User talk:Explicit
| This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.Please consider using other venues such as WP:REFUND, where most of my deletions are considered uncontroversial and can be restored upon request. Alternatively, you can consult other experienced users and admins for any guidance or help, or simply await my response. |
|
Archives |
|---|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
|
|
Contents
- 1 Josimar Da Silva martins
- 2 File:Tribe of Torqua.png
- 3 CodeLaunch Content
- 4 Re add deleted image
- 5 Re add image Sheridan_School_logo.png for Sheridan_School
- 6 Page Deletion Inquiry
- 7 Restore File:Khalifa International Stadium.jpg
- 8 Beanpole (TV pilot)
- 9 Where else to discuss Template:Di-disputed fair use rationale
- 10 Tudor House, Melbourne
- 11 Fair use image restore request
- 12 Request for restoring Wikipedia page of K7 Total Security
- 13 Request for restoring page that was deleted
- 14 Request for creating a Wikipedia page for K7 Computing
Josimar Da Silva martins[edit]
Hi can you tell me why was the page Josimar Da Silva martins deleted by you? Please restore it I will provide sources LordJoki (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:49, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
- @LordJoki: Hi, Josimar da Silva Martins was deleted for being a biography of a living person that lacked any sources. Under the WP:PRODBLP policy, such articles are deleted after being tagged for seven days and no sources being provided, which happened here. If you can provide a source here, I can undelete the page. ℯxplicit 23:35, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Here are few sources https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/josimar/profil/spieler/256136
https://us.soccerway.com/players/josimar-da-silva-martins/100042/
https://sports.ndtv.com/ileague/i-league-mumbai-fc-sign-forward-josimar-da-silva-martins-1511569
https://m.timesofindia.com/city/goa/Dempo-sign-Brazilian-Josimar/articleshow/49521814.cms
https://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-sports/Joshimar-gets-a-point-for-Chirag/article12717635.ece
LordJoki (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:22, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- @LordJoki: Thank you, I've restored the page. Please add these references to the article. ℯxplicit 23:13, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks LordJoki (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:36, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
File:Tribe of Torqua.png[edit]
File:Tribe of Torqua.png (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) That image didn't violate "F7. Invalid fair-use claim" on Camp Cherry Valley, please restore it. Thanks. --evrik (talk) 21:59, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Evrik: Hi, per WP:NFC##cite_note-4, the "allowance for logos only applies to the use of the logo on the infobox or lede for the stand-alone article about the entity... The use of historical logos for an entity is not allowed, unless the historical logo itself is described in the context of critical commentary about that historical logo." The above logo was used in a section of the article to showcase the Tribe of Torqua patch, which was not accompanied by any sourced critical commentary. At the time of deletion, the file was in violation of policy. ℯxplicit 23:39, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
CodeLaunch Content[edit]
Good day Explicit,
I sent you an email requesting a copy of the content from the deleted page "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CodeLaunch". I realize the page violates the G11 policy written in the Wikipedia guidelines and understand the article would require an overhaul of the content for it to be a permanent fixture on Wikipedia. However, we created that page over 2 years ago and contains a lot of valuable information. I would like to receive a copy of that content for our own personal use, even if it means the article will remain deleted.
I look forward to your response.
Thanks,
CodeAuthorityCH (talk) 19:03, 23 October 2018 (UTC)Cory
- @CodeAuthorityCH: I have emailed you a copy of the contents. ℯxplicit 00:33, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
Re add deleted image[edit]
Dear Sir
You have recently deleted an image as it was removed from a page. I have replaced the image as its removal was unjustified. As such I would ask that you reverse the deletion.
Kind regards Mtaylor848 (talk) 22:15, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Mtaylor848: Hi, the image was remove from Briggate, Leeds twice by Chemical Engineer. The second time, the user commented, "Remove skyscraper picture. Uncited bit about something that never happened. I think encyclopedia should be key facts. Sorry." You should discuss the issue with the user instead editing warring over it. Additionally, it appears to me that the use of the image would violate WP:NFCC#1. If the information can be properly cited, it would contradict the passage at WP:FREER. ℯxplicit 00:32, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
- See Talk:Briggate,_Leeds#Skyscraper. There was no response. I also doubted that the image was available for use.Chemical Engineer (talk)
- It is not my intention to edit war. I have reviewed the situation as it stands and cannot see reasonable justification for its removal. I have stated that I feel if any other editor feels inclined to remove it I would be happy to take this to arbitration. However I do not feel it is possible to reach a consensus if we do not even have the file. As this issue is not settled and I was not consulted or warned about the deletion of my work I am not in a fair position to make my case.
- Thanks. Mtaylor848 (talk) 16:44, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) Hi Mtaylor848. You received a notification on your user talk page that the file was "orphaned" and was going to be deleted per WP:F5. As Explict has posted, restoring the file would only make sense if there was a 100% certainly that it would be immediate be added to an article and not subsequently removed again so that WP:NFCC#7 is satisfied; otherwise, the file would just be deleted as an orphan again. You can, howwever, add an external link to the file's source to the articles talk page for discussion purposes, if you want to try and establish a consensus to re-add the file. Once it becomes clear that a consensus has been established in favor of reusing it, I'm pretty sure that Explict will have not problem with restoring the file. Images are like article content in the sense that a consensus may need to be established for using them in an article in a particular way; a file's licensing helps determine how it may be used, but there's still no automatic guarantee that file will be used even when licensing is not an issue. In such cases, you should try to resolve any differences of opinion on the article talk page or as otherwise explained in WP:DR, just as you would with disputed textual content. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:37, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. Mtaylor848 (talk) 16:44, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
Re add image Sheridan_School_logo.png for Sheridan_School[edit]
Over the summer I updated a logo for my school (that is used with permission) but did so prematurely and reverted until the logo was ready for use. In the meantime, it was (properly) deleted for lack of being used anywhere. Now that I would like to make the update again, it will not let me re-upload the image. I'm not sure how to do it again but would appreciate your help.
The file is at Sheridan_School_logo.png for the page Sheridan_School — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaybriar (talk • contribs) 19:43, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Jaybriar: I have restored File:Sheridan School logo.png and added it to the article. ℯxplicit 00:57, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
Page Deletion Inquiry[edit]
Hello,
I would like to inquire about how to fix/republish a page that was deleted for David Meltzer (the Sports Executive).
I believe there was some bad sourcing, etc that we would like to fix.
There is a strong possibility that source material from the WWE Employed "David Meltzer" was tied to the David Meltzer I am referencing, who can be found at www.davemeltzer.com.
Is this something you can help us do? Or can you advise as to better steps to accomplish this?
Thank you!
-Derek Shaw (310) 980-4965 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derekshaw35 (talk • contribs) 17:14, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Derekshaw35: Hi, if you haven't already, please consider reading notability guidelines for people and the general notability guideline to understand what constitutes "notable" on Wikipedia, as this was the main concern. There was also a concern over the article creator's association with the subject; if you are share the same ties, please read the conflict of interest page as well. The best way to proceed would be going through the articles for creation process. There, the article you plan to create will go through a draft phase, and an experienced editor will review the page and determine if it is suitable to be an article; if not, you will receive feedback on how to improve the page. ℯxplicit 02:24, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
@Xplicit: Thank you for this direction. I appreciate you response! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derekshaw35 (talk • contribs) 15:24, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Restore File:Khalifa International Stadium.jpg[edit]
I was led to your talk page to ask you if you'd be willing to restore File:Khalifa International Stadium.jpg, which was replaced by a commons file that has now been deleted itself due to a freedom of panorama case. It came with a detailed non-free use rationale that took a while to write up, and I don't want to have to write up another lengthy non-free use rationale for the same image. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 01:24, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
- @PhilipTerryGraham: Hi, I have uploaded the Commons file locally instead (File:Khaliffa stadium - panoramio (1).jpg). It is free enough to be uploaded at least on the English Wikipedia. Cheers. ℯxplicit 02:24, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Explicit: Apparently this photograph was taken on January 2, 2014? If so, then this defeats the purpose of having this debacle at all. We need a photograph of the redeveloped stadium, not the old one. I was misled by GTVM92 into believing the photograph was taken in 2018, after they edited the caption in {{Infobox venue}} saying it was so. The image originally uploaded to Wikipedia was that of the redeveloped stadium. That and I still need the non-free use rationale I wrote up for it. I've mentioned it numerous times but nobody seems to acknowledge that issue I have as well. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 04:50, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
- @PhilipTerryGraham: If that's the case, a non-free image of the redesigned stadium is not be justified because it would violate WP:NFCC#1. As a structure that still exists and can be accessed, a freely licensed image can be created and uploaded locally. ℯxplicit 05:06, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Explicit: But it's not the same structure, thus the building pictured in the commons photographs no longer exist and cannot be accessed. There still has been no attempt to address my concern about the non-free use rationale that I had written up that I want to retrieve. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 09:17, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
- @PhilipTerryGraham: The fair use rationale you mention is directly tied to the WP:NFCC#1 issue: "Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose." Even if a freely licensed photo does not currently exist, a non-free image is not justifiable under policy because a freely licensed photo can be created of the new stadium. You are free to remove the image from the infobox if you believe an image of the current stadium fits best, but a non-free image simply can not be used. ℯxplicit 00:04, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Explicit: I think there's been a lot of misunderstanding here. I do believe an image of the current stadium fits best, but no free images of the stadium exist. You're presenting me with a paradoxical situation where you're telling me I can't use an image of the new stadium even though you're inviting me to. Also, your response to my question about the non-free use rationale I wrote up is confusing and does not answer my question at all to any degree. I'll try to simplify it as best as humanly possible. I wrote a bunch of text. I want that text back. Is there any way to get that text I wrote back? I don't want to write it up again. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 00:09, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
- @PhilipTerryGraham: I have pasted it here. The situation is not paradoxical. A photo like File:Khaliffa stadium - panoramio (1).jpg (licensed under Creative Commons or some other appropriate free license) can be used; a photo like File:Khalifa International Stadium.jpg (a fully copyrighted photo which requires a non-free license) can not be used. If a freely licensed photo of the current stadium does not exist, then you must simply wait until one is created. ℯxplicit 00:18, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Explicit: I think there's been a lot of misunderstanding here. I do believe an image of the current stadium fits best, but no free images of the stadium exist. You're presenting me with a paradoxical situation where you're telling me I can't use an image of the new stadium even though you're inviting me to. Also, your response to my question about the non-free use rationale I wrote up is confusing and does not answer my question at all to any degree. I'll try to simplify it as best as humanly possible. I wrote a bunch of text. I want that text back. Is there any way to get that text I wrote back? I don't want to write it up again. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 00:09, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
- @PhilipTerryGraham: The fair use rationale you mention is directly tied to the WP:NFCC#1 issue: "Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose." Even if a freely licensed photo does not currently exist, a non-free image is not justifiable under policy because a freely licensed photo can be created of the new stadium. You are free to remove the image from the infobox if you believe an image of the current stadium fits best, but a non-free image simply can not be used. ℯxplicit 00:04, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Explicit: But it's not the same structure, thus the building pictured in the commons photographs no longer exist and cannot be accessed. There still has been no attempt to address my concern about the non-free use rationale that I had written up that I want to retrieve. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 09:17, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
- @PhilipTerryGraham: If that's the case, a non-free image of the redesigned stadium is not be justified because it would violate WP:NFCC#1. As a structure that still exists and can be accessed, a freely licensed image can be created and uploaded locally. ℯxplicit 05:06, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Explicit: Apparently this photograph was taken on January 2, 2014? If so, then this defeats the purpose of having this debacle at all. We need a photograph of the redeveloped stadium, not the old one. I was misled by GTVM92 into believing the photograph was taken in 2018, after they edited the caption in {{Infobox venue}} saying it was so. The image originally uploaded to Wikipedia was that of the redeveloped stadium. That and I still need the non-free use rationale I wrote up for it. I've mentioned it numerous times but nobody seems to acknowledge that issue I have as well. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 04:50, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Beanpole (TV pilot)[edit]
Whoever prodded this article never notified me; would you please restore it so I can improve it? Erpert blah, blah, blah... 03:54, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Erpert:
Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ℯxplicit 23:48, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Where else to discuss Template:Di-disputed fair use rationale[edit]
I thought about discussing "Template:Di-disputed fair use rationale" to either TfD or VPP. Personally, I found it either too intimidating or too bureaucratic. Contacting the person responsible for using this template shouldn't be necessary. There's already File PROD, which is less bureaucratic, less restricted, more editor-friendly, etc. Suggestions? George Ho (talk) 20:24, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
- @George Ho: WP:TFD, though I was well noted for opposing the use of File PROD on non-free files. It adds to the workload for me, and {{di-disputed fair use rationale}} is much easier to handle. ℯxplicit 23:48, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) Although I'm using Template:Prod when I can, I'm still not sure that it's better than {{di-disputed fair use rationale}} as a way to nominate non-free files for speedy deletion/review. Nominated files can be de-prodded even in bad faith without any sort of administrator review which then means that the file needs to be taken to FFD or tagged again anyway. Since most non-free file speedy deletions (based on my experience) seem to be clear cut per WP:F7 or WP:F9, prodding these seems like a waste of time; "di-disputed fair use rationale", however, can also be used when just one non-free use of a file needs to be assessed, and removal not deletion of the file is being proposed which I don't think is something which can be handled very well by PROD. If an admin reviews the di template and decides further discussion is needed, they usually say so in the edit sum they leave when removing the template.So, it might instead be better to try and tweak the existing template to make it more user friendly and clarify how it should be contested (perhaps by creating a {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}} type template for it) instead of deprecating its use. Pretty much the only editors bothering to bring files to FFD or tag them with templates are those who seem to have a pretty good grasp of WP:IUP and WP:NFCCP; so, I don't think these templates are being abused in anyway. Mistakes may be made, but these can usually be caught by the reviewing admin (who also tend to be very experience in dealing with files), which doesn't always happen when files are deprodded. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:25, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestions. I was gonna take the template to TfD as suggested, but then I changed my mind and then requested creation of {{di-disputed fair use rationale disputed}} at Wikipedia:Requested templates. George Ho (talk) 01:53, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that "di-disputed fair use rationale disputed" would be a good name for such a template; it seems like it might be easily mistaken for typo or some other error given that "disputed" is used twice. Moreover, as I tried to discuss awhile back at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 67#Change "fair use" to "non-free content", the wording of all of these types of templates should be changed to be consistant with the actual name of the policy. WP:NFCC is not really "Wikipedia's fair use criteria"; it's "Wikipedia's non-free content criteria". Moreover, WP:FUR is not really a "fair use rationale", but rather a "non-free use rationale". Editors new and experienced already mistake fair use/fair dealing as being interchangeable with non-free content use, even though the latter is much more restrictive. The way some of these templates are worded only seems to keep things confusing, so it would be best not to create any more with similar naming problems until the existing ones have been revised accordingly. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:46, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Tudor House, Melbourne[edit]
Hi, this page was deleted. I believe it should not have been. User (rosguill) who proposed deletion cited the fact it was not on a heritage register. This claim presumes that historical significance is determined only by state and local governments, which I strongly dispute. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tom od (talk • contribs) 07:26, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Tom od:
Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ℯxplicit 23:58, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Fair use image restore request[edit]
Please restore File:Windows Server 2012 R2.png – it is to be used in the article Windows Server 2012 R2. Modernponderer (talk) 08:15, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Modernponderer:
Done, file restored. ℯxplicit 23:29, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Request for restoring Wikipedia page of K7 Total Security[edit]
Dear Sir/Mam,
I am writing to you on behalf of K7 Computing, a global provider of leading IT security solutions for enterprises and consumers. Incorporated in 1991, K7 Computing has its registered office in Chennai, India and a strong presence in all Indian states. With more than 20,000 channel partners, K7 Computing is protecting more than 25 million customers worldwide against threats to their IT environment. Corporate website
K7 Computing’s flagship product; K7 Total Security had a Wikipedia page which was deleted in October 2016 and the reason quoted was "Non-notable product developed by non-notable company".
Please allow me to share a few media coverage here to support the fact that K7 Computing is indeed a notable company with millions of users actively using K7 Total Security product.
Please find pasted below links to a few authentic and trustworthy media publications those have published news about K7 Computing. All these are category A publications in India and few of these have international presence as well.
The Times of India - K7 Computing eyes $50mn revenue, to expand to US and Europe
Business Standard - K7 Computing eyes $50mn revenue, to expand to US and Europe
The Financial Express - K7 Computing eyes $50mn revenue, to expand to US and Europe
India Today - K7 Computing eyes $50mn revenue, to expand to US and Europe
Outlook - K7 Computing eyes $50mn revenue, to expand to US and Europe
Money Control - K7 Computing eyes $50mn revenue, to expand to US and Europe
Express Computer CRN - K7 Computing Celebrates Completion of 25 Years
Zee Business - K7 Computing eyes $50mn revenue, to expand to US and Europe
VARIndia - K7 Computing completes 25 glorious years
Channel Drive - K7 Computing Unveils K7 Academy, Celebrates Completion of 25 Years
United news of India (UNI) - K7 Computing launches new security solutions
The Times of India - Chennai's homegrown cybersecurity enterprise K7 Computing expands to B2B segment
The Hindu - Concern about cybersecurity on the rise
The Hindu Business Line - K7 launches cyber security products large enterprises
CIOL - K7 Computing Announces Strategic Repositioning and Expansion of its Enterprise Security Business
CRN India - K7 Computing announces strategic repositioning and expansion
Communications Today - Concern About Cybersecurity on The Rise
B4U media - K7 Computing Announces Strategic Repositioning and Expansion of its Enterprise Security Business at its Annual K7 Odyssey Event
3rdEyeReports - K7 Computing Announces Strategic Re-positioning and Expansion
SPO India - Help the people in distress in Kerala with K7 Computing
VAR India - AI helps in staying ahead of ever-evolving threats
Request you to kindly restore the page of K7 Total Security on Wikipedia and guide me to create a Wikipedia page on K7 Computing.
Kindly let me know if I could assist you with further information about the company or any specific detail.
Thanks and regards Rashmi Markhedkar Official email: rashmi.m@k7computing.com 106.193.158.232 (talk) 13:46, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ℯxplicit 23:29, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Request for restoring page that was deleted[edit]
Hello, I noticed a page about me (Marquis_Wright) was deleted and saw somewhere that you were the person to reach out to. I'm not familiar with editing or creating pages on Wikipedia and believe I may have tried to update some content on it without being logged onto a wikipedia account. An administrator explained the controversy there to me and how the page can be flagged as a result. However, I wanted to reach out to you and see if you can undue the page deletion.
Thanks, Marquis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mnw30 (talk • contribs) 01:02, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Mnw30:
Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ℯxplicit 01:23, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
Request for creating a Wikipedia page for K7 Computing[edit]
Dear Sir/ Mam, Thank you for restoring the page on K7 Total Security. I had 2 queries – 1) The Wikipedia page of K7 Total Security is still not reflecting in Google search. Kindly help me understand if this takes some time. 2) The Wikipedia page of K7 Total Security is in a language other than English. Is it possible to have a Wikipedia page of K7 Total Security in English Also, would request you to guide/ help me to create a Wikipedia page for K7 Computing, the company. Request you to let me know if I can assist you with any information or detail. Regards Rashmi Markhedkar Official email: rashmi.m@k7computing.com Rashmimarkhedkar (talk) 13:16, 16 November 2018 (UTC)