User talk:Postdlf/Archive20

West Wind (1891), Winslow Homer

This user has been on Wikipedia for 20 years, 11 months and 2 days.

This user is an administrator on the English Wikipedia.

contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves)

JD This user has a Doctor of Jurisprudence degree.

BFA This user has a Bachelor of Fine Arts degree.

en This user is a native speaker of English.

This user is a participant in WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases.

This user is a member of the Comics Wikiproject.

This user thinks okapis are the coolest animal ever.

CLICK HERE to add a new message.

help me to move the Richard aguirre article to a userification status

If you could please help me to move the Richard aguirre article to a userification status so that I can develop the article. Mr. Aguirre is a famous San Diegan with both a political and musical back round that is of notoriety. I feel that I can get the article up to speed with all the references it will need. Thank you for your help. Wikimikesd (talk) 18:00, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Articles about Richard Aguirre have been deleted FOUR TIMES through the normal AfD process - twice under the name Richard Aguirre and twice under the name Richard William Aguirre. The repeated consensus is that he is NOT notable. You (postdIf) closed the most recent AfD, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Aguirre (second nomination); it was my opinion that it should be, not just deleted, but salted. --MelanieN (talk) 00:42, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

undeletion request

I'd like to ask you to undelete my my user page, please. If memory serves, the final version prior to your deletion was non-controversial, and I would like it restored at least long enough that I might archive it off-site. 24.177.120.138 (talk) 06:48, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

That's a "no"? 24.177.120.138 (talk) 05:15, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Being banned for the past month probably will not convince admins to undelete your userpage.Jasper Deng (talk) 22:24, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Redirect with history preserved request

• List of Navy–Vieques protesters and supporters was deleted because it was what most determined to be an unnecessary list, not because it had inaccurate information(I added several references to major newspapers to prove it was accurate). Can you restore the history and put a redirect there to United States Navy in Vieques, Puerto Rico? A lot of information about the protests was recently merged from another article, Navy–Vieques protests [1], which was replaced with a redirect with full history preserved. I believe some of this information might be useful in that location also, just to list the politicians from there who did jail time for joining the protesters, etc. It was already previously discussed on the talk page for the main article that the list article could have some of its contents merged there. Dream Focus 17:04, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it's a likely search term, and only a few entries were sourced at the time of its deletion. I'll copy those entries that were sourced from the deleted history to User:Dream Focus/Navy-Vieques protesters for you. postdlf (talk) 14:31, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Grant Morrison photo

Hi. Your opinion on what would be the best photo for the Infobox in the Grant Morrison article is requested here. If you could take the time to participate, it would be greatly appreciated, but if you cannot, then disregard; you don't have to leave a note on my talk page either way. Nightscream (talk) 01:29, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Status?

Can you advise as to the status of this action referencing IP 24.177.120.138? Thanks. JakeInJoisey (talk) 19:32, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

The ban was for one month and has since expired. If the IP is disruptive again, it will be blocked again. Is there a current problem? postdlf (talk) 21:20, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

No. I guess I misread the effective date. Thanks JakeInJoisey (talk) 21:56, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

About the deletion of Balkan Holidays

The re-worded article of Balkan Holidays has got now deleted again for not being substantially different (which I disagree) from the article that was deleted following the original discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Balkan Holidays, where you deleted the first version. Could you please give reasons for the reason of deletion in the first instance? 83.244.229.226 (talk) 13:36, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

The consensus was that notability was not established by reliable sources; there were actually NO sources in the article at the time of it's deletion (the co's own website doesn't count for that analysis). And the repost that was just speedy deleted had NO sources regardless of the additional text it added, so the notability issue was in no way fixed. So the differences were not substantial in any relevant way. Please see WP:CORP and WP:GNG for relevant notability guidelines. postdlf (talk) 15:29, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Mahlon Pitney.gif listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mahlon Pitney.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. howcheng {chat} 05:22, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Got another one for you: File:Rufus peckham.gif, replaced by File:Rufus Wheeler Peckham cph.3b30513.jpg (which looks to be the uncropped version of the GIF you found). I didn't list it at FFD; you can just delete it yourself (or I can list it there if you prefer). howcheng {chat} 07:19, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Done. The quality of those larger images is really amazing. postdlf (talk) 07:26, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm not even doing much with them -- crop the border off, use Photoshop auto-level adjustment, and that's it. howcheng {chat} 07:33, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for finding and uploading them at the very least. postdlf (talk) 07:34, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Supreme Court List Articles

Your Supreme Court list articles are fantastic! I could scarcely believe it when I stumbled across ones such as 2010 term opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States. Looking forward to helping you out next term! Sailing to Byzantium (talk) 11:58, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm glad they're appreciated. Just be careful that your changes actually match the text of the opinions and not what you think they should be; your correction to the Leal Garcia caption in the per curiam list was contrary to how the Court rendered it. postdlf (talk) 05:34, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Whoops, sorry about that! I'll be much more careful in the future. Sailing to Byzantium (talk) 05:46, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

List of Miss USA, Miss Teen USA and Miss America titleholders who have appeared on reality television

Any chance you could restore a version of this page just so I can save the info for my records? No problem with it being deleted again, I just wished I'd saved the info! Thanks PageantUpdater talk • contribs 23:19, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Diary of a Bad Man

This article that you deleted three months ago, Diary of a Bad Man, success and coverage has improved since then. It has been featured on BBC News back in July and over 20 million views on the channel, and regular radio interviews. Surely that should count as notable? 82.46.152.122 (talk) 13:52, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

• I Agree (article should be undeleted)-Article was delete several months ago for failing to establish notability from a credible source. This is article concerns online webisodes and has attracted the attention of BBC News in July 2011 (Muslim comedian Humza Arshad becomes internet sensation ---- http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-14222093). Ergo, I feel that this article should be revived from the deleted pages. Opinions welcome add to the discussion. --InExcelsis DeoTalk 18:45, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
  • If you think notability can now be demonstrated, either under WP:GNG or WP:WEB, then please present that argument at Wikipedia:Deletion review, being sure to carefully present and highlight which sources are new (or newly discovered) since the AFD discussions. postdlf (talk) 18:50, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dog's Pog

Hey, I saw you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dog's Pog, and deleted Dog's Pog, but the AfD also addressed other articles that were also related to that article as well. Just wanted to bring that to your attention in case you might have missed it. Thank you. - SudoGhost 17:43, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, it was an oversight. Thanks for pointing it out. postdlf (talk) 17:57, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Crossfire Deletion Reason

I've seen that you have deleted a first shooter game called, "Cross Fire". Why delete it? (I have never played the game， just wondering why.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.245.57.78 (talk) 07:31, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

The discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CrossFire (online PC game) established a consensus that the game wasn't notable, meaning that no reliable sources had written about it so there was no basis for an article. postdlf (talk) 13:32, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Bertha Heyman

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Ohio cemeteries

Just saw your post from late July at the Village Pump regarding cemetery notavility. You may be interested in the Internet Archive's copious number of nineteenth-century Ohio county histories — the Allen County, Indiana (Fort Wayne) Public Library owns a massive collection of Ohio county histories, and they arranged for the Archive to get digital copies of them. County histories that I've used are generally careful to pay attention to at least some cemeteries. Nyttend (talk) 00:24, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip, I do plan on checking out what they have in this area eventually. Did you have a chance to take a look at my sandbox list I'm working on? The Franklin County section uses the template format I'm developing. Your suggestions are appreciated. postdlf (talk) 15:53, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Socratic Barnstar
		I wish to award you The Socratic Barnstar for your having waded through an incredible long discussion in order to seek the consensus. Trying to follow the discussion must have been akin to chasing a reed in a whilwind. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 01:25, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Tinker and Mayo

You seem to be far more knowledgeable about this area of Wikipedia than I, so I shall certainly defer to you. I'm curious though, is there a naming convention guideline for court cases? NW (Talk) 18:35, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Not a written one on WP, no. General practice is to follow the standard "short form" name of a case (that which is used in case citations in legal writing; the Bluebook gives the most widely accepted standards for this), but often simplified to avoid abbreviations or words that might be considered unnecessary for a lay audience. We can see how the Court itself shortens names in both the headers of their case opinions and their lists for each term (e.g., http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/slipopinions.aspx?Term=10). I think often our article case names simplify too much, such as by dropping the "Inc." or "Corp." from a party name that tells you right away it's a corporation instead of some other entity, but that's relatively trivial. Thanks for your understanding, and please let me know if you have any other questions. postdlf (talk) 18:55, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

hey you can delete this if you want but dont delete the fischers chameleon info please, im trying to expand it. thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.82.99.249 (talk) 06:31, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

You've been naughty

[2] I'm sure the goddess would have spanked you if she could. FuFoFuEd (talk) 07:32, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

photo requests

I was about to request a New York City photo, but I see you've moved. Could I ask you to update your listing at Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Photographers? Got to admit I'm dissapointed to see I can't ask you. You've taken some wonderful pictures. Cloveapple (talk) 03:37, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, unfortunately I don't even get back to NYC very often either (once in the past two years since I left). Just out of curiosity, what was the request going to be? postdlf (talk) 14:56, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Toby Buonagurio's art installation at the 42nd Street Times Square subway stop Cloveapple (talk) 19:57, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Postdlf. You have new messages at Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability.
Message added 23:33, 30 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Cerejota (talk) 23:33, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

publication histories

Thanks for your assistance. I've been a skeptic about whether these articles could be improved to be something other than an original compilation of some fans' favorite storylines. But it shows promise. It seems to have a much clearer inclusion criteria that's verifiable, and not just subjective opinion. I appreciate your edits to continually improve these types of lists. Shooterwalker (talk) 01:48, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. The problem with the list is that it's been equivocating mere fictional crossovers, in which a character from one book may appear in another, thus establishing them as part of the same shared fictional universe, with crossover events, in which a single storyline is told across multiple comic book titles as a marketing ploy (something Marvel and DC have done every year since the early 80s, often tying in all of their superhero books with a limited series anchoring the story). It should probably just focus on the events; landmarks of the other kind of crossover can be noted in the articles on the companies' "universes". postdlf (talk) 14:05, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

why you have deleted the page of adya prasad pandey

Rajeshsng (talk) 12:36, 6 September 2011 (UTC)why you delete as i am trying to make it in a new manner just undelete it so that i can make it in a justified manner help to improve the article not just to delete it .

I deleted it according to the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adya Prasad Pandey, where the consensus was that the subject was not notable, as that term is used on Wikipedia. If you are confident that you can prove Pandey's notability, either through significant coverage in multiple reliable sources, or by meeting the notability guidelines specific to professors at WP:PROF, then please present that evidence clearly and succinctly at Wikipedia:Deletion review. postdlf (talk) 13:55, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Wong Kim Ark

Thanks for your help earlier regarding the footnote cites in United States v. Wong Kim Ark. I was wondering if you might be willing to go back to the FA review page (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/United States v. Wong Kim Ark/archive1) and see if you might have anything additional to say. The discussion has largely moved beyond proofreading / copyediting issues and is now dealing with content / source issues. Thanks for any insights you can offer. Richwales (talk · contribs) 03:29, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Typewriter Eraser, Scale X.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Typewriter Eraser, Scale X.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:50, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:NBC television network

Category:NBC television network, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:11, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

cats

I'll respond on my talk page. Savidan 22:46, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

I'll agree to stop changing categories until this is resolved, but I would also ask that you stop reverting what I've done in the interim as well. Savidan 22:57, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

One week after my explanation, neither you nor anyone else has responded here. If you are not satisfied, could you please raise your concerns at your earliest convenience. Savidan 03:08, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Zahm Hall residence hall at Notre Dame

Hi - Can you briefly explain why you deleted the Zahn Hall entry, but have left other Notre Dame residence hall entries up? Dorms are a big part of the culture of Notre Dame, and if one dorm is seen as valid, then all other dorm entires should as well.

Deletion of Zahm Hall residence hall at Notre Dame

Hi - Can you briefly explain why you deleted the Zahn Hall entry, but have left other Notre Dame residence hall entries up? Dorms are a big part of the culture of Notre Dame, and if one dorm is seen as valid, then all other dorm entires should as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Znarky (talk • contribs) 11:52, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Your reasoning is a bit flawed. It doesn't follow from the fact that some individual dormitories are worth writing about that all dorms are therefore worth writing about. And "dorm culture" is undoubtedly a big part of campus life at any university that has dorms, which doesn't mean that any particular dorm is a good article subject. The basic guideline is that a subject must have significant coverage from multiple reliable and independent sources. This is all spelled out in my close of the AFD, so you really should take the time to follow those links and read up on Wikipedia standards so you can understand why we do what we do here. postdlf (talk) 16:21, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Gh87 and his or her deletion debates

Hello, Postdlf. I see that you commented on Gh87's ridiculousness in some of these deletion debates. Well, he or she has gotten worse. Making bizarre claims about when an article can be recreated and what is important in deletion debates about fictional characters, which I responded to.[3] And nominating articles in obvious bad-faith, which I also responded to.[4]

Will you comment on this? don't even think this editor should be nominating articles for deletion. 174.137.184.36 (talk) 14:51, 12 October 2011 (UTC)