User talk:Chrislk02: Difference between revisions

; Archives
	Jul - Oct - 2006; Nov, Dec - 2006; Jan, Feb - 2007; Mar, Apr - 2007; May, Jun - 2007; Jul, Aug - 2007; Sep - Dec - 2007; Jan - Feb - 2008; Mar - Apr - 2008; May - Jun - 2008; Jul - Aug - 2008;

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 11:03, 6 September 2008

Wiki Break

This user Currently has the following time consuming items on his IRL "plate". Please be patient and understand your requests may not receive timely attention. Please note this user still checks his watchlist multiple times daily (possibly more than he checks his email) and will get involved if necessary.

9 Graduate credits and finishing up his masters degree in May
Full time job
A girlfriend

Notice: If you are here because I speedy deleted your article, please do not email me about it unless it contains sensitive or private information that you would not like to discuss here. I WILL NOT reply to run of the mill emails answering your question, "Why did you delete my bands page, we are not signed yet but we really are notable," or other similar complaints. If you have a problem, post it here so everybody can see, and review it themselves if they so desire. If you post a complaint here please make sure you link to the article in question (even if it is a red link). I sometimes delete hundereds of articles a day and unless you tell me what you are talking about and make it easy for me to find it, it is unlikley I will address your concerns. Thanks! Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:17, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator abuse complaint

Chris, I am writing to you regarding an Administrator abuse compliant. The purpose of making this complaint here is to see if we can resolve this between yourselves, as required by WP, before a formal complaint would be filed.

In deleting the draft article in my user page, you violated several Wikipedia Policies, specifically:

1. You questioned my motives for creating this draft article. This is a violation of WP:AGF. I could just as easily question your motives. This however is both non-productive and irrelevant. There is no wiki policy that allows material to be deleted based on the motives of the editor who posted it; the relevant WP focus on the actual content, not on motives. If I am mistaken about this, please refer me to the policy that permits material to be deleted based on the assumed motives of the editor.

2. You did not articulate a valid reason for the immediate deletion of a draft article in user space.

3. You set a "moving bar" with your reasons, first stating one reason, then stating another.

4. You made insinuations that the material might violate BPL, but you decided not to use the BPL procedures. Nonetheless you continued to make BPL insinuations. You are well aware that BPL violations require special procedures. If you are going to make BPL accusations, you are obligated to follow the BPL procedures. If you are not going to follow the BPL procedures, then you are obligated to not make BPL accusations.

To resolve this matter, I request that you agree to the following:

1. To refrain in the future from questioning the motives of an editor.

2. To not exercise any administrative authority based on your beliefs or interpretations of the motives of an editor.

3. When summarily deleting any material, you cite the specific WP that permits immediate deletion.

4. That you not delete any material without a valid reason under the relevant WP.

5. That when you delete any material and make accusations or insinuations of BPL violations, you follow the specific procedures required of BPL violations.

6. That when you do not follow the specific procedures required of alleged BPL violations, you refrain from making any accusation or insinuation that there may exist a BPL violation.

Please indicate whether you agree to each of these requests. If you are in agreement, then I will consider this matter resolved.

Thank you.

Pulsifer (talk) 11:03, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for User:Pulsifer

An editor has asked for a deletion review of User:Pulsifer. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Pulsifer (talk) 19:37, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

David Banks Self Portrait - Your Interpretation of "Blatant Copyright Violation"

[You seem to have deleted this photo out of ignorance.] Arguably, the way I uploaded the photo may have been in ignorance as well. However, not only is the photo not copyrighted, it's being used with David Banks's full knowledege, permission and approval. This photo was from David Banks's website. David Banks has not copyrighted it. David Banks was actually with me when I added the photo, and he helped to decide which photo to use. The photo and the entire page were posted with David's supervision. Let me know how you want to verify this, assuming that you'll need verification. I spoke to David about this, but he's not a member of Wikipedia. I am representing him here. Thanks in advance. --Victorcoutin (talk) 15:49, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this on monday. However, it is not my responsibility to ensure you provded proper licensing information per wikipedias standards. Nor is it my ignorance for deleting an image that was in a violation of our policies here. I just reviewed the final revision before it was deleted and no licensing information was provided. This is not my problem, however yours. Please ensure that all future uploads have all the required information. Thanks! Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 21:58, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No need. You can make much, much, much better use of your precious time, I'm certain. --Victorcoutin (talk) 02:31, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The fact is, I cannot read your mind and even the example you provided above is not enough. You stated it has his full permission and knowledge because he has not copyrighted it. Has david bands released the image in question under the GFDL or into the public domain? It does not matter if it is used on this project with his permission, it needs to explicitly be licensesd properly. That is why the image got deleted is you did not provide the required information and we cannot read your mind.Chris lk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 03:34, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

iRestorer

I recreated this one, as the current article wasn't quite promotional enough to justify a G11 speedy. I have prodded it as NN. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:15, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, cool deal. Thanks for catching that! Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:18, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no assertion of notability at all and no citaitons. However I dont see this being a problem with being prodded. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:19, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But "no assertion of notability" is not grounds for speedy deletion of a product article; web content, group, company, yes, but not product. A7 has limits. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:27, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, I realized that which is why I agreed with prodding. My apologies if this caused any inconvenience. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:30, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of "Beacon Cottage"

Hi, you deleted my fledgling page on Beacon Cottage, which we believe was built by the Earl of Harrowby in 1795 as a hunting lodge / holiday home / love nest / something. I don't yet know all the details I am trying to build up the information.

Was this deleted because this is incorrect use of Wikipedia (i.e. recovering local history is out of scope) or was it because I did something wrong (publishing without much info, not justifying notability)? I thought it was a good thing to make my research public, and thereby benefit from collaboration from others.

OnTopOfTheHill (talk) 16:34, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am reviewing this. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:36, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You in no way indicate why it is significant, and there are no citations. Mostly it is just a date by date lsiting of events that happened to this particular location. The article was written was extremely unencyclopedic. Do you plan on fixing these problems by providing citations and re-writing it in an encyclopedic manner? Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:39, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion Of Clarence Charles

Hi. Why did you delete the article on Clarence Charles? He is a FICTIONAL character. I never indicated in the article that he was a REAL character. And take into account all of these fictional characters as well:

If all of these are on Wikipedia, then why can't Clarence Charles be? Micky 1234567890123 (talk) 16:34, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per the article he had brief roles in season 1 and has not had any important roles since then. Wikipedia is not a place to list every fictional character that has had a minor role in a telvivion series. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:41, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You also mention he is the father of another character? Perhaps a minor mention in the main characters article would be sufficient (with a redirect created to such effect). Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:42, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Image

Why did you delete the image of the book 'How to Win Every Argument'? Your reasons seem obtuse. Indeed, I wager that if you entered into a proper argument on the issue, you'd lose!

Hence, if you don't reply to this message soon, I'll assume you accept you cannot win the argument and will restore the image.Chris who reads books for a living (talk) 20:56, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please provide a link to the image in question? In response to your statement, "Indeed, I wager that if you entered into a proper argument on the issue, you'd lose!" I will gladly explain my reasoning if you can provide a link. I delete hundereds of images/articles a day all for failure to meet wikipedias standards. What most likley happened is YOU failed to provide relevant licensing/fair use information. We cannot read your mind so to ensure that copyright policies are followed, such images are deleted within a reasonable amount of time (usually 7 days). In the case it was recently uploaded, you most likley selected a license that is not compatiable with wikipedias licensing requirements for images to be uploaded. IF you can provide more details, I will gladly provide a more in depth review. Thanks! Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 22:03, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oos.cc speedy deletion

Hi, your answer to the speedy deletion of the oos.cc article was: "it is better that it stay deleted". Can you tell me why you think so since the article was completey re-written to become wikipedia conform. I think that OOS is notable enough (just see the list of links and reviews that were added, more than 20.000 active users, etc.) to get an entry in wikipedia, don't you think? Kind regards, Jason barrington (talk) 10:30, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:45, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXX (August 2008)

The August 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:42, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFAR alert

One of the arbitrators has asked that every admin who is arguably involved in the events at Sarah Palin be notified of an arbitration case covering it. I therefore draw your attention to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#MZMcBride. In your case, you are, like me, one of those who made an edit to the article while it was full protected. GRBerry 18:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a statement to the RFARB, thank you for drawing my attention to this. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:29, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for User:Pulsifer

An editor has asked for a deletion review of User:Pulsifer. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Davewild (talk) 20:12, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sarah Palin protection wheel war

The Sarah Palin wheel war arbitration case, on which you have commented, is now open.

Evidence for the arbitrators may be submitted at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sarah Palin protection wheel war/Evidence. Evidence should be submitted within one week, if possible.
Your contributions are also welcome at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sarah Palin protection wheel war/Workshop.

For the Arbitration Committee, Anthøny ✉ 21:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're invited...

...to the 5th Washington DC Meetup! Please visit the linked page to RSVP or for more information. All are welcome!
This has been an automated delivery, you can opt-out of future notices by removing your name from the invite list. BrownBot (talk) 00:00, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]