User talk:Explicit

Critical commentary on cover art and FFD closes when speedy deletion intervenes

Thank you for your remarks on Fastily's talk page (permanent link[1]) and I have replied there. I would be interested in your reaction but maybe Fastily's page (which has a very rapid turnover!) is not the best place. Both the problems I mentioned are common at FFD and are not specific to Fastily although his lack of feedback exacerbates the situation. Thincat (talk) 10:34, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I have left a response on Fastily's talk page. — ξ^xplicit 03:42, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. That was fine. I'll wait a bit to see if anything further happens and then go to WT:NFC. Thincat (talk) 09:15, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Deletion review for File:Reg cox civvy.JPG

I have asked for a deletion review of File:Reg cox civvy.JPG. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --George Ho (talk) 03:14, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

You know... an image deleted under F5 doesn't need to be restored via DRV. A simple request here or at WP:REFUND would have done the job if the parent article gets restored. — ξ^xplicit 03:42, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

GA Thanks

On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to thank you for your contributions to Lupe Fiasco, which has fairly recently achieved WP:GA status.

This user helped promote Lupe Fiasco to good article status.

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:50, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Ted Robinson

Hello,

My name is Vitali Zatroutine, and I am a New Media student at Ryerson University, in Toronto, Canada. I work on media projects, and for one of my final exams, I have been instructed to create a false identity for educational purposes only. This is to help me develop skills on narrative, and to fully understand authenticity of an identity online. You deleted my page on Ted Robinson, an identity i created for a supposed "Invisible Person". This page was created entirely for my final examination. I understand you are very strict on creating a trustworthy community of information, but I do not plan on displaying anything offensive, or anything that might interrupt the flow of other pages. This is strictly educational. I would highly appreciate the opportunity to work on my assignment, and create a page for my false identity (even temporarily).

Thank you so much, this means a lot to me.

Vitali Zatroutine, New Media student at Ryerson University — Preceding unsigned comment added by LoadingShoe (talk • contribs) 02:33, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker)Above issue addressed elsewhere. Calabe1992 02:44, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Grown-Up (EP)

The DYK project (nominate) 08:32, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of File:Biarritz.jpg

I noted this deletion this morning:

(Deletion log); 00:06 . . Explicit (talk | contribs) deleted page File:Biarritz.jpg ‎(Deleted because "F11: No evidence of permission for more than 7 days". (TW))

Despite what is reported here, I did send an email 7 days ago:

Subject: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/21/Biarritz.jpg

From: Brad Face <bradandelisabeth@yahoo.com> Date: March 14, 2012 4:42:47 AM EDT To: permissions-en@wikimedia.org

To Whom It May Concern:

I am the owner of the Dewis Collection, LLC.

I am the owner of this painting.

I am the creator of this image of this painting.

I am the owner of www.dewis.com, which also shows an image of this painting.

I give my permission for this image to displayed on Wikipedia

Brad Face, Owner Dewis Collection, LLC

I don't know what else I could have done.

I thought I was fully complying with the request. Ruedetocqueville (talk) 12:49, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Has OTRS followed up on your email? The wording doesn't specifically state which license you release your work under, so you should have received a response asking you to clarify that. If you haven't, it would be a good idea to email them again pointing to the deleted file and specifying exactly which license you have chosen. — ξ^xplicit 19:29, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I received no response. I will re-send the email. Ruedetocqueville (talk) 01:59, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Zynga With Friends

I am curious why you moved Zynga With Friends (capital "W") and all its game titles (Words With Friends, Chess With Friends, Hanging With Friends, and Scramble With Friends to page titles with a lower case "w". If you check out each of the game titles in their respective app stores, you'll see they all have a capital "W". The Zynga With Friends website also indicates the proper studio title has a capital "W". I hope you'll consider reverting the page move.NinaSpezz (talk) 15:17, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Those articles were moved in accordance to MOS:CT. Because 'with' is a preposition, the first letter of the word should not be capitalized. This takes precedence over the way the game developer stylizes its game titles. — ξ^xplicit 18:49, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I understand it's a preposition, but the MOS:CT in no way indicate it takes precedence over the composition creator's stylization. If that is the case, perhaps the MOS:CT should be revised?NinaSpezz (talk) 19:21, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia would have a lot of whacky article names if we started making exceptions to observe the stylization of the creator's work; SHINee instead of Shinee, the GazettE instead of The Gazette, DJ OZMA instead of DJ Ozma, or even worse, /\/\ /\ Y /\ instead of Maya. If you feel that MOS:CT could be reworded a different way that would better help other users in future cases, consider raising the issue on its talk page. — ξ^xplicit 19:46, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Lydia Simmonds (Margaret Tyzack).jpg

I saw that the file was deleted under F7 (violates non-free use policy). However, I wonder if you can restore the image back to one article that was rationalized; GSorby or other uploader may notice. --George Ho (talk) 02:58, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

 Done, and re-added to Margaret Tyzack. — ξ^xplicit 03:38, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Woods & Ether deletion and recreation

I created a page under a username that presented a conflict of interest issue. I deleted the page myself in order to recreate it under a appropriate username that represented no such conflict. Thank you for reading. Pocommunicate (talk) 01:15, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Avvasi Deletion

Hi there, in regards to the Avvasi page that was deleted this morning, I'm wondering how it a non-notable company and therefore deleted? Thank you (Kelliott14 (talk) 19:40, 26 March 2012 (UTC))

The text that was left on the article's talk page was as follows: "Article needs a little work, and I will see if I can clean it up a little later. Any other help would be good. The article *does* need better citations, from reliable sources. All the current citations do not establish notability by themselves. Won't tag for notability now, figuring (hoping) I can find some better references to add." — ξ^xplicit 23:47, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Would it be possible to put this article back into draft mode, or Articles for creation so work can be done to improve the citing? Thank you. Kelliott14 (talk) 19:39, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

 Done, moved to User:Kelliott14/Avvasi. Please make sure to address the prod's concern before moving the page back into article space. — ξ^xplicit 21:51, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

• Thank you Explicit. Kelliott14 (talk) 02:57, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Explicit. You have new messages at Drmies's talk page.
Message added 18:25, 27 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

• One more thing, Explicit. You got 40 archives, and that looks really impressive, but for the record I want to state that I may have fewer archives than you, but the individual archived pages are longer. I think we should have some standards here, so that this eternal popularity contest can be run in a fair manner. Toodles, Drmies (talk) 18:27, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
  • I've actually been meaning to clean up my archives. I had the habit of adding 25 threads per archive, but I want to start archiving about 50–80 bytes per archive. I wouldn't want to go any higher because I would probably end up having five archives. I can't look that unpopular, either. :( — ξ^xplicit 19:17, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Wow!

How on earth did you manage to clear that SD backlog in one millisecond? Magic? Jared Preston (talk) 19:28, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

With the help of my magic wand, anything is possible! — ξ^xplicit 19:32, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

But why did you leave all the talk pages? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:29, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll go back and delete those shortly. Unfortunately, Twinkle doesn't delete talk pages in batch deletions. — ξ^xplicit 19:32, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Reply

Hello, Explicit. You have new messages at SlimVirgin's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SlimVirgin ^(talk) 20:44, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Yukon Optics

I see you have just deleted Yukon Optics and related redirects. The company is a highly notable Belorussian, former Soviet optical equipment maker. I ask you to restore the article. (and take it to AfD if needed). -- Petri Krohn (talk) 05:11, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

 Done, the article and its redirect have been restored. Please make sure to address the concern, as it may still be nominated at WP:AFD. — ξ^xplicit 19:40, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. My original stub had a number of references. They were all lost when the article was edited by someone who seems to have a relation with some distributor. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 22:37, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

why did you delete Rome Area Museum?

why did you delete Rome Area Museum in dishonoring of Rome, Georgia history? you want to delete Chieftan Museum and Smithsonian too because you hate history and your own generation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.166.215.6 (talk) 00:54, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

That must be it. — ξ^xplicit 00:59, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Deleted file: File:Katparsonsviperroom.jpeg

Hello,

I finally got permission from the original owner of this image to display it on the Kat Parsons Wikipedia page, but as it took longer than 7 days the image was deleted. Sorry I didn't contact you sooner, I meant to but I forgot!

Here's the e-mail I got from Robert Peate, who owns the photo:

From: Robert Peate (rpeate@gmail.com) To: Sebastian (skmalm@gmail.com)

Hi, Sebastian. I took the photo in question, and I give permission for its use in the Kat Parsons Wikipedia article.

Robert Peate NLPhotos http://nlphotos.imagekind.com

Feel free to contact him to verify if you'd like!

Do I need to re-upload the image or can you bring it back somehow?

Thanks,

-Sebastian (SkrymSay)

SkrymSay (talk) 02:16, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi there. Unfortunately, that permission is still insufficient to allow use of this image on Wikipedia. At Flickr, the image is licensed under noncommercial use, which would make the image a candidate for speedy deletion under our speedy deletion criteria. Files licensed under a Creative Commons license must allow attribution and/or share-alike. Noncommercial and No Derivative Works are not suitable licenses for use on Wikipedia. — ξ^xplicit 20:41, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of File:Coat of Arms for H.E. Archbishop Christoph Card. Schönborn.svg

Salutations!

You recently deleted the image of Christoph Cardinal Schönborn's Coat of Arms. The reason for doing so was that there was no evidence of Permission (F11). The Editor (Mlpearc (Please note that the name of the person (and file) is incorrect. We were both talking about Schönborn and not Collins) who nominated the picture up for deletion. I informed him that:

• I had put a request for permission at permissions-en@wikimedia.org as he requested.
• I made that image in question. Any files that I used to make the coat of arms were listed in the information info box and sourced. I also verified in their licensing that I was allowed to modify their files without having to ask for explicit permission.
• I asked if this was standard procedure as I have uploaded similar files on both Wikipedia and (especially) the Commons.

His response was simply that the matter had been resolved. Since I never had any problems with the other files, I assumed it was just an overeager editor who didn't read the info box and tagged the file. I waited for a response from Wikipedia Permissions but I never received one.

Can you please assist me in the correct way to proceed? I believe that the file does not deserve to be deleted and I would wish you can enlighten me on any errors in my logic/proceedings.

Thank-you very much.

Jonathan Ng 吳家明 16:21, 3 April 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ng556 (talk • contribs)

After taking a second look, it seems that I had misread the description of the image. There seem to be no copyright issues, so I have restored the file for you. Apologies for any inconvenience. — ξ^xplicit 19:01, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Pierre Vogel

You deleted the article of the german islamist preacher Pierre Vogel because of a lack of nobility. That seems quite strange for me, as this man is the most active german islamist and extremely popular among young muslims, especially among those who recently converted to islam. He is often interviewed in the german press as "the evil islamist" and is believed to be one of the most influential radical muslims in germany, according to the german security authorities. Maybe he is quite unknown outside germany, but that should not be a reason to delete the article. From Germany, --Antemister (talk) 13:27, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

I think you mean lack of notability, not nobility. Anywho, prior to the article's deletion, two users agree on the talk page (before it was deleted) that the individual did not seem notable per WP:GNG. If you'd like, I can restore the article if you plan to work on it so it can meet the general notability guideline. — ξ^xplicit 23:54, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Thought a correct the numerous spelling errors of my english... Anyway, I do not know the quality of the article, but deletion only because a lack of notability was not right.--Antemister (talk) 19:49, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I went head and restored the article. — ξ^xplicit 21:50, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Montauk Yacht Club image

Hi... Concerning the image of the Montauk Yacht Club: I do have permission from the owner of the image to use it, so I have re-uploaded the image complete with the emailed approval notice, per Wikipedia's guidelines. Please let me know if there are any issues with this. Thanks!Tbenzinger (talk) 19:36, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, if you could, please forward the email sent by the copyright holder of the image to permissions-en@wikimedia.org so it can properly be verified. — ξ^xplicit 21:50, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

About photos at the article of Nirman

Hi. I have seen that all the 4 files are deleted. I hold the copyright of the photos and I had donated those files to wikipedia. I had even written so in the description. What other procedures i should follow so that the photos will not get deleted? Thanks Abhijeet Safai (talk) 05:39, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

I have written this mail, as I saw your response to the earlier query.

from Abhijeet Safai abhijeet.safai@gmail.com to permissions-en@wikimedia.org cc amrut bang <amrutabang@gmail.com>, "sayali(nirman)" <sayali.tamane@gmail.com> date Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 12:08 PM subject Fwd: Photos deleted on Wikipedia mailed-by gmail.com hide details 12:08 PM (1 hour ago) Dear Sir / Madam, I am forwarding herewith 5 images. I herewith declare that they are being donated to Wikipedia. I am aware that these can be used for private or commercial use. The owners of these photos have no objection for that. I am forwarding the mail which permits the use of these photos.

Kindly let me know the further procedure if any to be able to upload these photos. Thanks

- Abhijeet Safai - Hide quoted text -

---

Forwarded message ----------

From: amrut bang <amrutabang@gmail.com> Date: Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 11:50 AM Subject: Re: Photos deleted on Wikipedia To: Abhijeet Safai <abhijeet.safai@gmail.com> Cc: "sayali(nirman)" <sayali.tamane@gmail.com>

Dear Mr. Abhijeet Safai,

Find the photos attached with this mail for the article about NIRMAN on Wikipedia.

It is permitted to use these photos for Wikipedia.

Regards, Amrut Bang Project Coordinator - NIRMAN. Cell: +91 9422501496

-- "There are no passengers on the Spaceship EARTH. We all are crew."

Abhijeet Safai (talk) 08:13, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Abhijeet Safai, the files you uploaded were deleted because you failed to provide proper license tags. Without them, it was impossible to determine which rights of your work you relinquished. — ξ^xplicit 22:29, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I will provide proper license tags this time. Thanks for guidance. After putting these files, I would ask to have a look at it if you have time. Thanks Abhijeet Safai (talk) 05:12, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Mephisto Award Deletion

I feel that it's a bit insulting to have a criteria as "Does not appear to be a notable award". Kodansha is a well respected and established publisher in Japan, so I would think that an award given out by one of it's magazines would be considered as legitimate. Not to mention the award itself has paved the way for a lot of famous Japanese detective novelists since it's an award given for their rookie status at the time. At the same time, after going over the articles for deletion, your claim of "Does not appear to be a notable award" doesn't fall anywhere underneath the accepted guidelines and as the article creator, I would have at least liked a message on my talk page so I wouldn't have to find out and get blindsided like I did just now. I realize that the page was a bit sparse, but that alone is no grounds for deletion, especially when the page is young and I was waiting for help with the translation of the Japanese Wikipedia page. 1Q84 (talk) 07:17, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

The deletion was not meant to devalue the magazine or its award in any way. An editor (not myself) proposed that the article be deleted under the rationale "Does not appear to be a notable award". That person was responsible—but not required—to notify you of the article's pending deletion. As the proposed deletion went uncontested for seven days, it was procedurally deleted. If you'd like, I can restore the article upon request. — ξ^xplicit 22:29, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

I would appreciate if you could restore it very much. 1Q84 (talk) 14:44, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

 Done, the article has been restored. — ξ^xplicit 23:03, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

deleting templates per G6

Regarding Template:Fb team Cultural Leonesa, Template:Fb team Gaziantep BB, Template:Fb competition 2008-09 Prva HNL relegation play-offs, Template:Fb competition 2007-08 Prva HNL relegation play-offs, Template:Fb competition 2000-01 Prva HNL relegation play-offs, Template:Fb competition 2006–07 Prva HNL relegation play-offs, and Template:Fb round 2007 Copa Libertadores 1S: Could you either restore or orphan these? I agree the system is a mess, but we need to fix the articles before deleting them. 64.134.156.208 (talk) 14:04, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

I restored these whilst looking through the DB report, talk pages also restored. The Helpful One 15:54, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Shouldn't these deleted templates have been replaced with text instead? — ξ^xplicit 23:03, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Enzo Martinez

Hey I'd like some reason as to why you deleted the Enzo Martinez page. I see "your rules" for deleting an article and I think the Enzo page met them. It had plenty of sources for the content and was still in the process of growing and getting better. I hope you rethink this and know that I will be a constant editor of his page so that it adheres to Wikipedia standards. Thank you and please let me know because there are plenty of pages on European, South American, African, etc. footballers who have less content on their articles and no sources. Please reconsider. Rupert1904 (talk) 14:21, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξ^xplicit 23:03, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Enzo Martinez restoration

Hi, I saw you restored Enzo Martinez after the PROD was contested by the article's creator. However, his contention only came after it was deleted; does a challenge not have to be established before the seven day period has lapsed? Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 23:08, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Contesting a prod can be done before or after the article is deleted. The last line of WP:CONTESTED reads: If the article has already been deleted', please go to Requests for undeletion. It will be undeleted automatically on request, though it may then be nominated at WP:Articles for deletion. — ξ^xplicit 23:10, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of The world is a beautiful place & I am no longer afraid to die

I'd like an explanation as to not only why this article was deleted but why it was ever even considered for deletion. This group of musicians is extremely well documented and can be found everywhere from music publications and online sources as well as youtube. Removal was done I suspect due to personal dislike, is highly irresponsible and reckless. I'm not sure what you're playing at here by removing this article. A five-second search on the Internet will show you proper documentation. The article as well was very well documented. user name inhighspeed i'm not sure what else you want as far as i.d. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inhighspeed (talk • contribs) 00:49, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

The World is a Beautiful Place & I Am No Longer Afraid to Die was proposed for deletion by another editor with the rationale: No significant coverage found in independent reliable sources; does not appear to meet WP:BAND or WP:GNG. From the quick Google search I did, I saw very little coverage of the band and several just drive-by mentions; insufficient for the band to merit an article on Wikipedia at this time. — ξ^xplicit 23:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Your Final Judgment Thusfar

You are least in the kingdom of God. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.224.180.93 (talk) 11:42, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Uhh... okay. — ξ^xplicit 23:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

TopTenWholesale

Hello Explicit,

I received notification from my office yesterday that not only our wiki page for TopTenWholesale.com was removed by you, but also a wiki page that was done on me - Jason Prescott. Yes, I am more than familiar and have read the wiki guidelines. There should have been no reason for the pull-down. This has been very embarrassing to me and our staff. After scouring around wiki, I was just shocked that there are pages that exist like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinavasion , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kole_Imports , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alibaba_Group. With ease, I could submit to you 100's of wiki's that are in clear and blatant violation of the TOS. It was rather humbling to see someone post wikis on our organization and my personal achievements. It was also shocking to see wikipedia take down content and referenced material that is / was valuable, factual, significant and credible.

It is understood that mistakes happen. If you would please re-consider posting the entries back up and make live - it would certainly be appreciated.

The wiki entries were on Jason Prescott and TopTenWholesale.com

Best

Jason TopTenWholesale (talk) 19:47, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi there. As far as I can see, I don't think I deleted any of these articles. TopTenWholesale.com, JP Communications, LLC, Jp communications, Top Ten Wholesale, etc., were all deleted by other administrators. Most of these deletions occurred in 2007, long before I was an administrator myself. — ξ^xplicit 23:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello and thank you for the fast response. OK, so here you can see the page was pulled down April 8th : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jason_Prescott - and this image / file http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:JasonPrescottLA.jpg belonged to the wiki on Jason Prescott that was pulled down. I can also see that 2 other admins pulled down the page on TopTenWholesale.com that was up for 2 months: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TopTenWholesale.com - It just baffles me how any admin could make this error. All it takes is few strokes in google to confirm our significance and credibility. Can you please give me a hand to get this corrected? Thank you, in advance.

j TopTenWholesale (talk) 13:58, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I deleted User:Jason Prescott because it was a red-linked redirect after DGG (talk · contribs) deleted the target article Jason Prescott. The image File:JasonPrescottLA.jpg works just fine, it just isn't currently used on any page. It seems that TopTenWholesale.com was deleted as it was written by Expewikiwriter (talk · contribs), a user who was engaging in paid editing, which is strictly forbidden on Wikipedia. Although the company may be notable, its article was written in a promotional manner, which met the criteria for speedy deletion as unambiguous advertising or promotion. In order for TopTenWholesale to merit an article, it must meet our guidelines for inclusion of articles concerning companies. In general, Wikipedia considers a topic to be notable if there exist multiple reliable sources of information on the topic, external to the subject itself. Once that happens, then there should be no problem with creating the article. — ξ^xplicit 23:19, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much for this info. Yes, of course we have a zillion' notable references about Jason Prescott and TopTenWholesale.com - I am not aware of anyone paying a writer for a wiki. I'm sure someone has a screen shot of the wiki on Jason Prescott and TopTenWholesale.com . Can we resubmit to you and get this taken care of? Thank you.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasonpress123 (talk • contribs) 22:58, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

If you can, you could start a draft of the articles in your userspace at User:Jasonpress123/Jason Prescott and User:Jasonpress123/TopTenWholesale.com. Once you finsih up with that, I can take a look at the pages and see if they are fit to be moved into articlespace. — ξ^xplicit 23:28, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

And when the dawn came

You deleted this before the page was patrolled. What do we do? Bearian (talk) 00:14, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Someone else fixed it; never mind. Bearian (talk) 00:15, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Iron Range Ironheads vs Flyers.png

Least in the Kingdom of Heaven?? LOL... what did you do? Anyways... I've been trying to get help with this and no one has helped me, at least usefully. I uploaded this image (that you just deleted) and a bunch of others (one of which is listed for F11 deletion on the 15th) with permission from the author of the photo to post to commons on Wikipedia. The conversation was over facebook. I put the conversation on the permission part of the template and it didn't seem to be an issue for months. A week ago an OTRS admin puts the image up for deletion and tells me that my conversation with the guy isn't good enough... I have to prove I'm not a thief or something. I contact the guy on facebook again and ask him to e-mail permissions @ OTRS and tell them I have permission... a couple days later he tells me he did on the 4th... which should have kept the image safe from deletion... it's the 10th... it got deleted... as far as I can tell, I've shown due diligence that I am not violating any copyright laws with these images... can you help me rectify this situation? It seems like a shame to put in all this effort for nothing. DMighton (talk) 00:26, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I deleted tons of one user's subpages. I have become horribly unpopular with that IP. :( As for permission of the image, after reading the conversation, it seems that the author didn't specify which license exactly they released the images under. Stating "Creative Commons" by itself is insufficient. Creative Commons license#Original licenses lists the possible licenses, and only Attribution and Share-alike are free enough to be uploaded on Wikipedia. The other two (Noncommercial and No Derivative Works) would make the images eligible for deletion under F3 as unacceptable licenses. So, what needs to be done now is to have the author specifically state which Creative Commons license(s) she is willing to release her work under. If compatible with Wikipedia, that statement can be forwarded to OTRS and things should be sorted out shortly after that. — ξ^xplicit 00:38, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok thanks. Hopefully he hasn't had enough of this license stuff... to people not associated with Wikipedia, they seem to find it confusing and alien. I've personally taken to just taking my own photos just so I don't have to deal with these "hoops" to jump through... but when the subject is too far away to take a pic myself... my hands are tied. Thanks again. DMighton (talk) 00:55, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Files pending OTRS deleted

It seems that you deleted some files pending OTRS. Not sure if it was correct or not, but a user complained on my talk page. For your information, I've asked about them here: WP:OTRS/N#A user sent an OTRS e-mail but the files were deleted. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:03, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I have responded at the OTRS noticeboard. — ξ^xplicit 22:58, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Mohmand abdul.jpg

Hello. You have deleted File:Mohmand abdul.jpg because "F7: Violates non-free content criteria #1". (TW). I want to know why are these (File:Massoud 2000.jpg and File:Massoud and Qadir 2.PNG and File:Ahmad Shah Massoud.jpg) allowed under the same rationale and the one for Mohmand abdul not allowed?--TAzimi (talk) 12:44, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I have nominated two of the three images for deletion. One can be kept because this certain individual is deceased, and no free images appear to be available. Additionally, please note that other stuff exists; that does not make the original deletion any less accurate. — ξ^xplicit 01:20, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For all of your work deleting files at CSD, FFD, and PUF, and for picking up where others unfortunately left off. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 00:04, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! It has been a while I've gotten a shiny gift. — ξ^xplicit 00:06, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

You deserve it. Probably deserved it a long time ago. I've only recently (for a few months) noticed your contributions as I mostly deal with files these days. Thank you for handling the behind the scenes work required from those of us who nominate everything under the sun. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 00:44, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Kim bed rest.jpg

How does it not meet the criteria? It was added as a joke, it serves no useful purpose, was previously deleted, and then readded. What does WP gain by hosting this image? ---RepublicanJacobite_TheFortyFive 02:52, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

F10: Files uploaded that are neither image.... Already failed the criteria by being an image. If you'd like to see the file deleted, please nominate it at WP:FFD. — ξ^xplicit 23:33, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

File:David Domoney.jpg

Hi, Permission for this file was sent on 4th April. There is evidence of a license! Bobby987 (talk) 15:35, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Evidence of permission has yet to be verified. You may want to double check with OTRS to make sure they have received your email. — ξ^xplicit 23:33, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Could you please tell me how I contact OTRS? Bobby987 (talk) 09:12, 18 April 2012 (UTC) Thank you.

You can email OTRS at permissions-en@wikimedia.org. — ξ^xplicit 23:40, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Digital Bounce

The DYK project (nominate) 16:21, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Eric Gemna

Hello! I am extremely new to wikipedia and wanted to start editing a while ago. I created an article about myself for practice but not realized it was not a sandbox article. The article in question is here here and I have tried to delete it myself but it still appears in searches. I was wondering if it is possible to either permanently delete or make it not appear in searches. Egemnator (talk) 00:27, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Hmm... I'm not entirely sure how, to be honest. I tried to look for something helpful at WP:NOINDEX, but I'm not sure anything on that page addresses the issue. — ξ^xplicit 23:40, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Amet Han Sultan.jpg

Hey there,

The deletion review page of wikipedia suggested that speak to you concerning this file(File:Amet Han Sultan.jpg), thus I really want to ask; how come despite an argument made against the deletion of the file was it deleted without a viable reason? I find this to be unreasonable at best.

Thanks The Night and the Silent Water (talk) 21:46, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Your keep argument on the discussion page didn't really address the nominator's concern. The file was tagged with a non-free license and violated WP:NFG. Whether a deceased photographer would care about the copyright didn't really matter, as it's the copyright laws we're trying to abide by. Although you did assert that the image may be in the public domain, you did not verify that it was; as you argued to keep the file, the burden of proof to verify its copyright status was with you. — ξ^xplicit 23:44, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Ryad Boudebouz.jpg

Hi Explicit, you deleted the file I uploaded because of reason F11 (no permission). However, I emailed the permission letter to permissions-en@wikimedia.org and tagged the article with pending (meaning I sent the email in and I am just waiting for permissions to process it), so that it does not get deleted. However, you still went ahead and deleted it. Please restore it and give "permissions" time to approve/reject the picture. Thanks. TonyStarks (talk) 09:11, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi there. This specific image was tagged with {{OTRS pending}} for two weeks, and said tag does not make a file exempt from deletion. If OTRS can confirm permission, it will be restored on the spot. — ξ^xplicit 04:57, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, I guess I'll follow up with them. TonyStarks (talk) 06:23, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Article "List of trains run by Indian Railways" is long, unreferenced and links to several external internet sites

Hey, quick question for you. Should List of trains run by Indian Railways exist in its current form? It is somewhat indiscriminate, long, unreferenced and links to hundreds of external internet sites. I would like a second opinion before recommending to AfD. Thanks!--Jax 0677 (talk) 00:26, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

That article definitely a mess as it stands at the moment. This could probably be classified as an indiscriminate collection of information, and I can't really see this list being turned into a suitable encyclopedic topic. — ξ^xplicit 00:35, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2012 April 10 / File:Ladewlight

I am contacting you in reference to the recent deletion of File:Ladewlight. You wrote simply "the result was delete." You did not explain why you deleted it. There had been a discussion going on, one that I had participated in, in which various options were being considered. I may take this to deletion review. But I would like an explanation. Sebwite (talk) 01:57, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Various options were considered, but none were implemented. The file was infringing on the Ladew Gardens' copyright as long as it remained licensed under the public domain, and was deleted as a result. If you have a fair use rationale and non-free license ready to put up, I can restore the file so you can rectify the problem. — ξ^xplicit 21:49, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Request to undelete NE LHIN page - evidence of notability was intact (citations and links were shown) as per the other LHIN wiki articles.

RHaworth had restored the page because of those revisions being made...why did you then delete the page? We are finding this introduction to Wikipedia a significant challenge, as we had copied the other LHIN formats which already exist as links from LHINs.

We respectifull request that you restore the link as it was at the time you deleted it, complete with all the links and citations done according to Wikipedia conventions. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.75.130.84 (talk) 18:43, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

It seems that RHaworth has already moved the content to User:Kbain/sandbox. — ξ^xplicit 21:49, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

you destroyed someone else's work unnecessarily

Explicit: you deleted a disambiguation page I created. While admittedly it was not the most important disambiguation page on Wikipedia, it definitely wasn't wrong for it to exist, and I can't believe you haven't got more important things to do than deleting other people's work when it doesn't need to be deleted. If you want to discourage people from contributing to Wikipedia, go ahead, you're doing the right thing. And if you're going to destroy someone else's work unnecessarily, you should at least clean up your mess and not leave broken links on other articles. Azylber (talk) 03:02, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Rio Turbio (disambiguation) was deleted because it was an unnecessary disambiguation page with only two items. Because these types of disambiguation pages are generally not needed, they can be speedy deleted as such. In fact, there's even a speedy deletion template for it: {{db-disambig}}. I hadn't noticed that it was also linked at Rio turbio (film), as disambiguated pages generally don't need any hatnotes. I will go ahead and remove that link now. — ξ^xplicit 23:28, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

You're still missing the point, but it's explained very clearly in my previous message, so it's a waste of time for me to type it again. And apart from that point you're missing, you're also missing yet another point: how do I add the other entries I want to add to that disambiguation page, now that you've deleted it? If I want to add more entries, do I have to retype the whole page just because you decided to rush and delete it? Azylber (talk) 14:27, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm not missing the point. The disambiguation page you created was tagged for speedy deletion by another user. It remained tagged for nearly eight hours. It met the speedy deletion criteria and was deleted as such. It's very straightforward. If you feel discouraged from editing because of one deletion that was well within policy, that's unfortunate. Should pages never be deleted in fear that it will "destroy" someone's work?

Is there any other entry on Wikipedia that currently exists besides Turbio River that would need to be disambiguated? If not, adding {{Distinguish}} or expanding the hatnote already on the Río Turbio will suffice. If more pages with the same title are created in the future, the disambiguation page can be restored upon request. — ξ^xplicit 22:54, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

You're still missing both points, but nevermind, it's all clearly explained above anyway. I've done my best to explain it to you, but I'm giving up now.

Also note that 8 hours is not enough time for a deletion to be contested by the author. Unless you edit wikipedia as a full-time occupation...

Afaik there are a total of 4 articles (1 unwritten) that need to be disambiguated. But I can't add them because you rushed to delete a page that didn't need to be deleted.

Azylber (talk) 09:43, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

I've now re-created the page and added all 4 entries. Azylber (talk) 12:06, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

WP:files for deletion/2012 April 19‎

There are discussions still open, yet many files, including File:Jaleel White Steve Urkel.jpg, were deleted. Do you have sufficient time to give rationale for each discussion? --George Ho (talk) 03:28, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Since there is a bot that closes the discussions for us, admins rarely need to manually close it themselves. However, if you feel that I should leave a closing rationale for File:Jaleel White Steve Urkel.jpg, I can make one. Would you like me to provide one? — ξ^xplicit 03:32, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Bruce Herman File Deletion

Why was a photo that I took with my own camera, with permission of the subject, deleted? Also, when I posted a dispute as directed, no one did anything to contact me (either through my talk page or on the page for the file)... what is the point of having dispute functionality if it gets ignored?ReformedArsenal (talk) 03:04, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

The file you uploaded was tagged with a non-free license which, because the subject is a living individual, violated the first point WP:NFCC and was deleted as such. Unless you release the image under a free license, such as the public domain or a Creative Commons license, your image can not be used on Wikipedia. Additionally, because a copyrighted painting was also part of the picture, that would constitute as an unacceptable derivative work. — ξ^xplicit 06:26, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks.

Thanks for the speedy delete. VanIsaac_WS^contribs 06:47, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Thank you for the cookie. — ξ^xplicit 06:53, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

File copyright question

What is the general believe (if you may know) about photographs of paintings. I cannot figure out one way or another if the photo of a painting (one done in the US anyways) is allowed to be PD, or if it falls under the original painting's artist's copyright. I do not know if any of that makes sense, but hopefully you can help. Thanks -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 23:52, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

I believe you mean if it's an acceptable form of a derivative work. It depends on who created the painting, when it was painted, and when it was published. If it's a recently created painting (~70 years), the painting is likely still copyrighted. If it's older, it would depend on the aforementioned information. — ξ^xplicit 23:58, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Another question: The file File:PBB Protein UBADC1 image.jpg and many others like it are listed with the source: [2] and as {{{PD-release}}. The only information on the site that I could find in reference to this is at [3]. No where could I find the words Public Domain on the website. And I do not believe that the criteria of their conditions (see [4] would really allow them to be Public Domain, but alas, I do not know. There are over 20 of these files uploaded by User:ProteinBoxBot which has two operators. What would you suggest? -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 00:19, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Under the Usage Policies header, the text states "Data files contained in the PDB archive (ftp://ftp.wwpdb.org) are free of all copyright restrictions and made fully and freely available for both non-commercial and commercial use. Users of the data should attribute the original authors of that structural data." As such, the images uploaded by this bot seem okay to me. — ξ^xplicit 00:49, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Madonna album covers

Can you restore File:AmericanLife2003.png, File:Ray Of Light.jpg, File:Truebluealbum.jpeg, File:Madonna - Music (album).jpg, File:I'mBreathless.jpg, File:Madonna - Like a Prayer.jpg? VernitaG (talk · contribs) removed it without a good reason, and his/her behaivour reminds me to BlondeBaller (talk · contribs). Also, the files were removed yesterday, not seven days before. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:42, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

All files restored. VernitaG decided to disruptively date all the {{di-orphaned fair use}} tags with April 22, 2012, instead of the date it was actually tagged. Apologies for any inconvenience. — ξ^xplicit 19:52, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Greg Klazura

Just wanted to check if Greg Klazura now qualifies as a notable player. He started for the Vancouver Whitecaps today in the 2012 Canadian Championship, which I believe counts under the condition: "Have played in a competitive fixture between two fully professional clubs in a domestic, Continental or Intercontinental club competition." The Canadian Championship I imagine is considered a domestic club competition.

Seems that someone recreated it before I could get to it. Still, I restored the history that was previously deleted. — ξ^xplicit 05:26, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Can you permanently delete the date of birth from "Dan Johnson (musician)" history?

Can you please permanently delete the date of birth from Dan Johnson (musician) history?--Jax 0677 (talk) 13:34, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Is there any reason to do so? — ξ^xplicit 19:35, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Prevention of identity theft, and Johnson's birthdate is not published anywhere (that I can find).--Jax 0677 (talk) 08:51, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

I went though the page history and I didn't find the subject's date of birth in any of the revisions. At most, I just saw the page being categorized under Category:1970s births and Category:1980s births, which itself is unsourced. As such, the best option would simply to remove that category from the page. There doesn't seem to be anything that would require revision deletion. — ξ^xplicit 09:16, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Another Question

I tend to make mistakes sometimes, like my FFD nomination here: Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2012_April_26#File:GJNLOGO.jpg where I withdrew it. Am I allowed to close the discussion since I withdrew it, or does an uninvolved party? -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 20:46, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of File:Derek Flores actor improvisor and comedian by Sarah Andrews.jpg,

Hello,

I'm Rachel I uploaded the file. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Derek_Flores_actor_improvisor_and_comedian_by_Sarah_Andrews.jpg Sarah Andrews then sent and email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org from sarahandrews2313@gmail.com using the template we found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CONSENT.

She heard nothing back.

On the 2nd of May the warning was still up, So I sent and email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org following up. No response.

How can Sarah give her permission? She is not currently a Wikipedia editor. Please let us know what our next course of action should be.

Kind regards Rachel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rat.bat.cat (talk • contribs) 22:25, 4 May 2012 (UTC)