burning Sands 19:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Law Firm follow up

Upon reflection, perhaps the Day Pitney site did appear promotional in nature. The same could not be said, however, about the Heller Ehrman site. Moreover, any direct quotes that appeared on the page were given proper citation to their original respective sources. If this was overlooked on a particulr quote, rather than deleting the entire Heller Ehrman page, might you or another admin simply point out the section in question so that it might be corrected?? I was under the impression that Wikipedia encouraged expanding and correcting articles.

This onoe was written in an objective tone, was encyclopedic and was in-line with the style/type/tone used by the other 160 pages dedicated to law firms listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Law_firms_of_the_United_States Until this morning, the page was a part of this category and a few different users had contributed to it in some form or fasion.

Moreover, the page contained a considerably informative history of the firm which chronicled its relation to the other institutions that were intergral to California's history from the time of the San Francisco Earthquake of 1906 until present day. This took quite a few days and a lot of effort to compile from multiple sources (all given credit) and after having reviewed the list of what wikipedia is and what it is not, I believe the page was deleted in error.

Is it within your ability as an admin to restore pages that have been recently deleted? If not, may I and others recreate the page for your/other admin review?

Your input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

Burning Sands 17:57, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

History of Law Firms not Commercial Material??

Confused... The law firm sites you deleted are no different than any of the other 160 sites listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Law_firms_of_the_United_States

Please restore.

Thanks

Burning Sands 17:15, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Copy of a deleted content

Hi, I'm gonna create some brand new pics and repost the Military ranks and insignia of the Sri Lanka Army asap. If I can have a copy of the deleted page, my job will be easier. Just paste it in here. Cheers --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ ^{walkie-talkie | tool box} 07:09, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

So kind of you :) I'm gonna upload the commissioned ranks into commons coz I the one who create those. Rest of those right now I'm gonna change into fairuse as like this one Image:China-navy-2000-dress 16.gif Will it work? --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ ^{walkie-talkie | tool box} 07:32, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Well then World Insignia Collectors Union is violating the copyrights of the Sri Lankan tri forces and the police :D So I do not think uploading pictures with fairuse will cause any prob to Wikipedia :-) --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ ^{walkie-talkie | tool box} 09:32, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I discussed this issue with Videmus Omnia and later I re-uploaded my images and re-set others into fair use. Further, he contacted Quadell for further clarifications. Now both of us are waiting for his reply. Thanks for all your help up to this moment. Good luck and happy editing!!! --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ ^{walkie-talkie | tool box} 13:02, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

I see that you have revert my copyright tag adding on Commons.[1] Please goto this page and decide your self whether I create those images my self, or I violated their rights. Thanks --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ ^{walkie-talkie | tool box} 08:05, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I started my work with wikipedia in the middle of August and that was my very first time. Until this year I did not have a knowledge of the Wikipedia procedures too much. That is why I had made a mistake. I used the green base from uniforminsignia.net and added the other parts to it (I think I used MS Paint). When I was uploading all the pictures I mistakenly copied the same fair use rationale and other fair use tags and forgot to claim that it is mine which I create my self. I create my Commons account on 24 December 2006 and since then whenever I create an image myself I release it to commons under free license.[2] Though the licensing was wrong initially it is now correct isn't it? If you still think I violated copyrights of them, do a metadata check and a google search on the net to verify that the images I claimed are mine were actually created by me. Cheers. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ ^{walkie-talkie | tool box} 09:05, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Leonid Fedorov page deleted. WHY?

Hello, Butseriouslyfolks,
Would you be so kind as to explain WHY did you delete my "Leonid Fedorov" article??? The explanations given at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page=Leonid_Fedorov do not seem satisfactory to me, because:
1. "spam" - this is NOT spam. I made this page myself, specificially for Wikipedia, in one and only updated edit. Now, do you mean it is lost forever? I spent a few hours of my precious weekend time making it.
2. "A7" (articles that do not satisfy notability) - Very very arguable, depends on the criteria you use. For English readers, can only things that originate from the English-speaking world be worth of any notablity? As far as I know, many would not agree with this.
3. "copyvio of http://www.leonidfedorov.ru/about_e.htm" - You should have looked more closely. Mostly yes, it repeated that text - because I am the author of both. You can't expect me to write two completely different bios for one person, can you. And then again, I updated that text so that it would fit for the present moment. So this was NOT a copy of another text, that was ME rewriting MY text FOR YOU.
So, i believe that this is enough explanation on why that page should have been left on wikipedia. Well sometimes one can come across some unexplainable rules at the others' websites, this is not a big news, and it may easily turn out that what is reasonable and commonsense for everyone, does not work in one specific place. This happens. But at least I will hope that I can get the text, that I spent some of my precious time working on, back to me so that I could use it outside of wikipedia.
Thank you for this in advance and I will be waiting to either see the Leonid Fedorov page restored, or to get my text back to me so that I could use it for other purposes.
Yours,
--M birukov 12:17, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

If the text if from your web site, you already have it, don't you? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:19, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Let's read closely once again: "I updated that text so that it would fit for the present moment. So this was NOT a copy of another text, that was ME rewriting MY text FOR YOU." I wrote it in the original message, didn't I? I'm sorry to ask this, but - do you people at wikipedia READ the texts you delete or you reply to??
I somehow believed that the text will be preserved here; I didn't expect such rush with the deletion.
Then, you wrote "there were no sources or information that would verify that this person meets Wikipedia's notability criteria. Don't worry; if he really is an important musician, one of his many fans will inevitably create an original, sourced article about him." Oh well, ask Marc Ribot or John Medeski, if you know who they are... And then, "one of his many fans will inevitably create an original, sourced article about him" - why not ME?? Isn't it sourced? original? Why not? I don't understand this.
And still, I want my text back. Thank you in advance.
--M birukov 13:04, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Your deletion of Heller Ehrman

Another editor asked me to review this deletion. Before sending it to WP:DRV, I wanted to ask about the copyvio you mentioned in your deletion summary. I ran a few sample phrases from the last version of the article through Google, but failed to get any hits. What sections of the article were copyvios? Thanks, Caknuck 17:57, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Copyvio at Bleach GC (series)?

Hey, BSF. I noticed you rearranged one of the sentences in Bleach GC (series), calling the previous version a "copyvio." While I have no problem with your edit, I am curious as to how it is a copyright violation to mention a company and a mangaka making a new character for a game. // DecaimientoPoético 00:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I see. However, the site seems to be a forum and the thread creator copied the text directly from Wikipedia. It happens a lot, despite people (normally fans of a video game) always critisizing us because of the vandalism. // DecaimientoPoético 18:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Rajnish Mehra article

Can you please restore the article ? I changed the language from the original page, and got rid of possibly copyrighted content. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Therealgandalf (talk • contribs) 04:58, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

the deletion of Re.press page

Hi Butseriouslyfolks,

You deleted my page that I created for our publishing house re.press as it was deemed to break copyright. However, I am the copyright holder for the publishers website and I am happy for it to be duplicated. Is it possible to have it back up please? I noticed that the other publishers largely take copy from their own sites for their wiki pages.

Additionally the publisher operates under open access principles and our authors can publish their work OA if so desired.

Thanks for your time

Paul Ashton publisher re.press —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulnigelashton (talk • contribs) 07:56, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Please do not abuse your Admin rights

I am the webmaster for http://www.bluecrosshyd.in/ and I am creating the wiki page for Blue Cross of Hyderabad. When I am the owner of the copyrights of the web content, why can't i use it here? Does this argument sound any good to you?

You could have left a talk on my page right? just like you ask me to... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gkkarthic (talk • contribs) 08:41, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

re.press notability and COI

Basically I am surprised at your response to my article. I see many publishers with websites that are clearly COI or marketing driven and they offer nothing to the publishing world. Reed for example boasts massive profits made on their page which are extracted from governments around the world with high priced journals that cost 20K a year to subscribe to (not to mention their connections with the arms trade), but re.press, a publisher that releases titles as open access and give 100% full viewing of all books is some how a COI! We consider re.press to be a serious intervention into publishing as opposed to other companies who are profit driven. Paulnigelashton 09:24, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

G Simon Harak and Jean Marie Malecki

Please help me understand how I can avoid your deleting these types of articles in the future. I cited all my sources. I understand copyvios, but, I am not wholesale plagarizing entire profiles from a single source and I am properly citing my sources. Plus I find it very difficult to state someone's education background in different words. And before you just delete the articles can you please at least give me a warning and opportunity to improve the article. There is nothing more frustrating than discovering that your article that I spent some time on was deleted without even a notification. Stagophile 21:28, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Peter Corry

I have examined what you are saying and have spoken to David Hull (Peter Corry's mamnagement company) and I have changed the tag to suit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Peter_Corry.jpg I think that this is the correct tag. Austenlennon 00:22, 9 October 2007 (UTC)austenlennon

G Simon Harak and Jean Marie Malecki

Do you have a copy of these deleted articles? I am hoping to avoid having to research the articles again. I will the revise the text according to your recommendation. Thanks.Stagophile 01:30, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

F.Y.I.

[3] - vandal only account (now indef blocked) decided to have a go at several admins. I suspect they'll be back again. Just to let you know! Pedro :  Chat  08:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

di

Why did you delete image? - Kittybrewster ☎ 10:10, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Peter Corry

You are right! It is complicated. If you could advise me which tag I should use it would be arreciated. Peter Corry has stated that he allows full free use of the photo and that the photo rights belong to him. So which tag should I use as there are no restrictions on it's use. If I can get this right here then I can make sure that the many others that I have put on a right too. Austenlennon 11:08, 9 October 2007 (UTC)austenlennon

That was fast...

Coren!

That was fast. I'm in the middle of editing, with an Underconstruction tag and fixing the text your bot highlighted, and boom, my article is gone. What was that, 15 minutes? Perhaps you can point me to the sandbox, I know there is one, but can't figure out how to use it.

Sonnet 122

I see you deleted this a day or two back. I'm proposing recreating it, along with Sonnet 117 and Sonnet 121 to complete the set. I'm just laying down the structure now, and will add commentary later (honest!). Any problems with me recreating it? All the best, --ROGER DAVIES ^TALK 06:16, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, dude :))) --ROGER DAVIES ^TALK 06:37, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

MacLaren image

You put a message on my profile saying that i might breach copyright by putting on my photo of the Clan MacLaren tartan and crest. How come? I took the photo myself and whilst I didn't make the tartan or the crest it is mine. Any advise? Thanks! Cls14 12:38, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I see you point but couldnt that be true of very many things? There are book covers and CD covers and thing on here too that are bound to be copyrighted. Cls14 12:36, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

So theoretically then if I drew the photo I had just taken myself then it would be ok? Cls14 22:32, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Copy and paste

Re this message. I was horrified that you did not rap the kid's knuckles for doing the move at all! How do you justify the capitals on "wolf researcher"? -- RHaworth 12:43, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Re:Derrick Gardner

Michael Hardy is giving me a hard time because I deleted a math article, mistaking it for CSD A7 (bad judgment call on my part). Anyway, he's now up to ridiculing me for any deletion I make. :) Nishkid64 (talk) 13:11, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

It is certainly not true that I have ridiculed this user nor am I going about attacking his every deletion. I have, however, paid some attention to his deletions after I noticed that his talk page has complaints from various users about his excessive haste in deleting articles. Michael Hardy 02:41, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Erika Ringor

Hello,

A few days ago you deleted/removed images of Erika Ringor. They are her personal photos that she posted herself on erikaringor.tripod.com which she is the owner of them. She will attempt to upload them again. Please let me know if there might be a problem. Since she is the owner of the footage she should have permission to post her photos correct?

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LMA2007 (talk • contribs) 17:23, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

CSD

In this edit you said this will have to be discussed on the talk page. As I pointed out, it already was. Michael Hardy 02:40, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

re.press 'opinion'

Sure if it is just 'my opinion' that: a cooperative that seeks to change the rules of publishing by allowing authors to make their work OA and readers read their work for free while saving the environment (through reducing wastage) are more worthy (or at least even equally so) than huge corporations that systematically rip off governments and individuals due to the inelastic nature of demand in academic publishing, then I am happy to hold this opinion. The problem is why are they allowed to basically make people aware of their product (when they do nothing notable) and we are not. As you imply wiki is democratic (excluding the fact that big coporations are given more of a voice than small cooperatives) if what we write is not 'true' people can edit it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulnigelashton (talk • contribs) 06:38, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Psycotics1454 unblock request

Hi, Psycotics1454 (talk · contribs) posted an unblock request at his/her talk page. Could you check it out, and elaborate on why you think this user is a sockpuppet? Thanks, Nishkid64 (talk) 16:54, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Right, first of all you ask me a question and then make my discussion page uneditable so that I could not answer. Why did you do that ? In response to your reply, my IP address is 83.67.100.248. The other user, Mjgm84 is 195.137.109.177. Not the same!, Your first big mistake. Secondly, in regards to my statement "I used to have a different username" I was actually refering to my IP address from which all my earliest edits were made before I had a username. Thirdly all of those images you deleted were correctly tagged in accordance with Wiki guidelines, I can prove that. I even went to the effort to get the owners to agree to the licencing terms and I still have their email responses. As a result if you do not unblock me I will contact the head of Wikipedia directly and report you with detailed evidence to back up my points. You do not have enough evidence to say I am anything more than a Suspect and certainly no proof that I am a "Sockpuppet", which I am most definatley not. Your actions are obviously not for the benefit of Wikipedia but for your own self-gratification. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.67.100.248 (talk) 18:20, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

User:LM1998...

...is continuing to add unsourced material to SpongeBob SquarePants-related articles. I'm letting you know becuase you've threatened to block them if they did it again. Thank you. NASCAR Fan24^{(radio me!)} 17:06, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for blocking. I reported them first to AIV, but it was removed because the closing admin thought they were adding it in good faith (which they clearly are not). NASCAR Fan24^{(radio me!)} 17:32, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I've reported a possible sockpuppet, User:SBLM1998 to SSP and have requested a checkuser. Just letting you know. NASCAR Fan24^{(radio me!)} 12:49, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Copyvio request

Hi, could you clean/delete the article Panorama stitchers, viewers and utilities for me. Since I was the one who tagged and to avoid a COI I don't want to do it myself. See the talk page of the article and User talk:Garion96/Archive 9#Panorama stitchers, viewers and utilities. Only if you agree it is a copyvio of course. Garion96 (talk) 00:52, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Considering that editor's history you (and me) probably would need a lawyer. :) Thanks, Garion96 (talk) 01:20, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Copyright violation

Could you please delete the image Image:Isps gate.jpg, it is currently in copyright violation, since the image isn't mine. Sfacets 07:30, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm telling you that the image is a copyvio. If you read the discussion, you will see that I admit to the mistake, and that the image was and is not mine to upload, let alone release under an unrestricted license. Assuming good faith is a simple matter. Obviously you have some problem with this [4] and so I would tend to think that your opinion is biased in this regard. Sfacets 07:40, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Military insignia images

We have a huge problem with military insignia images taken from http://www.uniforminsignia.net, which apparently claims copyright on its versions of rank insignia. I'm positive the Israeli rank insignia came from there, as well as the Korean insignia. The linksearch above doesn't fully reveal the extent of the problem; in many cases, it appears that people have given no source, simply claiming public domain, or have given a fraudulent or unverifiable source, as is the case with many of the Korean insignia. I'm not positive that the website's copyright claim is always 100% valid, but they could probably make a case that the images they produce are derivative improvements of public domain images, which they would have a right to license. I would welcome any ideas on fixing this problem, I'm running into a lot of resistance on taking care of this. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 17:20, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

The problem is at the Commons too. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 04:47, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I tagged a bunch from Sri Lanka for deletion at Commons recently. -- But|seriously|folks  04:54, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Most were uploaded because of that false insignia template that survived for a few years. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 04:58, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

{{Military-Insignia}} User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 05:23, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Bare Toes? Good Thing I Am Wearing Slippers!

Seriously, who is our friend? -WarthogDemon 06:19, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Ugh . . . okay, the bare foot thing makes sense to me now . . . and had I known this beforehand I would not have picked the title I chose for this section's header . . . ew. -WarthogDemon 06:23, 15 October 2007 (UTC)