User talk:Fastily

User:Fry1989

Please can you block this IP 76.67.104.57, it's the IP adress of Fry1989. Thanks SanglierT (talk) 07:10, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, he clearly hasn't learned his lesson. Shame. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 07:39, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I confirmed, he learn nothing, he used same process in all language version, how it's possible to blocked in all? SanglierT (talk) 09:44, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you proposing a global block? That would be m:SRG, I think. Note that I have not at all paid any attention to the user's action or to the reasons to block him here, so my comment here should neither be seen as support nor as oppose for any actions taken against him. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:41, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes i'd propose a global blocking, he used a new IP adress on en.wikipedia 70.31.112.140. He definitly learn nothing about heraldic but he think this point of vue his right! SanglierT (talk) 06:51, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request for deletion review

Fastily,

You recently closed a deletion discussion of several bookcover photos which I uploaded. [1]

You deleted the photos although every one of them was accompanied by newspaper articles, direct quotes to those news articles, and
in-line citations to those news articles. This critical commentary existed for each and every photo. As such, all of these photos met the WP:NFC#UUI "critical commentary" standard.

I pointed this fact out repeatedly in the discussion. Also, if you look at the article where these photos were placed, you will see exactly what I mean. [2]

Each and every photo correlated to extensive critical commentary, from sources such as The New York Times, Washington Post, Publishers Weekly, Time Magazine, the Chicago Tribune, the San Francisco Chronicle, Library Journal...the list goes on and on.

Could you review this matter when you get a chance, and re-consider the deletion? I would greatly appreciate it, and thank you for your time. Below is the list of photos.

File:LIVE RR LittleBook.jpg
File:Leibowitz.jpg
File:Roomftd.jpg
File:Farm&m.jpg
File:Be a road.jpg
File:Butlerian.jpg

Thanks again,
Nelsondenis248 (talk) 06:14, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fastily's deletion summary for all of them reads "textbook violation of WP:NFCC" and that's exactly what it looks like: photos of lots of books in a list of books, which is identical to WP:NFC#UUI §2 on discographies. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:30, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that is your view but at FFD Nelsondenis248 has given a contrary view of the way policy should be applied by quoting the same policy document as yourself. Do you think the policy-based consensus of the discussions was "delete"? It does not look like that to me. Thincat (talk) 16:40, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I also noticed that User:Fastily deleted all six photos, in just one minute of time. It is highly unlikely that he read the article [3], or read all the critical commentary in that article, or even read the deletion discussion itself.

I find this disturbing since I spent hours locating those photos, uploading them, and writing the critical commentary. Now I'm wasting more hours in these deletion discussions. I may go to WP:DRV, I may go to WP:AN/I, but it is all very tedious and disappointing. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 09:14, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NFCC#3a: the number of non-free images should be kept as small as possible. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:59, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Hi, can't help but notice this discussion. I've been working in the image venue long before I became an administrator—and I've been one for nearly two and a half years—so I thought I'd chip in as I was uninvolved in this discussion. Fastily's deletions were spot on. What the first point of WP:NFCI requires is that the cover art itself be subject to critical commentary to merit its inclusion. This wouldn't apply if the covers were being used in the infobox of the articles about the books themselves, but that wasn't the case here.

And for the record, deleting six images in one minute can be done by opening the images in multiple tabs, clicking the delete button and switching to the next tab seconds later. Being an administrator, I think it's safe to assume that Fastily read the discussion in its entirety. — ξ ^xplicit 07:46, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mini-Comet on 75 map.jpg

See Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 March 6#File:Mini-Comet on 75 map.jpg: it says that you deleted this as F8 but the file doesn't seem to be on Commons and it was deleted by a bot from the article where it was used: [4]. A mistake? --Stefan2 (talk) 13:57, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to provide a link. My bad. Fixed now -FASTILY ^(TALK) 20:52, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism closure

Saw your comment/closure regarding my complaint on the admin noticeboard recommending AIV. I did not go there, because I did not consider talk page attacks and sockpuppetry to be strictly vandalism. Are those typically falling under that umbrella? Gaijin42 (talk) 19:06, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, most admins will block for such offenses (granted that the user has been sufficiently warned) at WP:AIV -FASTILY ^(TALK) 20:56, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TPS

(talk page stalker) - regarding [5], maybe try a / if no good? I've never used Cluebot myself, but User:ClueBot_III#How to archive your page says "For example, if I were archiving User talk:Cobi, I would set it to User talk:Cobi/Archives/" Begoon ^talk 21:43, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think I got it: [6]. Thanks though! Best, FASTILY ^(TALK) 05:52, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Legend of Korra

The page you deleted today "The Legend of Korra" I've moved "The Last Airbender: Legend of Korra" to "The Legend of Korra" as the series has been renamed. - Alec2011 (talk) 00:53, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:HungerGamesPoster.jpg

Hello. I believe you may have made a mistake in deleting this file. You said you deleted it because (F5: Unused non-free media file for more than 7 days) but the file was being used in the article when you deleted it. For An Angel (talk) 02:21, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Restored Sorry for the inconvenience. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 05:53, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

epguides deletion

epguides was recently deleted because of G11. I totally agree-- it was a lousy article. But it was also linked to Template:Epguides so I wonder if it is worth reinstatment.

Full disclosure: I am one of the founders of epguides, but I did not write the article. I'm not all that concerned we don't have a page any more, but there are similar sites with pages: TVRecaps.com, The_TV_IV (full of references to itself), TV Tome.

I don't want to come off as petty-- I fine with or without the page.

Fuddle (talk) 02:31, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think I'd rather not restore that article, because it doesn't appear to meet our standards and probably wouldn't survive an AfD. If you like, you're welcome to create a new page. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 05:55, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now this is odd

What is one of your talk page archives doing in Category:Brand name food products? I looked at the templates transcluded there and nothing jumped out. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:38, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. The missing colon prefix is usually the culprit. Killiondude (talk) 02:51, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Irene Castle Filmography

Hi. I didn't know that this was being considered for deletion. Can I have access to it temporarily, please, to see if I need to transfer anything from it back into her main article? Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:19, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have appended the text of the deleted page below. Click here to view it.

-FASTILY ^(TALK) 06:21, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. Done. -- Ssilvers (talk) 07:11, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am confused...

Hi Fastily, I am a bit confused with what you have done to my page... It has G8 mark on it. And I do not understand why.

Could you please explain :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Azbukva (talk • contribs) 09:43, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]