User talk:Fastily

PUNJAB FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION

I am sorry but my temper is really high now. According to wikipedia I (the creator of the article) can contest the proposed deletion. I was actually doing that but then I clicked save and all of a sudden it was gone. Basically you did not give me the chance to contest this deletion. I will act bossy here but please just revive the page because I did not copyright that one section, I rewrote it in my own full words. By the way did you even bother to inspect why it was put up for deletion. I bet you didn't because even the most stupid idiotic people would see that this page was not copyright at all. I actually remember when we went into this situation with the History of Indian football page when I supposedly copyrighted that from an article created after I created this page. This is almost the same case. I am being accused of unjustified copyright and I would love to have my views expressed without you or someone else deleting it without my word. Thank you. --Arsenalkid700 (talk) 20:27, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Do you have the revised text of the page? If so, feel free to re-post. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 02:52, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

I do not have one. I usually would store a copy of the page but I created the PFA page on my London Laptop when I was there. Can you just restore the page and I can revise that one section like when what happened with the history of Indian football page. --Arsenalkid700 (talk) 03:48, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Ok you have still not replied. I am just going to guess that you had a lot of people to reply back to and missed my post. Anyway I want to know if the Punjab Football Association page can be recovered. Like I said I can fix it if given the page and I don't have time to recreate it so please if you can, restore the page and the copyright will be fixed. --Arsenalkid700 (talk) 11:17, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Have patience. Even the business world does not move this fast. I have a big talk page with many messages and I don't always notice changes that are made to it. For future reference, instead of threatening to be my personal poltergeist, you could move the thread to the bottom of the page, where I'd be more likely to notice it. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 01:26, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough. I am sorry bout that. Like I probably mentioned before to you or maybe someone else I am very serious when it comes to wikipedia. Also I do have a problem with being impatient. Once again I am sorry about that. I do understand how many questions you get per day and next time I will take your advice. Cheers. --Arsenalkid700 (talk) 01:34, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)It's good to know that you are serious about Wikipedia, I myself haven't been able to edit it that often lately. I myself have an impatience issue but I realized that being impatient doesn't get you anywhere except for boiling water. Patience is a virtue. Here's a tip, if you see a speedy deletion tagged on your page, quickly go to edit and copy the source code minus speedy deletion template, go to the talk page and contest it, if the page is gone, at least the source code is in your clipboard and you can create a subpage in your userspace and paste it there, or if it's your article, why not move it to your userspace and remove the template from the page and continue editing it from there. It shouldn't be deleted as long as it's in your userspace. As for you Fastily, I would recommend maybe setting MiszaBot to maybe 12h.—cyberpower (Talk to Me)(Contributions) 01:44, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Hahaha thanks for the advice cyber stalker. :) I will follow your advice as well. --Arsenalkid700 (talk) 02:30, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Callum Driver

I noticed you deleted this article because of non notability. I have references that prove that this article is notable Ref 1. As you can see under the team lineups it says Drivers name for Burton Albion, so he has made a professional appearance. Thanks for your time. Zbase4 (talk) 03:49, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2012 January 12#Callum Driver. Feel free to comment. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 07:04, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

I see this article has been deleted as being the same as one previously created. Not so - the difference is that Driver has now made his full football and professional debut with a fully pro side in Burton Albion. This debut is referenced in the article. Please restore the article as notability has now been established and referenced - Thanks.--Egghead06 (talk) 07:44, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Can provide further reliable sources for notability. Otherwise can it be restored please?--Egghead06 (talk) 05:53, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Delete the Article Wordbee- translator.

Dear Fastily

First of all, I would like to thank you for what you are doing on Wikipedia. In fact, I am writing about companies on the translation market tools that are applying the cloud computing. And I begin my work with the product that I know best and the others later. Could you please let me know how can I repair my work and why the other companies information can be published on Wikipedia. I am very appreciated if you let me know the reason so that I can do better and write more article about them. I'm looking forward to hearing from you.

Best regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huy Quoc Nguyen Dang (talk • contribs) 09:12, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

User:Fastily/E#G11 -FASTILY ^(TALK) 19:38, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Depositphotos page

Dear Fastily,

First of all, I would like to thank you for what you are doing on Wikipedia. I'm writing you because you deleted page of Depositphotos stock photo agency with the reason of "G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion". Could you specify please why you made such a decision. The company has been already established on the stock photography market and serves tens thousands of customers worldwide. Isn't that fact enough for the company to be featured on Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mallboro (talk • contribs) 11:04, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

If Fastily doesn't mind my commenting, it seems to me that we have here an example of a surprisingly common kind of misunderstanding. As you yourself have pointed out, the reason for deletion was that the article was written as "advertising or promotion", not because the company is not significant enough to be the subject of a Wikipedia article. It may be that the subject is perfectly suitable for an article to be written about it, but that particular article was not written like an advertisement, and so was unacceptable. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:05, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi James. Thank you for clarifying this for me. I wrote Depositphotos article in a style that very similar to pre-existed articles of Depositphotos' competitors. It will be very helpful if you can tell me what part of the article made it look like an advertisement. Thank you in advance. Mallboro (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:01, 12 January 2012 (UTC).

(talk page stalker) Well, the fact that prices for the photos are listed, how one becomes a contributor. Oh, and the fact that the only reference is its own website. If this is based on other articles, I'll warn you about WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS because it looks like we'll have to purge some "competitors" as well (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:13, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

File:U.S. RQ-170 on display in Iran 1.jpg

Hi, please read this: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-August/027373.html 87.236.209.23 (talk) 12:59, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

That's immiterial. What's important here is that there is no source and no license for that file. Sven Manguard Wha? 14:30, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

If you're posting that mailing list link because of the recent PUF discussion then it was raised there and Fastily has also acknowledged to me on this page that when he closed the PUF he was only determining whether the image was unfree (which it clearly isn't as it's PD) not whether we should use it. I do intend to start a RfC on whether we can use such images as that e-mail seems out of keeping with current practice but it's the most recent thing we've got and still referenced at WP:C. I've removed the speedy tag as I don't feel it's appropriate. Take to WP:FfD if desired. Dpmuk (talk) 15:46, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh and there is a source in the upload comment. I'm going to assume good faith that the article does give the Iranian government as the source of the photo (given the language I can't tell) as it does seem the highly probable source. If that's the case it's PD, which is the reason for the deleted PD-Iran in US tag. It's definitely PD so not a G12 we just need to sort out whether we should (rather than can) be using it. Off to start a RfC. Dpmuk (talk) 15:51, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

RfC started here. I will try and do more notifications later. Dpmuk (talk) 16:12, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

University of Oxford Georgian Society

Dear Fastily,

Thank you very much for your response. I believe there was a misunderstanding which I would like to clear up - the article Oxford University Georgian Society was not simply reposted and hence in violation of G4. I have specifically addressed the issues raised under the Oxford Georgian Society Discussion page, and the article University of Oxford Georgian Society is now well referenced and cited with numerous external sources and reading materials, which was the issue with the previous article (anything that only has one reference has been removed). I believe its an interesting topic that has tens of analogous articles on Wikipedia (Oxford University Polish Society, Oxford University Greek Society, Oxford University Russian Society etc). I would thus like to kindly ask for the article Oxford University Georgian Society to be reinstated. Please let me know if you require any additional information / clarification.

Best regards,

--81.159.130.123 (talk) 15:32, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Green Planet 4 Kids

Hi, I went through the link you sent, and rewrote the article. I wanted to get other editor's opinion, but unfortunately WP:RFF is currently inactive. I am posting the content here before uploading it on main wiki page. Can you please have a look at it and let me know if this is okay now.

Green Planet For Kids is a Canadian magazine about green living ideas. It covers following areas Water Electricity Heating and cooling RRR (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle) Yard and garden Transportation, and Environmental choices

This annually published magazine started in 2010, and 260,000 copies were distributed across Canada in 2011. The magazine uses a dinosaur group of cartoon characters in the form of comic strips to depicts different green ideas. It has an accompanying website, and an ipad app — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick helps (talk • contribs) 15:44, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I just updated the link. It'll take you somewhere where you can get another opinion. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 19:41, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

newline at the top of geobox

Could you take care of this? thank you. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 15:53, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done -FASTILY ^(TALK) 19:42, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of 'Bestselling cars of all time'

What was the reason of deleting page: 'Bestselling cars of all time'. I suppose you, or someone else might have thought that if there already is 'List of bestselling automobiles' & 'List of bestselling automobiles' such page as 'Bestselling cars of all time' is usles. But as a metter of a fact it was completely different content! It might have been unnoticed for someone who isn't interested in such topics. Once again, I'm politely asking to recreate that page.

I'm looking forward for your answer.

(edit conflict)(talk page stalker) The reason given for the deletion: "G7 One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page" I'm not an Admin so I can not see who the author is but, even if it's Fastily, if an author request deletion there's not much an admin can do. Mlpearc powwow 17:13, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Fastily - OTRS review and approval

Dear Fastily,

On December 2, 2011 you deleted File:Nelson_Denis.jpg pursuant to this PUF discussion: [1]

The following day on December 3, 2011, as part of an Administrator's Noticeboard discussion [2], you provided me the following, and very helpful, guidelines:

• I recommended that you send an email to OTRS, which you did. When the email you sent is processed, and if the permissions are valid, the file will be restored. Frankly, I've done everything I can for you... -FASTILY (TALK) 20:55, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Your guidelines were followed. OTRS has verified and approved the permission as valid. The photo file has been restored. [3]

Thank you for your guidance in this matter. It was very helpful, and greatly appreciated. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 22:18, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad to hear that it worked out. Regards, FASTILY ^(TALK) 04:55, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Katarina Olsson

Unambiguous copyright infringement, eh? Can I point out that I got the majority of the information in the article was sourced from Wikipedia and some from the audio podcast of Big Finish (I think it was early November 2011) and from a brief bio.

Given the 90% of Wikipedia is material taken from other sources and then redrafted, I think you decision to target my little article seems a little churlish. Has Miss Olsson offended you in anyway? Did you ask for an autograph and she slighted you? Or do you have a particular disdain for voice actors?

I'd have to assume all of those, because the decision to delete the article without suggestion of amendment would appear to breach the very spirit of Wikipedia, the "peoples encyclopedia", providing us with a real glimpse into what is effectively a cabal of like minded people. Or am I wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ascolti (talk • contribs) 23:18, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

User:Fastily/E#G12 -FASTILY ^(TALK) 01:15, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Tymon Kruidenier, et al

Thanks for deleting these two articles today. Best, A Sniper (talk) 03:34, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

No problem, happy to have been able to help. Regards, FASTILY ^(TALK) 04:55, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Mac Miller

I don't see how this article could possibly qualify as unambiguous advertising or promotion, and it has previously survived a deletion discussion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mac Miller). I think it should be restored. --Bongwarrior (talk) 05:01, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't realize you had already declined the speedy.  Restored -FASTILY ^(TALK) 05:02, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. --Bongwarrior (talk) 05:03, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

User:Lord Cornwallis

This editor has been around since 2007, and has almost 70,000 edits, but it looks like he's created 30 or 40 articles of the type I tagged tonight and you deleted: an article about a non-notable actor that consists of a generic single sentence lede followed by a filmography straight out of IMDB. These are all actors who played bit parts, many or most of which they weren't even credited for, so they're clearly non-notable, as least as far as the data from IMDB shows, and the articles don't pass our notability requirements.

I've never come across a situation quite like this, so I don't know what the best thing to do here is. Any ideas? Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:29, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

I would recommend leaving a note on the editor's talk page (I see you've already done that here), and politely ask them to stop creating such articles. If they refuse or recreate the articles, this can be remedied with continued warnings and subsequent blocks as necessary. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 05:38, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks, that's what I'll do. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:43, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Holiday Plaza

While you were deleting Holiday Plaza, I was editing it to remove the attack part. The whole thing wasn't an attack article, so I think that editing is better than speedy deletion. I did, however, tag the article for notability and prod it. However, I don't really care that much, and don't particularly mind if you re-delete what I put. If not, and if it survives prod, then we should undelete the rest of the history for attribution purposes. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:41, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Ah, sorry about that. Please feel free to undelete as necessary. Regards, FASTILY ^(TALK) 05:43, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi Fastily, You deleted 'File:Harry-barr-epping-1948.jpg' with your reason F11. I was the author and uploader and had followed the directions on the deletion request by sending an email to permissions@wikimedia.org on 02/01/2012. I received a response back today 13/01/2012 asking me to use a specific email template. Of course it is too late now so I'm not sure what to do. Do I reupload the file or can you restore it? Benlevy1 (talk) 08:30, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Continue the email correspondence. Once you provide the necessary details/release of permission to our OTRS team, the file will be automatically restored. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 10:43, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Deleting articles is a sure-fire way of drawing editorial fire ("How dare you delete my article on something I drew on a napkin in 1992?") but rarely will you get commended for it. To rectify the balance: a barnstar, for performing this much-needed and underappreciated task quietly and diligently. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:30, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!! I really appreciate it :) Cheers, FASTILY ^(TALK) 10:42, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Deletion on Multimedia University

Fastily, the record shows that you had deleted the article Multimedia University for violating G12. You also give the website link. The article are meant for and is about the same entity, Multimedia University. I don't think that the article is lack of citation since the official website would be the source of information. Perhaps a proper citation should do. By deleting the whole article, this might an act of vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by S12796 (talk • contribs) 11:10, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

User:Fastily/E#G12 -FASTILY ^(TALK) 11:13, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Need Help

Hello Fastily, within September 2011, an editor editing under User:Ysoliman2010 has come back again, making some disruptions. He claims to be an administrator, even though he isn't. May I request banning this user from editing because it appears he just is gaming the entire system. Abhijay (☎ Talk) (✐ Deeds) 11:31, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Is he editing under another account/IP address? User:Ysoliman2010 is currently blocked. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 11:35, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

User:Virinchi523/NO DADA NO KKR

Hi Fastily, could you please undelete User:Virinchi523/NO DADA NO KKR? Regards,
--Carbon Rodney 11:36, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

What for? -FASTILY ^(TALK) 11:37, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Time Agent

Hi, can you delete the talk page (above) as well please? While you were living up to your name and deleting rapidly, I was adding some (unnecessary, as it turned out) extra explanation for the speedy delete request to the talk page. So now there's a talk page, where there wasn't when you did the deletion. Sorry for the extra work. Thanks. 81.107.26.167 (talk) 11:47, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

No worries,  Done -FASTILY ^(TALK) 11:48, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

File:MindLifeInstituteLogo.jpg

Hi Fasty, can you please restore this file since the corresponding article have been restored, as discussed here [4]. I am currently working to improve the article. Thanks. --Rédacteur Tibet (talk) 13:31, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Your deletion of Dubai Museum

Hello Fastily! I see you deleted the Dubai Museum article, leaving the following summary: "(G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.weknowdubai.com/70743/dubai-museum/)"

That's a big mistake. The fact is that we are the victims of infringement here as Wikipedia is not credited in that page for the text, neither the photographer is credited for his photo (File:Al_Fahidi_Fort.jpg, which is found at http://www.weknowdubai.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Al_Fahidi_Fort.jpg on the weknowdubai website, notice the 2011/12 in the URL).

The webpage you linked to is by all means a new page. Not only the image was uploaded in 2011/12, the page as a whole has no history saved in the Wayback Machine, while the rest of the site is there. Searching the 8,335 URLs that have been captured for this domain not one of them includes the word "museum". Looking at the website's history, this is how it looked in Nov 2010, and this was then the same page that now includes the Dubai Museum page, it has no link or mention whatsoever of the museum.

If you have a look at other sections at the website you'll find many parts here and there taken from WP articles. This website has been lifting it's contents off Wikipedia ever since its inception. Compare this to this.

All the details describing the museum and fort I wrote after my personal visits to the museum, other information is cited. Our article is not new, the history of the article should show clearly how it's been built over the years, and not with one copy-paste action. People steal from WP without attribution all the time, and it seems odd to assume that we are the infringers just because others have copied the article word for word and ignored our attribution requirement. I hope you can restore the article as soon as possible. Cheers! -- Orionist ★ talk 15:21, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

File:EFF Filtered.png

Hi! I haven't seen this file, but if it's just a screenshot of the EFF website, then it should be OK, because "Any and all original material on the EFF website may be freely distributed at will under the Creative Commons Attribution License, unless otherwise noted." https://www.eff.org/copyright Trycatch (talk) 16:30, 13 January 2012 (UTC)