Jump to content

User talk:SchuminWeb/Archive 25: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
SchuminWeb (talk | contribs)
95,920 edits
←Redirected page to User talk:SchuminWeb
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{User:SchuminWeb/Talk archive}}
#REDIRECT [[User talk:SchuminWeb]]

==[[Lifetime income tax]]==
You reasonably enough deleted this as an expired prod; however I found multiple good RSs, and undeleted. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive633#Iranians_in_CAT:CSD] for background. '''[[User:DGG| DGG]]''' ([[User talk:DGG| talk ]]) 04:31, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

:Excellent that you found reliable sources for the article! I'm going to claim TL/DR on the ANI discussion, though. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 04:49, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alabama Baptist State Board of Missions]] ==
You've been following? [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] ([[User talk:Uncle G|talk]]) 02:36, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

:Kinda sorta. Looks like at least one article may now pass muster, but the others still need work, and some of the comments are [[WP:ITSNOTABLE]] without further explanation. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 02:43, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

::Can we narrow the field a bit, then? [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] ([[User talk:Uncle G|talk]]) 09:39, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

:::Generally speaking, I do not withdraw AFDs. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 18:54, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

== [[Ahmed Ezz (Egyptian actor)]] ==

I see that you speedily deleted this despite the clear claims of importance/significance, i.e. starring roles in multiple films. Please reconsider. [[User:Phil Bridger|Phil Bridger]] ([[User talk:Phil Bridger|talk]]) 19:16, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

:I looked again and determined that the subject does clear A7. However, I have left the BLP PROD tag in place. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 00:24, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

== Suspected copyright violation with no proof ==

I know what to do if I see a page that I know is violating copyright. But what if it's a huge mess that just seems as if it is violating copyright but I have no proof? Such as the entirety of [[Manly Daily]]. See the link at the bottom, I think someone copied it right out of a non-fiction book. Not cool. [[User:Lots42|Lots42]] ([[User talk:Lots42|talk]]) 11:06, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

:I rolled it back and indicated exactly why I was rolling it back - suspected copyvio and unreferenced to boot. No one says you can't remove it when that little voice tells you it's more than likely a copyvio. Especially in this case, when, after locating the edits where the material was added, I discovered that the entire block was added at once, plus it was the editor's first edit ever. Put two and two together and I have enough reason to roll it back on intuition. I won't speedy delete on intuition, but I will roll it back. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 18:53, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

::Thanks. [[User:Lots42|Lots42]] ([[User talk:Lots42|talk]]) 10:00, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

== Australian Association of Live Steamers ==

An editor is questioning your deletion of [[Australian Association of Live Steamers]] (see [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion#Australian_Association_of_Live_Steamers]]). In reviewing it, I'm seeing a good faith claim of importance, namely "The Association is probably the first truly national association of live steamers in the world." I'm going to be bold and undelete it, but if you have an objection feel free to drop me a line and we can discuss it. (No objection to it going to AfD if you think notability isn't there -- I haven't taken a look at that, only the importance issue.) Cheers!--[[User:Fabrictramp|<font color="#228b22" face="comic sans ms">Fabrictramp</font>]] | [[User talk:Fabrictramp|<font color="#960018" face="Papyrus">talk to me</font>]] 19:36, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

:Thanks for taking care of the restore. I have nominated it for AFD, because while it might clear A7, I believe it still fails notability. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 23:04, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

==[[Glassesdirect]]==
Hi - I wrote an article on this company as part of an overview of the UK retail opticians sector. Your claimed reason for deletion was CSDA7.

This is incomprehensible to me as (and the article stated all of these things) GD is the major player in the UK online optical sector, forced a change of strategy by the major players in the market. probably the only interesting retail optician likely to get a floatation, the project of a guy who is almost certain to become a UK cabinet minister (he's already a senior government advisor, one of the closest friends of prince willian or harry - not being a teenage girl I can't tell them apart), and one of the few profitable UK based internet retailers. Also you've left the articles I wrote on the UK optical sector and its major personalities with an irritating orphaned link to the GD page, which they rely on. Thus messing up a collection of articles on a multi-billion dollar industry that is far too boring for anyone to usually write about. (I wouldn't have done unless I'd done the research already.) And, much. much, MUCH worse, ruining the story of one of the [b]funniest[/b] business feuds I've ever heard.

(If I can make a suggestion to an obviously hard-working fellow wikipedian - always remember that this is hypertext you are editing, and be extra careful about deleting articles that are relied on by others.)

Otoh, an analyst I barely knew got my phone number off a mutual friend (my number yet - not even email!) and phoned me to complain that the article was gone. Ok, it was a complaint, but it still shows that people in the real world use wikipedia for important stuff, not just looking up anime characters and cheating on homework. I feel so validated that I might come back and start the series on the UK waste disposal and land management industries that I was planning! It was an even better feeling than one of the other "optical" articles being featured on wikipedia's front page.

So I'll restore the article tomorrow and check in one my user page for a few days in case you want to talk.

PS Really nicely word user page blurb - very non-confrontational.

[[User:Umptious|Umptious]] ([[User talk:Umptious|talk]]) 21:03, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

:I looked again, and looks like it might very well be worth restoring. So I'm going to do so. And thanks for the comments on my page blurb. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 23:07, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

== Deleting User:Dodo19/Miacek ==

Could you explain how this page you deleted just now ([[User:Dodo19/Miacek]]) threatened the user in question? Or how the other criteria for an "attack page" are met? You are aware that there is [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Dodo19_-_stalking_User:Miacek_and_compiling_his_.27Little_Black_Book.27|a discussion]] still going on, I persume?
<br>
Well, since [[User:Miacek]] seems to have left, there is no need to restore the page. But I would like to understand the rationale behind all this, as I might consider coming back one time and I don't want to experience anything like this again. If you have any comments, please join the debate (see above).
Yours --[[User:Dodo19|Dodo19]] ([[User talk:Dodo19|talk]]) 05:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

:I read the ANI discussion, and agreed with the tagger that this it was an attack page. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 05:38, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
::I figured that much myself, cheers. But this doesn't answer my question how you came to that conclusion and why you did not comment on the noticeboard. Yours --[[User:Dodo19|Dodo19]] ([[User talk:Dodo19|talk]]) 07:03, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

== Username discussion ==

Hello, SchuminWeb! An editor has started [[Wikipedia:RFCN#SchuminWeb|a RFC regarding your username]]. Your input there would be appreciated. -[[User:Kotra|kotra]] ([[User talk:Kotra|talk]]) 17:18, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

:Apologies; I didn't realize the editor had already notified you on [[User_talk:SchuminWeb/Unprotected_talk_page#Username_SchuminWeb|your other talk page]]. -[[User:Kotra|kotra]] ([[User talk:Kotra|talk]]) 17:21, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

== [[LoveTheseCurves]] ==
I really don't know why lovethesecurves was deleted. please tell me what I have to do to be wiki worthy with this article. I read and read but nothing is making this clear for me. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Superj707|Superj707]] ([[User talk:Superj707|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Superj707|contribs]]) 20:33, 27 August 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:[[LoveTheseCurves]] was deleted under speedy deletion criterion A7 as an article about a Web site that made no claim to notability. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 23:24, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

== See also delinking ==

What's the point of delinking a "see also" link as you did [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Google_PowerMeter&action=historysubmit&diff=381434727&oldid=380777354 here]? There's nothing to see (i.e. no article), so why not delete the entire line? I've gone ahead and deleted the line but I'm wondering if there's a good reason for leaving the entry there. <span style="font-family:monospace;">[[User:Dismas|Dismas]]</span>|[[User talk:Dismas|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 04:15, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

:Automated Twinkle delink, so I never actually saw the article. However, thanks for performing the necessary cleanup. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 04:26, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

== Dominico Venetucci rescue ==

I've hammered together a new version of [[Dominico Venetucci]] at AfD and would appreciate your reconsideration on the "Delete" recommendation. [[User:Carrite|Carrite]] ([[User talk:Carrite|talk]]) 05:32, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

:I generally do not withdraw my own AFD nominations, preferring to see them to conclusion. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 14:20, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

==AfD [[Protest Warrior]]==
An article that really needs it. [[User:Carolmooredc|CarolMooreDC]] ([[User talk:Carolmooredc|talk]]) 12:42, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

:See [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Protest Warrior (2nd nomination)]]. This appears to be another article, like DAWN, where the notability claim is light, and now that time has passed, we can better determine notability. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 14:24, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

::Actually, I'm ambivalent given a few WP:RS. But here's one that really has to go. NO WP:RS at all. [[Muslim WakeUp!]] Maybe I'll remind myself how to AfD and have some fun too. [[User:Carolmooredc|CarolMooreDC]] ([[User talk:Carolmooredc|talk]]) 18:25, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

:::Indeed, you should do some AFD-ing if you feel moved to nominate something for deletion. I recommend using [[WP:TW|Twinkle]] for it, which you can install as a gadget in your preferences. It makes AFD (and TFD, CFD, RFD, FFD, etc.) very quick and convenient to do. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 05:18, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

::::Thanks. Been procrastinating on figuring it out. I hope it works for Categories (ones that violate BLP my biggest bugaboo). [[User:Carolmooredc|CarolMooreDC]] ([[User talk:Carolmooredc|talk]]) 16:36, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

:::::Any objection to my taking up this suggestion at [[Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/DC_Anti-War_Network]]: ''Delete and merge to Opposition to the Iraq War.''? [[User:Carolmooredc|CarolMooreDC]] ([[User talk:Carolmooredc|talk]]) 22:23, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

::::::I'm kind of ambivalent about it. I don't see the harm in it, but at the same time, I don't see the value in it, either. So whatever, I suppose. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 01:17, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

==[[400 Blows (band)]]==
Hi, I saw you A7'ed this article. The band's actually not unknown; I dug around a little and found an Allmusic profile ([http://allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:acfyxq80ldte~T1]) and a review from PopMatters ([http://www.popmatters.com/pm/review/400blows-angels/]), which should at least knock them out of A7 territory. Could you please restore the article? I'll add these references to it. [[User:Chubbles|Chubbles]] ([[User talk:Chubbles|talk]]) 13:37, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
:I can also add ''[[CMJ New Music Monthly]]'' ([http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=aCLLK8t9Ob8C&pg=PA28&dq=400+blows+music&hl=en&ei=cBJ5TMD1NIHEswah99iyDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=400%20blows%20music&f=false], [http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=XioEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA60&dq=400+blows+music&hl=en&ei=cBJ5TMD1NIHEswah99iyDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CEcQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=400%20blows%20music&f=false], [http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_ywEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PT47&dq=400+blows+music&hl=en&ei=cBJ5TMD1NIHEswah99iyDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CF4Q6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=400%20blows%20music&f=false]) and an entry in Barry Lazell's ''Indie Hits'' (the band had 2 top 30 albums and 5 singles on the UK Independent Chart), so would also request that this is restored. Thanks.--[[User:Michig|Michig]] ([[User talk:Michig|talk]]) 13:48, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
:In fact they had a #54 single in the UK, as [http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:w3GLqEB9lKQJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/400_Blows_(British_band)+400+blows+tony+thorpe&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk this cached version of the article] spells out, with a good reference, so I'm struggling to see how this was a suitable A7 deletion.--[[User:Michig|Michig]] ([[User talk:Michig|talk]]) 13:52, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

::Well, cool! The article is restored, so have fun with it, and happy editing. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 14:19, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
:::Thank you. Actually appears to be about a different band to the one I was thinking of, so will have to rely on Chubbles' sources here.--[[User:Michig|Michig]] ([[User talk:Michig|talk]]) 14:56, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

== [[Temporary Residence Limited]] ==

Hello SchuminWeb. I was patrolling [[CAT:SD]] yesterday and deleted the above article, which you tagged, under [[WP:CSD#A7]]. I was [[User_talk:Airplaneman#Temporary_Residence_Limited|contacted]] about the deletion today, and after taking another look at the article, decided it was borderline, but ''did'' assert notability (although in a spammy kind of way, IMO). Please feel free to AfD or PROD it if you still think it is fit for deletion. Thanks, [[User:Airplaneman|<span style="color:blue;size=2">Airplaneman</span>]][[User talk:Airplaneman|<span style="color:#33dd44;size=2"> ✈</span>]] 14:02, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

==[[By the End of Tonight]]==
I fear getting on your nerves, but I think you might have been a little overzealous last night...I also saw that [[By the End of Tonight]] was deleted. This band had two albums on [[Temporary Residence Limited]], which would meet [[WP:MUSIC]]; they also have an Allmusic profile at [http://allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:0vfoxqyaldhe~T2] and were reviewed by, among others, [[Pitchfork Media]] at [http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/1128-tribute-to-tigers/]. Could you please restore this one as well? Thanks [[User:Chubbles|Chubbles]] ([[User talk:Chubbles|talk]]) 14:51, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

:I found no claim to notability made in the article, thus why the title was deleted. Notability is not inherited, therefore the record label's notability or lack thereof does not have any bearing on this subject's notability. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 15:45, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
::It has nothing to do with the label's ''notability'', which is an artificial construct for the website; it has to do with the label's real-world importance, as per [[WP:MUSIC]] bullet point 5. Regardless of whether TRL has an article, it meets that bullet point. In any case, the two references provided should at least lift the band out of A7 territory. You can userfy it if you like - same end result. [[User:Chubbles|Chubbles]] ([[User talk:Chubbles|talk]]) 15:50, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
::Please note that this has been taken to DRV. [[User:Stifle|Stifle]] ([[User talk:Stifle|talk]]) 07:58, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

== [[Just foreign policy]] and [[The Palestine house]] ==
Schumin could you please explain to me why you deleted my contributions to Just Foreign Policy and The Palestine House? What is missing? what needed to be done to get them posted? Thanks.... [[User:ME202012|Bill]] ([[User talk:ME202012|talk]]) 15:19, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

:I did not delete [[Just foreign policy]], and so am unqualified to speak as to why it was deleted.

:I did, however, delete [[The Palestine house]], which was an article about a subject where notability was not asserted in the article. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 15:43, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

::I would like to know please two things from you Schumin: 1.) who are you to delete an article? I mean, what is your official function at Wikipedia? who gives you the authority to do so? Why delete before warning? Why you are deleting before sending an information email to the person... 2.) could you please clarify more what do yo umean by Notability was not asserted in the article?.....what do you mean by that? and please examples are appreciated.....thanks! [[User:ME202012|Bill]] ([[User talk:ME202012|talk]]) 04:48, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

:::1) I am a Wikipedia user with the administrator flag. I gained the administrator flag through [[WP:RFA|Requests for Adminship]] in May 2007. The process involves community discussion on whether or not a candidate will make proper use of the administrator tools, which include deleting pages, protecting pages, and blocking editors' accounts and/or IP addresses for disruption. You were [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:ME202012&diff=381424361&oldid=381401666 notified on your talk page of the speedy deletion nomination] by [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] on August 28 at 2:15 UTC.

:::2) The speedy deletion criterion that the article was deleted under was [[WP:CSD#A7|A7]], which states, "An article about a real person, individual animal(s), organization (e.g. band, club, company, etc., except schools), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant." It is a low standard to meet, and [[The Palestine house]] failed to meet even that low standard. To survive on Wikipedia on the long-term, however, one must meet the [[WP:GNG|guidelines on notability]]. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 08:56, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

: got it! thank you for clarification. I agree, I need to rephrase the verbiage in order to protrude the importance to the reader. thank you ... will have another run on it soon. Regards; [[User:ME202012|Bill]] ([[User talk:ME202012|talk]]) 15:40, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

==Alvarado Street Bakery==
Hi SchuminWeb. You recently deleted [[Alvarado Street Bakery]], an article I created. I would like to try and see if I can improve the article. Would you be able to help me userfy the page so I can work on it? [[User:Gobonobo|<font face="Verdana" color="333300">Gobonobo</font>]] [[User_talk:Gobonobo|<sup>T</sup>]] [[Special:Contributions/Gobonobo|<sup>C</sup>]] 12:58, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

:Actually, I don't think we have to go that far. That was part of a number of speedy nominees tagged by an IP before I realized something was up and the noms were vandalism. I'm going to restore it to mainspace and roll back the vandalism. However, you still do need to improve the sourcing. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 15:48, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

::I'm surprised that this vandalism went as far as it did. Aren't candidates for speedy deletion supposed to have a template applied? Anyhow, thanks for reverting the deletion. --[[User:Stepheng3|Stepheng3]] ([[User talk:Stepheng3|talk]]) 22:09, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
::Please also undelete the talk page. --[[User:Stepheng3|Stepheng3]] ([[User talk:Stepheng3|talk]]) 22:11, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

:::Done. Also, yes - template was applied. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 22:26, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

::::Thanks. I'll work on the sourcing. Cheers, [[User:Gobonobo|<font face="Verdana" color="333300">Gobonobo</font>]] [[User_talk:Gobonobo|<sup>T</sup>]] [[Special:Contributions/Gobonobo|<sup>C</sup>]] 22:47, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

== Sacred Code ==

Removing a G4 and asking to defer to an AFD where the only two !votes are already asking for a G4. Yeah, that makes a ''lot'' of sense... *eyeroll* <span style="color:green">Ten Pound Hammer</span>, [[Special:Contributions/TenPoundHammer|his otters]] and a clue-bat • <sup>([[User talk:TenPoundHammer|Otters want attention]])</sup> 17:01, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

== [[Forward Energy Solutions]] ==

I believe this page was wrongfully deleted, as a precedence, the page [[The Energy Detective]] is accepted. This company is less notable than Forward Energy Solutions, and the page has less references. Forward Energy Solutions is notable and unique because they offer energy monitoring for both home and business users. Usually companies only offer one or the other. The company is notable and the evidence of the claims in the article were verifiable by the references given. I think a delete was too severe.
[[User:Silvaneus|Silvaneus]] ([[User talk:Silvaneus|talk]]) 14:56, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

:I found no claim to notability in the article's text, and I found nothing to indicate notability in the sources (I looked at all of them) even if the article is lacking. It seemed to be a good fit with the A7 criterion, therefore it was speedily deleted. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 16:08, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

::Can you userfy the old content of the page? [[User:Silvaneus|Silvaneus]] ([[User talk:Silvaneus|talk]]) 17:27, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

:::Userfied to [[User:Silvaneus/Forward Energy Solutions]]. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 18:08, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

::::Thank you, I put a lot of work into the research on that page and I would like to keep a little of it to ogle over like Gollum in Lord of the Rings [[User:Silvaneus|Silvaneus]] ([[User talk:Silvaneus|talk]]) 18:12, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

:::::Now remember, [[WP:FAKEARTICLE]] indicates that one should not use the userspace just to memorialize deleted content. You do need to actively be working to improve it. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 18:17, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

::::::Yes, of course. Thank you again [[User:Silvaneus|Silvaneus]] ([[User talk:Silvaneus|talk]]) 18:20, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
==Against Pending Changes==
{{User:Gniniv/Userboxes/NoPend}}
:Add this userbox to your userpage to advertise your opposition to [[WP:Pending Changes]]--<span style="background:black; color:red;font-size:small;;font-family:Freestyle Script;">Gniniv</span> ([[User talk:Gniniv|talk]]) 07:15, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
:Love it! Adding it to the user page. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 15:54, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

==Toronto G20 protests==
Please take a look at a revised caption [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2010_G-20_Toronto_summit_protests&diff=382542332&oldid=382541222 here]. You may have forgotten a reasonable concern that the addition of a small protestor group logo was unhelpful or inadequately supported. This issue arises in the context of the article about protests at the G20 summit in Toronto.<p>We start from agreement that the premise of your critical analysis is valid; but is my attempt to resolve this good enough? If it still seems that I don't "get it," are you willing to try again to help me figure out what I need to do? --[[User:Tenmei|Tenmei]] ([[User talk:Tenmei|talk]]) 20:57, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

== Judd logo ==

Hi. Thanks for carrying out my revert request so swiftly. is there anything a non-admin can do in a case like this?--[[User:Kudpung|Kudpung]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 06:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

:You can revert back to the original logo prior to the admin's coming in to delete the vandalism revision, but otherwise, actually deleting requires the sysop bit. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 13:31, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

::Thanks ;) --[[User:Kudpung|Kudpung]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 16:11, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

== [[Animal Rescue Foundation]] ==

Would you mind if I restored [[Animal Rescue Foundation]]? I was about to decline the speedy as it's not clear which text the article copied, if it copied anything at all - the given URL dates from 2007 which is quite long after the article's creation and the article has changed very little since 2005. [[User:Kimchi.sg|Kimchi.sg]] ([[User talk:Kimchi.sg|talk]]) 06:22, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

:Go for it. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 13:30, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

== Problems ==
Hi Ben. Might you have a look at this [[User_talk:ElKevbo#Huh.3F]] with [[User:ElKevbo]] ? He reverted out without discussion many "further readings" I put in to a number of articles about for-profit degrees etc. He called them "link spam". But they were citations. Thanks. --- (Bob) [[User:Wikiklrsc|Wikiklrsc]] ([[User talk:Wikiklrsc|talk]]) 15:52, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

== Debut songs of 2007 (Argentina) ==

How the heck is this not a G8? It's a subpage of [[Top 100 Argentina]] which was deleted ages ago. And you want to let it slog its way through AFD or Prod for a week or longer. Why not speedy it via IAR? It's obviously not going to be kept. <span style="color:green">Ten Pound Hammer</span>, [[Special:Contributions/TenPoundHammer|his otters]] and a clue-bat • <sup>([[User talk:TenPoundHammer|Otters want attention]])</sup> 17:27, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

:As I understand [[WP:CSD#G8]], the criterion doesn't apply to articles. This isn't a subpage - subpages are things like [[User:SchuminWeb/Blah]] or [[Wikipedia:Example/Blah]]. Subpages were discontinued in the article namespace years ago, and therefore for technical reasons cannot exist in article namespace.

:Additionally, there is nothing necessarily wrong with a slower process. I'm not inclined to ignore all rules on this one, because this just feels like one of those where someone would howl at an IAR deletion. Thus it should go through the AFD process (PROD has no teeth - AFD is the way to go), and a consensus should be formed, that way if anyone complains, we can point at the AFD page, and say, "See?" [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 17:35, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

::Who'd complain at a list associated with a chart whose article was deleted three years ago AND has no incoming links whatsoever? You're out of your freaking mind if you think someone would complain about this one. <span style="color:green">Ten Pound Hammer</span>, [[Special:Contributions/TenPoundHammer|his otters]] and a clue-bat • <sup>([[User talk:TenPoundHammer|Otters want attention]])</sup> 17:39, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

:::I've had people complain about deletions more straightforward than this one. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 17:41, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

::::Meh. No one ever wants to delete anything anymore. [[WP:SEP]] and so forth. You have no idea how much I have to badger admins on IRC just for a simple G6 (not this one). <span style="color:green">Ten Pound Hammer</span>, [[Special:Contributions/TenPoundHammer|his otters]] and a clue-bat • <sup>([[User talk:TenPoundHammer|Otters want attention]])</sup> 17:42, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

:::::I have no problems with deleting stuff, and a look at my deletion log contributions would seem to confirm that. However, it just needs to go through the correct process to reach that end. See [[Wikipedia:Process is important]]. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 17:46, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
::::::More like process for the sake of process, if you ask me. <span style="color:green">Ten Pound Hammer</span>, [[Special:Contributions/TenPoundHammer|his otters]] and a clue-bat • <sup>([[User talk:TenPoundHammer|Otters want attention]])</sup> 17:55, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

== Short 4 days? ==

Can you please explain how you could CSD#C1 [[:Category:Minor Counties cricketers]] when at least one [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nicholas_Adams&action=historysubmit&diff=382777891&oldid=372721291 article] was only changed from Counties to counties on the 4th of Sept. The rules are in place to allow other editors to determine if it was a correct decision to move the cats. It [[Category_talk:Minor_counties_cricketers|wasn't]] the right [[Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cricket#Category_.22Minor_counties_cricketers.22|decision]]. Please revert yourself, undelete, stick to the rules and fix up the mess.[[User:The-Pope|The-Pope]] ([[User talk:The-Pope|talk]]) 00:24, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

:The way the current MediaWiki setup is, it does not allow me to see when a category was emptied, and so one has to [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]] in deleting such things. I can undelete it, wait four days, and then delete it again, but considering it just went through a speedy-rename process and is apparently more controversial than people expected, if I were you, I would nominate it for renaming back to what you intended in [[WP:CFD|CFD]] so that a discussion may take place.

:In short: I am going to decline to undo my administrative action, and you should nominate it for a full discussion. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 01:05, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

== Schroeder Romero & Shredder ==
I am recreating the page [[Schroeder Romero & Shredder]] with significant improvements and references.[[User:Warrenking|Warrenking]] ([[User talk:Warrenking|talk]]) 04:32, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

== Zishan Engineers ==
Hi Schumin.. This is with reference to the Zishan Engineers article you just deleted. I had requested it to be put on hold since I was having a discussion with Ottawa there.This was my stance

The ZEL website is there and shows the list of projects that have been done till 2004 and the website up-gradation has started and would be completed with a couple of weeks time. Ottawa mentioned the reason for deleition that the website of the organization doesnt serve as a secondary source and only a primary source, then please check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nespak - Nespak Pakistan which only presents two references that are of its own site (no secondary sources). There are also many statements in that article that need citations for e.g the last sentence. This is common for numerous articles concerning pakistani companies (I can give you the article names too if you want) With these emerging pakistani companies and organizations its very hard to find secondary sources since the primary sources themselves (their own websites) are rare. I believe it is for this very reason why wikipedia launched WikiProject Pakistan to improve wikipedias coverage of pakistan.

In all fairness, I feel that ZEL's article has more secondary sources and more notability ( even in its un updated website) than NESPAK(that article doesnt even have one) if you need a comparision, one can google both organizations and compare its notability. I dont see how ZEL is not as notable like NESPAK or other articles on pakistani organizations. I would request you to kindly allow me to upload the article. If you deem fit or should you advise, I can upload the article after the website is upgraded to include new projects but compared with other articles on pakistani organizations, I think this one has a place in wikipedia. Appreciate all your help <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Uzairsyedahmed|Uzairsyedahmed]] ([[User talk:Uzairsyedahmed|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Uzairsyedahmed|contribs]]) 22:30, 6 September 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:I am standing by my deletion, and am not going to restore at ths time. I read the discussion on the talk page, and the general thrust of it is that the organization's own site is insufficient either for the A7 "claim" to notability, or the [[WP:CORP]] real notability. If you would like to work on the topic in your userspace, feel free. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 22:36, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Okay. So should I upload the article after the organization's website is updated? does an organizations website suffice as a show of notability? could you please explain why article on Nespak wasnt suggested for afd. It would help me in figuring out how to write a better article because I feel that it perhaps has less notablity than the article I wrote. Thanks alot for your help <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Uzairsyedahmed|Uzairsyedahmed]] ([[User talk:Uzairsyedahmed|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Uzairsyedahmed|contribs]]) 22:47, 6 September 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:See [[WP:CORP]] and [[WP:FIRSTARTICLE]] for guidance. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 23:29, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

== Elijah Muhammad, Jr. ==

Hi, I hope you don't mind my userfying of the article at [[User:Ism schism/Elijah Muhammad, Jr.]] for the user who had created it. [[User:Dabomb87|Dabomb87]] ([[User talk:Dabomb87|talk]]) 00:58, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

:Go for it. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 03:01, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

== deletion decline ==

hi, you declined my Speedy deletion because there was no rational, i put in the talk page because I couldn't edit the tag, (used the multiple issues one because i couldn't find a miscellaneous one), the reason i tagged the article was because this is not Wikia, we don't have individual articles for individual Mario enemies, they go in the characters article otherwise we'll be seeing articles for Goombas and koopa troopers--[[User:Lerdthenerd|Lerdthenerd]] ([[User talk:Lerdthenerd|talk]]) 13:15, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

:Seems you've nominated the article under [[WP:PROD]]. That ought to work better than CSD in this case. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 14:52, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

== Oxbow Deletion ==

HOW, may I ask, didn't the Oxbow article state the "significance of its subject"?? It's a major international brand that sponsors major international events and athletes. How in any way does that deserve to be deleted by the high court of SchuminWeb? I don't know how to undelete the page and think that atleast the subject should have been discussed before deletion. delta_foxtrot_zulu 13:34, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

:See [[WP:CSD#A7]]. The article clearly fit the speedy deletion criterion, and therefore was deleted. Considering this was the second time that the article was deleted, if you are dead set on recreating it again, you had better get some serious sources lined up before you start writing. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 14:49, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

::Look past the letter of the law to the fact that this was a legitimate article, about a legitimate and major brand. The existence of the article adds to the informational scope of Wikipedia. There are plenty of articles about plenty of other things that don't have/need sources. The French language article on Oxbow doesn't have any sources and hasn't been deleted. The article was not written like an advertisement and merely offered relevant information on the company. Again, strictly according to the letter of Wikipedia standards, it might be deletable, but you and I both know it's legitimate information on a sufficient topic. delta_foxtrot_zulu 16:10, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

== Thanks for deleting an article I started ==

Thanks for your wisdom and guidance, and making Wikipedia a safer place. --[[User:Brian Fenton|Brian Fenton]] ([[User talk:Brian Fenton|talk]]) 19:30, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

:I'm surprised to see you consider yourself an inclusionist, but as I haven't used Wikipedia in a while, maybe it's like what they say in politics, that the Left is always moving further to the left, and maybe inclusionist are moving further to the side of Deletionists. :-) --[[User:Brian Fenton|Brian Fenton]] ([[User talk:Brian Fenton|talk]]) 19:58, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

== Deletion of "Pioneer Zephry 'Dawn to Dusk Club' image ==

Today you "closed" a lengthy [[Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_September_1#File:Pioneer_Zephyr_Dawn_to_Dusk_Club.jpg|discussion]] of a proposed deletion of the image "Pioneer Zephyr 'Dawn to Dusk Club'" (which had been on WP for three years without complaint) by deleting the image despite an ''overwhelming consensus'' in the thread supporting retention (not counting the proposer, ''five'' editors strongly for retention of which two are also veteran admins, only one against retention). The case that this image is even "non-free" at all appears to be in question as the alleged copyright "claim" of the image by the Denver Public Library is in fact [http://photoswest.org/copyright.html made suspect] by their ''own'' notice <small>''("The Denver Public Library is unaware of any copyright in the images in the collection.").''</small> Even if the Library ''does'' have a legitimate copyright claim, it also "encourages" use of all the images in its collection in places such as WP <small>''("We '''encourage use''' of these materials under the fair use clause of the 1976 copyright act. All images in this collection may be used for educational, scholarly purposes and private study.")''</small> It should also be understood that the 1934 image in question was originally created as a "publicity photo" with the intention that it was to be distributed with the ''express purpose'' that it be ''freely reproduced and published'' by others without restriction. Before I open a [[Wikipedia:Deletion_review|deletion review request]], please explain the reasoning for your deletion of this image file when that was clearly ''against'' the consensus expressed in the discussion which was to ''retain'' it. [[User:Centpacrr|Centpacrr]] ([[User talk:Centpacrr|talk]]) 23:56, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

:Let me answer this with a few points:

:*The image is unquestionably non-free. According to the [http://photoswest.org:8080/cgi-bin/cw_cgi?fullRecord+20711+594+623619826+4+1 image description] at the Denver Public Library, the author was Harry M. Rhodes, who, according to the same page, died in 1975. Thus we still have 40 years before the image passes into the public domain. The Denver Public Library's "encouragement" to use the image is not relevant in this case, because it only encourages use under fair use. With no evidence that the image was released under a free license, nor any evidence that the image was either explicitly released into the public domain or having passed into the public domain due to age, one must assume that the image is non-free.

:*Wikipedia's own policies for non-free content are more restrictive than the legal definition of fair use, and so Wikipedia's policies take precedence.

:*I *am* a veteran admin, so your attempt to use that as a [[Red herring (idiom)|red herring]] to sway me will not work.

:*Deletion discussions are not votes. These discussions ultimately hinge on the merits of the arguments - not which side has a the most !votes, nor who yells the loudest.

:*In coming to the conclusion of deleting, I (A) read the discussion, (B) read the [[Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria|relevant policy]], and (C) looked at the two usages of the image. Based on all that, the soundest policy-based reasoning was from the people who argued that the file violated various points of [[WP:NFCC]]. Considering the usages in particular, I was unable to "buy" the keep arguments.

:If you wish to contest the deletion at [[WP:DRV|deletion review]], knock yourself out. I stand by my decision to delete. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 02:09, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

::To start with let me mention that I neither posted the image originally, nor did I add it to the two articles, so I am coming at this with a neutral perspective. The fact that two of the editors who favored retention are veteran admins is not a red herring, but was mentioned instead ''only'' to point out that their comments were being made from the perspective of very experienced editors who well understand the policies and guidelines of the project and so their views deserve to be given very considerable weight. They (along with the three other editors who also favored retention) all clearly have a good faith disagreement with your interpretation of the facts in this case. As a super majority of 5 to 1 (+ the OP) strongly favored retention, it seems to me that a decision made ''against'' that consensus view clearly calls for a review of a larger body of admins to be credible. While in the long run the decision might end up being the same, if the process of WP "consensus" is to mean anything to those who devote the time to participate in it <small>''("Sometimes voluntary agreement of all interested editors proves impossible to achieve, and a majority decision must be taken.")''</small>, this would seem to be an essential final step. Otherwise what's the point of having such a discussion at all. [[User:Centpacrr|Centpacrr]] ([[User talk:Centpacrr|talk]]) 03:11, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, the image is clearly non-free (no argument from me then or now) but I think was a good faith disagreement over #1; whether the image was "necessary" or not. Your deletion rationale did not address this disagreement. If you think the "delete crowd" had the stronger policy based argument then you should be able to articulate the reasons why. I'm told someone to take it to Deletion Review many times; this is always a valid threat because DRV is such a pain in the ass so that's usually the end of it. A discussion of that length and complexity merited a more appropriate response. [[User:Mackensen|Mackensen]] [[User_talk:Mackensen|(talk)]] 10:32, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, I've opened a deletion review anyway. Nothing a like a little bureaucracy to start the morning: [[Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 September 10]]. [[User:Mackensen|Mackensen]] [[User_talk:Mackensen|(talk)]] 10:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 12|DC Meetup #12]] ==

An off-wiki discussion is taking place concerning DC Meetup #12. Watch [[Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 12|this page]] for announcements. <br />
[[User:Nbahn|—NBahn]] ([[User talk:Nbahn|talk]]) 04:38, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

<small>P.S. You are receiving this message either because you received a similar one before and didn't object, or you requested to receive a similar one in the future. If you don't wish to receive this message again, then please let me know either on my talk page or [[Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 12#People not wishing to be informed about future meetups|here]].</small>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0070 -->

== [[Vanessa N. Brown]] ==
I can not find an explanation for why a recent page for artist Vanessa N. Brown is no longer available. The rights to the content were supplied and it was still being worked on to abide by the site rules. Where can I find out what was done with it? [[User:Farfarellusdedeus|Farfarellusdedeus]] ([[User talk:Farfarellusdedeus|talk]]) 20:17, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

:I didn't delete [[Vanessa N. Brown]], but it would appear that the article was deleted under speedy deletion criterion [[WP:CSD#A7|A7]], as an article about an article where notability was not asserted. Looking at the deleted article, it would appear that it also was nominated under [[WP:CSD#G12|G12]], as an unambiguous copyright infringement. Wikipedia takes copyrights quite seriously, and so lacking evidence that the content is either an author's original work or that permission has been provided to Wikipedia indicating that the writing is released under a license compatible with the Wikimedia Foundation's [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use terms of use], the content will be summarily deleted. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 23:03, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

== 'Orphaned' images ==

Orphaned as a reason for deletion only applies if the image has been uploaded under [[WP:NFCC]], as a fair use image must be used in an article. All the images you are tagging are PD - there is no requirement for them to be currently in an article. --[[User:Elen of the Roads|Elen of the Roads]] ([[User talk:Elen of the Roads|talk]]) 14:56, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

:All images ''hosted locally on Wikipedia'' (not Commons - that's a key point) should be employed somewhere on Wikipedia, be it in article namespace, project space, user space, etc. It has always been the case, and still is, that one can nominate images that are hosted locally for deletion if they are completely orphaned. In the cases you cite here, these were images that are hosted locally on Wikipedia, completely orphaned, and that I don't consider worth moving to Commons. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 15:02, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
::Yup, realise that now. I'm a bit slow on the uptake sometimes :) After the third nom it kind of dawned on me that SchuminWeb is an admin, so he's probably doing something that I haven't sussed out. I'll scratch my comments. [[User:Elen of the Roads|Elen of the Roads]] ([[User talk:Elen of the Roads|talk]]) 21:35, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

==User:Mjtrout/IndiaVerified.com==
Can you explain why you felt the need to delete the page achieved on my personal page? Thanks. [[User:Mjtrout|Mjtrout]] ([[User talk:Mjtrout|talk]]) 01:52, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

:Advertising is advertising, no matter where on Wikipedia it lives. Additionally, see [[WP:FAKEARTICLE]]. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 01:55, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

== File:Sea-Chart, Medana Bay-Tanjung, Lombok Indonesia.jpeg ==

Hi SchuminWeb, it has taken me a while to get back to this issue but never the less I am still somewhat curious as to why you marked [[Sea-Chart, Medana Bay-Tanjung, Lombok Indonesia]] for deletion. It has CS3 at wikitravel commons and has been sitting on the WT Tanjung article for a while now. It relates to the [[Lombok]] article, is in context and the image was given consensual release by the originator and copyright owner. The the image was attributed to the original source and to wikitravel commons. So why? ...Please leave a note on my talk page so I don't miss it. Thanks [[User:Felix505|Felix505]] ([[User talk:Felix505|talk]]) 07:54, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

:The reason that [[:File:Sea-Chart, Medana Bay-Tanjung, Lombok Indonesia.jpeg]] was deleted was because of your statement about reusing and modifying the image, which negated your license tag. You said, "Copyright remains with: PT Wisata Alam Samudera (Marina Bay Medana) for information on the image or for permission to reuse the image please contact: The Technical Advisor, Medana Bay Marina [www.medanabaymarina.com] admin@wisatasamudera.com Please do not modify chart information and please do not use this chart for navigational purposes." The Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license is a blanket permission to reuse and modify content provided that proper attribution is given, and the same license terms are continued. One does not have to seek permission to reuse the image - it is given via the license. Additionally, the license permits modification. Your description's not permitting it negates that and turns it into a no-derivatives license, which is incompatible with Wikipedia. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 08:01, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

::The reason is that their logo is on the map and more importantly that it a navigational sea chart and so therefore should not be modified as doing so could create a considerable navigational hazard. With some maps it is OK to move stuff about, re-route a contentious border, change colours and similar. A sea chart that may be used for navigational purposes should not be messed with. So it was described to try and stop people modifying it. That also explains why it has the note "do not use for navigational purposes, in case someone does go and modify it. This is a useful thing to have in the article as it allows an appraisal of the suitability of the bay for entering and mooring. ie clearances, drafts and similar. Do you have any recommendations or suggestions? Thanks for you response. [[User:Felix505|Felix505]] ([[User talk:Felix505|talk]]) 08:16, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

:::This seems like a simple solution, then: don't post it here. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 14:48, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

::::You have been rather less than helpful, by the way I am not posting it "here", this is your talk page. I was uploading it to Commons and placing it on the Lombok article. Perhaps you might like to assist by suggesting which licence (if any) is appropriate so that the image can be used? Thank you [[User:Felix505|Felix505]] ([[User talk:Felix505|talk]]) 15:17, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

:::::"Here" meaning "on Wikipedia", not "this talk page". If you want the image to stay, you must specifically drop the provisions that I mentioned earlier: writing for permission to reuse the image, and the prohibition against making modifications to the image. Otherwise, the file will again be deleted. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 15:27, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

==[[Sawbuck (band)]]==
Although it would have been nice to get a response to my "hang on" for this article, right now I'd like to get access to the material I wrote so I can incorporate it into the ''[[Sawbuck (album)|Sawbuck]]'' album page. Unfortunately, I didn't create a copy.
Thanks, Bob <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Bobglickman|Bobglickman]] ([[User talk:Bobglickman|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Bobglickman|contribs]]) 17:59, 12 September 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Emailed to you. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 18:34, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

== [[Shagrath]] ==

You just removed a load of backlinks to a legitimate redirect. Why was it deleted anyway? You really seem to be overusing the "remove backlinks" tool... [[User:J Milburn|J Milburn]] ([[User talk:J Milburn|talk]]) 19:06, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

:Thanks for bringing this to my attention - I took a second look, and decided to revert the original move, and reverted myself on the unlinking. As it turns out, we have hatnotes for the kinds of things the original move was for, and so it's now back where it belongs. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 19:13, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

== [[Brook Stickleback]] ==

Hey Shuminweb. I was just declining the above speedy when I found you had already zapped it. My rationale was "Declining SD. Context is evident and references are not within the ambit of A3 either. Citing sources before adding content, while rarely seen, is an excellent indication of sourced content to come, i.e. exactly what we want to encourage in additions." I have no attachment to the article but I do think it is invalid under A3 and I also think it unlikely a person would add a page with pre-formatted references alone plus section headers if they were not planning to follow up with content, quite unlike content without sources. Cheers.--[[User:Fuhghettaboutit|Fuhghettaboutit]] ([[User talk:Fuhghettaboutit|talk]]) 19:18, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

:Funny you should mention that - adding sources first is actually how I build 'em (see [[Fraser Mansion]] edit history), but that stage of the game is done while the page is still in userspace when I do it. I'm going to go ahead and give the original creator back the article - in userspace. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 19:33, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
::Userfying is perfect. Thanks.--[[User:Fuhghettaboutit|Fuhghettaboutit]] ([[User talk:Fuhghettaboutit|talk]]) 19:36, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

== Superfogeys deletion ==

Hello SchuminWeb, I noticed that you deleted the page for [[Superfogeys]] this morning based on G12. I didn't create the page, but I've been working quite a bit on it, and I wanted to ask you about that. The character bios on the page were copied word-for-word from the webcomic's site, so I can't really contest that as copyright infringement. However, I don't consider the page to be "unsalvageably corrupted," and I had been planning to change those parts (which weren't my responsibility) long before the page was deleted. Will removing those chunks of text make Superfogeys wiki-worthy? If not, let me know what I need to do to make the article worthy of restoration--I hope to continue my work on it. Thanks! [[User:Greenhas|Greenhas]] ([[User talk:Greenhas|talk]]) 22:46, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

:I'm going to Email you the sections that were added after the infringing content was added so that you can create a new article. Due to the copyright infringement, I cannot restore the existing article. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 23:02, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

:You have Email disabled. Would you please enable it, at least temporarily, so that I can send you the non-infringing passages? Thanks. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 23:04, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

:: Email is now enabled. Thanks for the help and the speedy response! [[User:Greenhas|Greenhas]] ([[User talk:Greenhas|talk]]) 23:08, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

:::And done. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 23:19, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

== Amtrak at Franconia-Springfield ==

Amtrak still has a page for [http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=am/am2Station/Station_Page&code=FRS Franconia-Springfield Station]. Where did you get the info about them dropping this? ----[[User:DanTD|DanTD]] ([[User talk:DanTD|talk]]) 17:47, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

:I see you already noticed and joined the discussion on this issue at [[Talk:Franconia–Springfield (WMATA station)]], so let's continue over there. Basically, I went to confirm what Mackensen found, and got the same result. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 18:54, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

::It's a deal. :) ----[[User:DanTD|DanTD]] ([[User talk:DanTD|talk]]) 18:58, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

== [[Infratek (company)]] ==

Could you please undelete this article? We have received OTRS permission for it which I can add as soon as it is restored. [[User:VernoWhitney|VernoWhitney]] ([[User talk:VernoWhitney|talk]]) 19:32, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

:All set! Take it away... [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 19:44, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
::Thank you, it's now tagged. Cheers! [[User:VernoWhitney|VernoWhitney]] ([[User talk:VernoWhitney|talk]]) 19:50, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

== Americentric ==

I recently tagged a <span class="plainlinks">[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Americentric&redirect=no redirect]</span> for speedy deletion. It linked to [[American Nationalism]] even though [[Wiktionary]] defines it to be <span class="plainlinks">[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Americentric "Having a North American focus or bias"]</span>. You used Twinkle to automate a reply: <span class="plainlinks">[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Americentric&action=history Your reason was Declining - point the redirect somewhere else, or nominate it for deletion at RFD.]</span> Might I ask you: Why should it be necessary for me to redirect the redirect (''answer:'' it shouldn't, you could have done it). Might I ask: How could it be necessary to put a clearly untrue redirect through RFD? (''answer:'' it couldn't, it was a waste of space and should have been deleted). <span style="white-space:nowrap;">— [[User:Fly by Night|<span style="font-family:Segoe print">'''''Fly by Night'''''</span>]] <font color="#000000">([[User talk:Fly by Night|<span style="font-family:Segoe print">talk</span>]])</font></span> 21:13, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

:I don't particularly care where it points, and there are many places where it could conceivably point and be valid. I didn't re-point it because I was processing speedy deletions at the time, and if you thought that the link to [[American nationalism]] was not the best place for this title to go, blanking is not the way to do it. Deletion of blanked redirects is not "non-controversial maintenance", and so the redirect needs to be attended to another way. If you believe that the redirect would be better pointing at a different article, please [[WP:BOLD|be bold]] and do so. If you believe that this redirect has no place in Wikipedia, then you will need to submit it for discussion at RFD. That is the correct process for these kinds of things. Either the community will come up with a better place to point the redirect, or the community will decide to just kill it. If the redirect is truly useless, the community will agree with you and consensus will be to delete. Speedy deletion is not the place for redirects except in a few limited circumstances, and this isn't one of those.

:Page blanking, as you have done with this redirect twice now, is disruptive, and will be viewed as such going forward.
::Your accusations of disruptive editing are both offensive and misplaced. Removing confusion and factual errors from the encyclopaedia is not at all disruptive: it is productive! The "''correct process for these kinds of things''" doesn't seem fit for purpose. Since when have you needed public consensus to remove incorrect information? <span style="white-space:nowrap;">— [[User:Fly by Night|<span style="font-family:Segoe print">'''''Fly by Night'''''</span>]] <font color="#000000">([[User talk:Fly by Night|<span style="font-family:Segoe print">talk</span>]])</font></span> 16:16, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

:I look forward to seeing this situation resolved, either through bold repointing of the redirect, or through community discussion at RFD. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 23:33, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Redirected to [[Americentrism]]. Does that satisfy you both? [[User:Secondarywaltz|Secondarywaltz]] ([[User talk:Secondarywaltz|talk]]) 00:52, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

:Works for me. I'm not particularly concerned about where it points to - I just won't let them speedy it. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 02:11, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

== Questions about Wikipedia editing ==

Hi SchuminWeb--
I am somewhat new to editing. You were kind enough to welcome me, and I wonder if you might have any guidance on the following.
# Can we use other encyclopedias as article references?
# What do I do when creating a biographical article if a published obit already constitutes the ''perfect'' article?
## Article on [[Maurice Valency]] which I am building illustrates this situation perfectly.
# I make lots of edits to my personal pages. Is there any reason not to do this? Is it OK to simply edit my own pages willy-nilly?
# After clicking on '''My watchlist''' I always click on '''Hide my edits''' and '''Hide bots'''. How can I make this preference permanent so I don't have to do it every time?
Thank you for your time--[[User:Foobarnix|Foobarnix]] ([[User talk:Foobarnix|talk]]) 08:47, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

:In response to your questions:

:* As long as they are reputable and satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for [[WP:RS|reliable sources]], you should be good to go. Other online wiki-type encyclopedias, however, as well as Wikipedia mirrors, are insufficient, but if you want to cite [[World Book]] or [[Encyclopedia Britannica]] or something on those lines, go for it.

:* If a published obit makes a perfect article, you may not copy it, of course, but you are welcome to cite the heck out of it for the Wikipedia article.

:* Referring to your "personal pages", I presume you mean pages like [[User:Foobarnix/whatever]], correct? There are [[Wikipedia:User pages|guidelines on what userspace is for]], but for the most part, users are given great latitude on what they may include on their user pages, and so if it helps overall, there's nothing wrong with it. Your userpage is not that much different from my own...

:* On your watchlist, go to [[Special:Preferences]] (linked at the top of every page for logged-in users), and all of those settings can be set in the "Watchlist" tab in your preferences.

:Hope that helps! [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 11:09, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

::It sure did help. You are awesome, dude!--[[User:Foobarnix|Foobarnix]] ([[User talk:Foobarnix|talk]]) 22:57, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

==[[Lackadaisy]]==
Hi SchuminWeb, I saw that you deleted this article today, based on an AfD from 2007.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Lackadaisy] Could I please ask you to take another look? From what I'm seeing, the article has changed substantially from its 2007 state, doubling in size. The webcomic Lackadaisy has won multiple awards, and the article itself has received quite a bit of traffic from numerous editors. It's also been the subject of third-party international press, has been published hardcopy, is being carried in both the US and Europe,[http://lackadaisy.foxprints.com/topgirl_lackadaisy.jpg] and was a selection for "Women's History Month".[http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6720988.html] In any case, I could maybe see putting the article through a second AfD, or possibly a DRV, but I don't think that CSD was the best way to go. Also, as a note of explanation, I did see the note on your talkpage about reversing your actions. I'm an admin, but chose not to reverse you because I have met the artist behind the webcomic. I don't actually read the webcomic, nor do I have any financial stake in it, but I did want to be cautious about any perception of COI. Anyway, please let me know your thoughts on what might be the best way to get things straightened out? Thanks, --[[User:Elonka|El]][[User talk:Elonka|on]][[Special:Contributions/Elonka|ka]] 03:06, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

:The article was in a second AFD when I came by. See [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lackadaisy (2nd nomination)]]. I came through and speedied off of that. If you disagree, go ahead and make it so, since I have no strong feelings about it one way or the other. I investigated it, and it appeared to be G4-able. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 06:39, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
:: Thanks. I have gone ahead and undeleted the article, re-opened the AfD, and also listed it via delsort at the Webcomics project. --[[User:Elonka|El]][[User talk:Elonka|on]][[Special:Contributions/Elonka|ka]] 16:49, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

== Removal od deltion discussion ==

You recently removed a deletion discussion. It caused some issues with links to it - I thought the bot did it and now I have the bots "owner" making snarky comments to me about it because I undid what I thought were the bots edits. In the future if you relist something please do not cut/remove the entire discussion - leave a link to the new discussion. And you may consider letting the editor who made the nom know about it's "relisting". I have updated links. [[User:Soundvisions1|Soundvisions1]] ([[User talk:Soundvisions1|talk]]) 00:06, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

:According to [[WP:RELIST]], I handled it correctly, which says (with original emphasis), "When relisting a discussion, it should be '''removed from the log for its original date''' (this does not apply at [[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion|Categories for discussion]]) and moved to the current date's log where the discussion will continue." As this was not a CFD discussion, I believe that I handled the relisting correctly, in moving the entire discussion to the new page. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 01:31, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

== Splashtop Remote - please undelete ==

Hi, could you please undelete the article about [[Splashtop Remote]]? I was about to add links to the page, such as
this [http://gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/15/controlling-a-pc-straight-from-an-ipad/?src=busln NY Times] review of the product or this [http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2368373,00.asp PC Magazine] article about it.
The designation of the product as "non-notable" is strange given that it reached the top of the iPad Productivity charts in many countries.

[[User:krupenin]] <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|undated]] comment added 21:19, 22 September 2010 (UTC).</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:I am not going to undelete the article that was deleted via deletion discussion (see [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Splashtop Remote]]), however, if you believe you can create an article that satisfies notability (see [[WP:N]] and [[WP:PRODUCT]] for relevant guidelines), I encourage you to create a draft article in your userspace (for instance, at [[User:Krupenin/Splashtop Remote]]). If the draft article satisfies notability as defined in the aforementioned guidelines, then we can look into moving it back into article space. Please don't just recreate the article on the old title right away - as it has been deleted via a deletion discussion, speedy deletion criterion G4 now applies for recreations. Thus it ''must'' satisfy notability in order to stay. I don't want you to put a bunch of effort into a new article just to see it speedied (it's happened to me - it's annoying). [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 22:08, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

== Your [[WP:GA|GA]] nomination of [[Fraser Mansion]]==

The article [[Fraser Mansion]] you nominated as a [[Wikipedia:Good article nominations|good article]] has passed [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]]; see [[Talk:Fraser Mansion]] for eventual comments about the article. Well done! [[User:Aaron north|Aaron north]] ([[User talk:Aaron north|talk]]) 02:06, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 06:47, 20 December 2012

Redirect to:

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SchuminWeb/Archive_25&oldid=528922757"