User talk:Explicit/Archive 11

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12


Question on category

Hi Explicit! Since you seem to be quite experienced with categories, I thought I'd ask you about one I ran across earlier today that has me thoroughly confused. Category:Categories named after North American Class I railroads is the one, which is a subcat of Category:Class I railroads in North America. I can't figure out the extra layer of categorization here, especially since I've never seen another cat named "Categories named after Foo". Is there something I'm missing? Dana boomer (talk) 21:35, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. Well, it seems Category:Categories named after North American Class I railroads acts like a container category for eponymous categories; Category:Amtrak for Amtrak, Category:CSX Transportation for CSX Transportation, etc. Category:Class I railroads in North America, on the other hand, contains articles about class I railroads in general (Class I railroad, List of Class I railroads and so on). As for Categories named after foo, there's an entire tree under Category:Eponymous categoriesξxplicit 23:24, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
How fascinating. I guess I've never stumbled across any of those before. Well, thanks for the quick response! Dana boomer (talk) 00:27, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Vermis (software)

Hi there,

I understand why the page I put together was deleted - lack of notable references. However, there are many pages on Wikipedia that have no references, not even a "References" section, and they are not even noted for deletion. Here is one example: This article has been online for over 4 years with no references and is still here. I don't see how it differs from the article I wrote? If possible, I would like some clarification on this matter. I appreciate your time. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nowy9 (talkcontribs) 15:22, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello. First, I'd like to point out that other similar articles may exist, that argument holds little to no weight regarding the article's deleted. As for the actual article itself, it was proposed for deletion by another editor and went uncontested for seven days, which led to its deletion. From what I can tell, Vermis software failed to assert notability, which is required to merit inclusion on Wikipedia. — ξxplicit 05:25, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

File:Alexander Fiske-Harrison headshot1.JPG and File:The Pendulum - Before The Duel (small).JPG

Could you please undelete these images? We have received OTRS permission for them. VernoWhitney (talk) 20:42, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Done and done. — ξxplicit 21:41, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! VernoWhitney (talk) 21:54, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Photo deletion

I don't care what your little message says, I'm still typing this because this is getting retarded. The first page of file uploads asks for a copyright explanation. IT IS NOT MY FAULT if that explanation, which you must fill out in order to upload a file, is not translated onto my pictures. STOP deleting my uploads, because as I just explained, they are all my own works and it is not my fault if the GFDL notes don't pass along due to a Wiki programming error!!!!! ToddC4176 (talk) 13:21, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

There was no error with the upload form. The most likely thing that happened is that you simply forgot to choose a license to begin with. Additionally, with the notices you received, you had seven whole days to correct the issue or ask for help. There's absolutely no fault with the upload form or me, the deleting administrator. — ξxplicit 18:29, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of The Brokerage Citylink


You deleted a page I created: The Brokerage Citylink as it was apparently non-notable. This organisation has had its work included in several newspaper articles (ie: and and has won a Dragon Award.

Please can you reinstate this article. I'm happy to link it up to external secondary sources if necessary.

--graham228221 (talk) 13:50, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Make sure to add these references in the article when you get the chance, before the article is nomination for deletion at WP:AFD. — ξxplicit 18:29, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
Great, thanks for that! Will add the references asap. - --graham228221 (talk) 11:45, 1 November 2010 (UTC)


Can you look at the actual words in this discussion? I think there is a consensus. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:02, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

YesY Baked. Err, I mean, done. — ξxplicit 01:09, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

FUR images

You may be interested in checking stuff tagged with {{Short-Rationale}} and {{Standard-Rationale}}.

The former is images that have some kind of an FUR, but it's not clear if all the points of WP:NFCC are met, The latter is images that are thought to meet [{WP:NFCC]] but which have a form of FUR that is non-standard or can't be detected easily by semi-automated tools and bots. As you are an experienced contributor, any efforts made in moving stuff from {{Short-Rationale}} towards {{Standard-Rationale}} by improving the FUR would be greatly appreciated. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:13, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

I'll do what I can and try to make a dent in the number of files tagged as such. — ξxplicit 18:05, 30 October 2010 (UTC)


Hi, thanks for adding information to File:AmbroseMarechal.jpg. However, as I would like to transfer this file to Commons, the author or a specific production date is still missing. I cannot find it in the "source". Could you please help me? Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 21:43, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Eek, I found very little information from Google. Might be worth nominating the image at WP:PUF? — ξxplicit 22:28, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi again, I hope I did everything right at PUF. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 04:01, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Yup, everything looks fine. — ξxplicit 04:02, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Sill plate.jpg

That one was not from flickr at all, it was already on wikipedia; I just cropped it to better show the siding. Can you restore it? Also, I'm pretty sure the other ones were fine for wikipedia; I just may have mistagged them here. They all showed up under the advanced search option of "Showing Creative Commons-licensed content for commercial use". That's how I've always used flickr to look for pictures I thought were okay for wikipedia. Daniel Christensen (talk) 22:12, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Let's see, I'll list the files and their sources. File:The Duff River; County Sligo, Ireland Kayaking.jpg, source, attribution noncommercial share-alike. File:Duquesne brewing clock pittsburgh.jpg, source, attribution noncommercial share-alike no derivative works. File:Back of Colortrak 2000 Dimenisa compatible TV.jpg, source, attribution noncommercial. File:Allis-Chalmers Model G tractor.jpg, source attribution no derivative works. File:Sill plate.jpg, source, attribution noncommercial. All these files fall under the criteria for speedy deletion, F3: Media licensed as "for non-commercial use only" (including non-commercial Creative Commons licenses), "no derivative use", "for Wikipedia use only" or "used with permission" may be deleted, unless they comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content.ξxplicit 22:28, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
On the Model G one, how was putting it here a derivative work? I did not change it. It just required attribution. Daniel Christensen (talk) 22:37, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Same with the sill plate one. Okay, on all the other ones but those two the license is wrong, but what makes those two wrong? Daniel Christensen (talk) 22:39, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
So as I now understand images have to also be licensed for derivative works? I did not know that uploading them here was considered building on, adapting or modifying them. But apparently it is? Daniel Christensen (talk) 22:44, 30 October 2010 (UTC) Oh yeah, and I had another image confused, the sill plate image was not already here. Daniel Christensen (talk) 22:45, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
(Just responding here for clarity instead of having two separate answers about the same thing on both my and Explicit's talk) It does not mean that you are making a derivative of the work, it just means that others cannot make a derivative, which Wikipedia does not allow. --Fiftytwo thirty (talk) 22:48, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Please see WP:ICTIC, files licensed under Creative Commons must allow for derivative works, regardless if derivative works are made or not. This is similar to images must be licensed for commercial use, even if they are never used for commercial purposes. Note that license templates like {{cc-nd}} and {{cc-by-nd}} redirect to {{Db-f9}} (it really should redirect to {{Db-f3}}, but that's for later). On an unrelated note, I hope I don't run into another edit conflict for the 415124th time. Preview button, please? — ξxplicit 22:51, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Jimmy Corkhill 2.jpg

Could you please explain why you deleted the above image without any notification to to myself who had taken great time to improve the associated pages. The image in question was the lead image and the best fair-use image we had. The other image represented the character several years later in the programme. Having a lead image and then another to represent a character at a different era within the programme is not unheard of, indeed there are a great many precedents set. I feel you are undermining the work being done by taking this action without first consulting those who have spent a great deal of time labouring over the articles and trying to illustrate them appropraitely. Should you have felt there was any controvention of copyright regulations it would have surely been common courtesy to have some consultation with the users who have taken the time to build these articles.

Kind regards, Mtaylor848 (talk) 00:40, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, considering I'm only the deleting admin, the burden of notifying the uploader (you) would be that of the tagger, which was Angusmclellan (talk · contribs). Contacting this user directly may yield better insight as to why the file was tagged to begin with. — ξxplicit 00:49, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps so. I am however intent on reuploading the image. Should it be felt that it should be deleted then I would have to request going to mediation with the issue as I don't feel there is any sufficient grounds for deletion. Mtaylor848 (talk) 13:32, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Canon Johnson School

Why did you delete that page? You even admitted that you couldn't find any justification for doing so. Chris Martin (talk) 18:24, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Canon Johnson C.E. Primary School was proposed for deletion by another editor, which went uncontested for seven days and was routinely deleted. Although I don't think there is a specific guideline that states that primary schools are generally not notable, the subject should still meet the criteria listed at WP:ORG. — ξxplicit 18:29, 31 October 2010 (UTC)


I spent weeks on my wikipedia page for and it was submitted for a speedy deletion for "copyright". I am the Product lead for at AOL and would like to update the page - Can you un-delete so that I can address the issue? Please sympathize:I spent weeks learning how to develop the page and drafting it. FerhaMirdawi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ferhamirdawi (talkcontribs) 17:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware, I only deleted User:Ferhamirdawi/, which was a redirect to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ That was deleted by JohnCD (talk · contribs). Due to legal matters, I can not restore material which was deleted as a copyright violation. If you hold the copyright to the text and would like to release it under a free license, please review our donating copyrighted materials page. — ξxplicit 18:02, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Your deletion of Brian T. Skala

I am aware that you recently deleted this article. Perhaps you unaware that this actor had a lead role in television series called Just Deal in the 2000s and has guest starred in number of notable television series since. Which would allow the article to exist per WP:ENT. If main problem with the article lack of references or that the information was mostly recieved from IMDB all you had to do was add this tag: {{BLP IMDB refimprove|only=yes}} instead of simply deleting. I am requesting that you reinstate this article so that I work on it. QuasyBoy 17:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξxplicit 18:02, 1 November 2010 (UTC)


Hi, you deleted File:Graffiti2-alphabet.png as a non-free logo. However, it does have a free-user rationale, but I guess it wasn't tagged. But also, I don't believe this image is copyrightable in the first place. Can you undelete it please? Ariel. (talk) 19:22, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, it actually didn't have a fair use rationale, but if you're going to claim PD-text, please be cautious about it. — ξxplicit 19:29, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
I meant, it qualified for a rationale, but didn't have one listed. I am not sure about the copyright. Personally I think it's pd-text, but since I'm not sure I tagged it with multiple tags - is there someplace where I can ask someone to review it? Ariel. (talk) 22:19, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
WP:MCQ would be a good start. Some text can't be subject to copyright, depending on how "simple" it is, while others can be protected by copyright. If I had to guess, I'd probably agree that this image falls under PD-text, but seeking further input at MCQ couldn't hurt. — ξxplicit 22:25, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

MacroData NetDrive


You deleted a page I created: MacroData NetDrive ( as non notable software. It is linked at Wiki NetDrive ( MacroData NetDrive is widely used software and referenced in many web pages and articles. It is shown at top rank when searched as "netdrive" at Google.

Please can you reinstate this article ? Thanks,

Terranbin —Preceding unsigned comment added by Terranbin (talkcontribs) 01:31, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Please make sure to demonstrate how the subject meets the notability guidelines by citing your sources, as the article is still deletable through the articles for deletion venue. — ξxplicit 03:02, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
FYI: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MacroData NetDrive. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 12:38, 2 November 2010 (UTC)


Do I assume that Wikipedia is working towards a situation were [Category:American songwriters] can be largely upgraded to [Category:Songwriters from any US state] ? Is every state covered at present ? Will a bot be created to carry out edits to all existing articles ? The reason I ask is that I sometimes create new Wiki articles for American blues musicians, and I may therefore need to slightly adjust my category compositions. It's no big deal either way, but I await your thoughts. Thanks,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 11:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, the Category:American songwriters by state tree is a work in progress that I started. I've only created 24 of its subcategories and they aren't very populated... Category:American songwriters being populated by over 2,000 pages doesn't help, so this will definitely take a while. Feel free to jump into creating more categories where needed. smileξxplicit 18:35, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello again. I have taken the liberty of editing those articles that I have created to help populate the 'tree'. However, there are now musicians awaiting said categories for Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Utah, Missouri, and West Virginia. Given my more recent work, I supect the Mississippi category will be, at least temporarily, one of the most populated ! Over to you for the category creations though, if only so we do not fall over each other. Regards,
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 21:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
I'll create those shortly. If you need others created in the future, feel free to drop me a note any time. — ξxplicit 21:08, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Iowa, Kentucky, Rhode Island, Colorado and New Mexico - please. I am adding to the tree (about 200 moved so far). Regards - oh, and North Dakota now.
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 19:02, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
Will create them shortly. Thanks for your work so far. — ξxplicit 20:11, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

If you would be so kind, categories are now required for Delaware, Vermont, Maine, Nebraska, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Hawaii and Arizona, please. The American songwriter category has now reduced from over 2,000 to under 1,500 pages. I think getting it below say 750, may be difficult due to lack of birth/origin details, confusion over birth/origin specifics, querying those born outside of US, possible non-notability of subject matter, etc. For my part a lack of complete understanding over any potential nuances of US states, and/or any real knowledge of the article's subject matter, does not make things easy. Anyhow, I have done what I can so far, and may well contribute more. Regards,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 21:10, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

All created. I've been running into similar problems with these articles. Some lack the birth state, while others are categorized under two more separate states. It gets confusing, so I just leave those as is. — ξxplicit 22:53, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks - where there is some confusion, I will also leave 'as is'. I think there only remains Alaska and South Dakota to be covered. As it seems merely a matter of time before either/both are needed, is it sensible to create these categories in the near future ? Best wishes,
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 10:24, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
I see that the Alaska category was populated, so I created that as well. The two states left are South Dakota and Wyoming, but I don't think there are any articles that can populate those two. — ξxplicit 18:51, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
This is interesting - well, maybe vaguely interesting. Based on my original research compiled from data amassed so far, over half of all American songwriters come from just six U.S. states. That is New York 19.6%, California 10.9%, Texas 7.1%, Illinois 5.1%, Pennsylvania 4.2%, and Louisiana 4.1%. Three possible responses; 1. So what ? 2. I feel a new Wikipedia article brewing, or 3. I'll amaze my buddies at work tomorrow with that one. Joking apart, is it a surprise to you ?
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 22:04, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
And here I thought California had all the talent. wink I expected the bigger states to be more populated than the rest, but not be responsible for half. There's plenty more left to categorize, so it could change up a bit. — ξxplicit 00:00, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

I am all finished on this one, having gone from 'a to zee' through the American songwriters category. The remaining 692 (not far off my original estimate of 750) have the problems we discussed earlier. There are now 1,432 songwriters re-categorised by state. Based on that latter tally, the current percentages are New York 19.1%, California 11.7%, Texas 6.8%, Illinois 4.7%, Pennsylvania 5.1% and Louisiana 3.3%. Not much difference from the values I gave you earlier, and I would suggest sufficient evidence from a big enough sample to prove the point. Still in excess of 50% in total (although I now notice Michigan coming up on the rails at 3.5%). I think someone with more knowledge could reduce the American category numbers further still, but I feel I am done. All pooped out. I hope this helps. Cheers,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 15:53, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Wow, nice work! I find it odd that some of the categories still only contain one page, but what can you do. Thanks for taking the time to sort this huge mess. — ξxplicit 23:41, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Repeated uploads without fair use rationale

I see that you deleted File:Hc-cover.jpg earlier, which I'm guessing was uploaded by NikS (talk · contribs). Since then the user has uploaded several more files, all of which have been CSD-tagged. Perhaps you could have a gentle word as the user doesn't seem to get it. --Biker Biker (talk) 14:14, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

I'll drop the user a note shortly. — ξxplicit 18:35, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for that. Roger and out. --Biker Biker (talk) 19:45, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Deleted image

Hi. I realise that you have deleted this file. I'm afraid there is a discussion going on regarding these images here. I think I left a message on the file talk page regarding this. I might be wrong too. Cheers --Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 14:26, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, looks like I missed that. From skimming through the discussion and reviewing the images in question, I'd say they are all derivative works from the original logos, and are still subject to copyright. As for the deleted image, it seems that Hammersoft (talk · contribs) changed the license to {{non-free logo}} and proceeded to subsequently tag it for lacking a fair use rationale. — ξxplicit 18:35, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Actually only the depictions of election commission of India could be covered by copyright not others. As I have shown in the bottom end of the discussion the electoral symbols can be and are depicted in any given form and hence those depictions can't be held as copyright of the Election commission. Isn't it? Cheers --Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 08:17, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
FYA: Other files which were nominated at the same time were kept [1] [2]. --Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 15:19, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, I see. Well, I'm definitely no expert on this. If you'd like, I can restore the file and you can re-adjust the license back to how it was. — ξxplicit 19:02, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, that would be brilliant if you can restore it back. Much appreciated. Cheers Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 11:30, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done, and I've restored the license you uploaded it instead of the non-free license added by Hammersoft. — ξxplicit 18:57, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Delete File:Dilma Rousseff 2010 Transparent.png?

Can you delete that file, it got moved to Commons, and its stint on the Main Page is done. Allmightyduck  What did I do wrong? 20:36, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. — ξxplicit 20:38, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Kevios

Please delete page. --Somerwind (talk) 00:54, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done, already declined by another admin. — ξxplicit 01:44, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

/* Your assistance please */

You deleted File:Dadullah.jpg as lacking liscensing information. If the image was a work of Afghanistan it would be in the public domain, wouldn't it? Did the image have an URL associated with it? Geo Swan (talk) 13:05, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, the only thing that was added to the {{Information}} template was the date, which was produced by generic tildes (~~~~~). Nothing more, I'm afraid. — ξxplicit 04:37, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Bad image list

Hi, I saw you added some images to MediaWiki:Bad image list. Were these images used for vandalism or it just a precautionary measure? Garion96 (talk) 11:49, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, a user had emailed and asked if I could add the images to the list. I'm not entirely sure if they were used for vandalism, though. — ξxplicit 20:11, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Could you please explain...

Could you please explain what was missing from File:Guantanamo captives leaving after their debriefing by Afghan security officials on 2003-03-25.jpg? Geo Swan (talk) 03:58, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, it had {{Non-free image data}} and tagged with about six {{Non-free image rationale}} templates, but lacked an actual license tag. — ξxplicit 04:01, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Air (band)

Hi, now that Air (band) points to a disambig, please don't forget to help WP:FIXDABLINKS! Thanks, --JaGatalk 14:04, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I've actually been doing that quite a bit [3] [4]. There's just so many links, it's taking me longer than usual. — ξxplicit 19:02, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

File:George Hunt Pendleton House.jpg

No complaints about the deletion of this image; I'd just like to ask that you remove deleted images from articles, since having deleted images in an article leaves ugly notices in articles such as the "George Hunt Pendleton House" line of National Register of Historic Places listings in eastern Cincinnati, Ohio. Nyttend (talk) 16:51, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Mmkay, will do my best to get rid of them. — ξxplicit 19:02, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

On Ernest Moore


I created a page on Ernest Moore. I am having trouble finding the deletion discussion that led to it being deleted. Can you point me to it? Also, can you place the deleted article in my user space? I understand that there are concerns that this individual is only famous for one event. I think that he may be more famous than that. If he is, I, obviously, need to document that fact with reliable sources. But it will be a lot easier to start with the old draft first. Thanks. Moorely (talk) 13:38, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. There was no deletion discussion for the article, it was proposed for deletion and went seven days with no objections, hence its deletion. Anywho, I went ahead and undeleted the contents and moved it into User:Moorely/Ernest Moore. — ξxplicit 19:45, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Ah. I see. Would you mind placing the article back in main space, so that we can have the discussion on its talk page there? I apologize for not noticing the deletion proposal initially. I think that Moore is famous for more than one event and would be happy to make a case for that on the talk page. Moorely (talk) 13:44, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
On your subpage, there should be a "move" tab at at the top right corner of the page. Most pages can be moved by any user. — ξxplicit 23:33, 12 November 2010 (UTC)


Explicit, you deleted the article on Vostu, citing "Lack of reliable sources, Brief google search reveals only promotional self-published material". Please run another Google search. Among others, the Wall Street Journal wrote about the company here: Or watch an interview with one of the co-founders on Bloomberg TV: Or just go directly to one of the company's VCs and get more press mentions from their site at Besides these very recent articles, there are many articles on newspapers such as the Boston Globe and the Miami Herald from the company's founding days. Please re-instate the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:27, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξxplicit 19:45, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Marina Watanabe

I noticed you deleted the page on the Japanese singer and TV personality, Marina Watanabe. I had no part in that article, and I assume it got deleted because it had inadequate proof of notability and no one protested it. But as someone who has lived in Japan on and off for 20 years, I can attest to her notability: as the Japanese Wikipedia states, she has over 12 albums, has appeared in over 40 TV dramas (starring in about half), was a regular on many variety shows, and has published 8 books. She currently is a regular on two shows and appears in many more. A Google search of her name in Japanese comes up with over 1,000,000 hits, with 38000 just for photos of her [5]. I don't have the time to come up with citations for all this, but while there are many extremely minor idols and anime voice actors who still clutter Wikipedia, this is one person who actually is known by pretty much anyone in Japan. Michitaro (talk) 03:06, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Just saw this while writing the below, as someone who also lives in Japan, I second this.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 04:17, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm guessing this counts as contesting the prod, so I'll go ahead and restore it as such. — ξxplicit 06:30, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! I tried to add a few sources and noted other areas where citations are needed.Michitaro (talk) 18:15, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


Hi! You deleted this image (not mine, but I came in on the discussion) per the discussion, however would you consider e-mailing me a copy? The sketch is original, but the image it represents is useful, I want to play with it and see if I can come up with a wiki-suitable version. Thanks.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 04:16, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I've emailed a copy to you. — ξxplicit 06:30, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 06:37, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
ps-can I get the text of the last page showing the copyright and source info? Thanks again!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 06:43, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Splendid, thank you!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 06:52, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I've provided it under the collapsible table above. — ξxplicit 06:49, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Mistaken deletion

Hi, Explicit. You appear to have mistakenly deleted an image file here. The deletion discussion indicates there was no reason for the deletion of that image. Could you please correct the edit? Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 05:20, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Oh dear, I've followed the trail and it seems like a huge mess occurred. SchuminWeb (talk · contribs) removed the discussion from the October 23 log and moved it to October 31 log. Leevanjackson (talk · contribs) reverted SchuminWeb's removal nearly 48 hours later, where others voiced their opinions, which would probably have led to a keep. However, the discussion also continued on the October 31 log, where the result of the discussion led to the image's deletion. My edit summary pointed to the October 23 log as the link wasn't properly changed when the image was relisted, so that only helped add to this huge mess. Agh! I've restored the file. — ξxplicit 06:30, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I was wondering about that! It looked like there was a clear consensus for Keep but the image was gone, so I asked a follow-up question.
Anyhow, it was obviously an honest mistake and I'm just glad you fixed it. Dylan Flaherty (talk) 06:52, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm just glad no one called it admin abuse and declared "off with his head!" — ξxplicit 06:57, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello again, Explicit. You closed that deletion discussion here and left the image intact. It appears another editor then immediately re-opened an identical deletion request, claiming: "Speedily renominating after neutral close due to out-of-process !votes fouling the discussion after a relist, causing it to be fragmented." Has he characterized your closure of the discussion correctly? It appears the file has been once again deleted after this new discussion that no one was made aware of. Also, could you point me to the policies regarding the infinite re-submission of speedy delete requests until a desired outcome is achieved, if such policies exist? Thanks much, Xenophrenic (talk) 21:26, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, for the most part, yes. I'd hardly call the fragmented discussion "out-of-process", though, and I pointed that out on SchuminWeb's talk page a few days ago. I did mention in my closing statement that "This file is still open to another nomination, and the result of this discussion should hold absolutely no weight on any future discussions." There's no policy against several listings for deletion per se, though there is a section in an essay here that briefly mentions subsequent deletion requests. — ξxplicit 06:26, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
I see now that you did explain on the less used Oct. 31 log page your expanded reasons for the discussion closure. I hadn't read that until now; I only had the Oct. 23 log page watch-listed. My impression of the situation was that the image was incorrectly deleted (after the above described relisting—undeleting—duplicate discussions snafu), but then restored because the discussion results clearly indicated valid image use. I had been given no indication that just 10 hours later a brand new, but identical, deletion request was filed - minus the previous input of several editors, myself included. On November 15, I learned that the image was again deleted, after the fact, while viewing an article that used to contain that image. Looking at that new "discussion", I see that my input on the matter, and I did give input on the matter, is not represented -- presumably because my input was "given out of process". It most certainly was not. I was not given due notice that my input had been disregarded; and I assume the input of other editors on this matter was scrubbed with equal disregard of due notice. The only notification that previous input from editors would be disregarded was given (by you) on a relisting-page that no one else had accessed (or, I would wager, even knew existed).
There is something screwy with the way this process was executed. Should this be taken to WP:DRV now, as suggested by another editor, or is there a more appropriate venue or coarse of action? Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 20:53, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Explicit. You have new messages at SchuminWeb's talk page.
Message added 16:15, 8 November 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SchuminWeb (Talk) 16:15, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Deleted jpg files from web page /wiki/Rosemarie_Koczy

Dear Sir/Madam,

I followed the instructions on getting the estate administrator to sign the release forms for the 5 images mentioned in I could not see how to bring this archived page back into foreground, so I left comments there. The text is:

I contacted OTRC by sending them ( an e-mail titled "Rosemarie Koczy Sculpture107 2002.jpg (5 files total)" on October 22, 19:45 EST. The e-mail contained a statement from the estate administrator that he indeed permits use of these 5 files for the Wikimedia purposes. I never received an acknowledgement that the e-mail was received, and files were not restored to the web page. Please help. Yashchi (talk) 19:40, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, that's quite some time. I went ahead and asked an OTRS volunteer, VernoWhitney (talk · contribs), for some assistance with these files. After receiving a response from him, we can go from there. — ξxplicit 22:53, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

"Legends of Kallisti" page deletion

Hello, I'm the administrator for online game "Legends of Kallisti", which used to have a wikipedia page until apparently deletion on 9/22 or thereabout. Some other users brought to my attention the page was deleted and I would like to have it re-instated. I thought that I had made the appropriate adjustment to stop deletion of the page but apparently not. The wiki page referenced a web page for the game, which has a contact form to contact the administrators of the game in case you wish to verify continued existence of the game and reach the folks running the game. Thank you, the Legends of Kallisti game admins. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:59, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. You may also want to take a read of our conflict of interest guideline. — ξxplicit 00:33, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
Also Wikipedia:Notability, as the popular fallacy that existence == Wikipedia article is in evidence in the request. (I'm the one who prodded the article, incidentally.) —chaos5023 (talk) 00:42, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

ISO 14289

My apologies, I used the wrong link for the redirect on the ISO 14289 page. The correct link is:

Thanks for your help.

Duff Johnson CEO, Appligent Document Solutions Chair, US Committee for PDF/UA (ISO/DIS 14289-1) Duff Johnson (talk) 20:14, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I've restored the page and adjusted the redirect accordingly. — ξxplicit 23:35, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Michael Golightly record


Can you explain fully why you have taken this down?

What is the definition of a non-notable criminal?

Thanks, I await your reply

Gramsci99 (talk) 23:55, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Per our biographies of living persons policy, Wikipedia is not news, or an indiscriminate collection of information. Merely being in the news does not imply someone should be the subject of a Wikipedia article. If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event, and if that person otherwise remains, or is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having an article on them. Biographies in these cases can give undue weight to the event and conflict with neutral point of view. As Golightly appeared to be notable solely for one event, an article was not merited for this individual. — ξxplicit 00:40, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Category:Rescaled fairuse images

Hi. I noticed this category probably is as full as I've ever seen it (700+ files). I'd started noticing that the files that were tagged with {{Non-free reduced}} were not displaying the correct "date added". For instance, on File:Been Waiting.OGG the source of the template reads {{Non-free reduced|23:20, 2 October 2010 (UTC)}} with the date the template was added, but the text of the template actually reads "Administrators: if the previous version(s) did not satisfy the non-free content criteria, please delete the previous version(s) on Nov-17-2010 (seven days after Nov-10-2010, when this template was added)". This is more than a month late. Tomorrow it will read "seven days after Nov-11-2010". This makes me think the template is hosed, but then I'm not completely sure. Anyway, I just wanted to get this out there. Dawnseeker2000 04:15, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

That's quite the backlog. I believe this edit to the {{Non-free reduced}} template may have something to do with the dates continually being reset everyday. It also seems that this issue has been brought up on the talk page. I've proposed to revert the edit there. — ξxplicit 04:22, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
OK, I made the change and left a message there also. Dawnseeker2000 04:30, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Well, that seems to have fixed it right up. Category:Rescaled fairuse images more than 7 days old is filled with 677 files at the moment. — ξxplicit 04:47, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Talk page speedy deletion

Hello Explicit, I'm contacting you in regards to your decline of my speedy deletion request for my talk page. My request was made in the interest of privacy, I'd rather not go into details but I'm trying to avoid associating my IP address with my account. I'v already had one comment accidentally made while not realizing I was logged out suppressed, I may do the same with this edit once the issue has been resolved. Should I just request that my talk page be suppressed as well? (talk) 05:53, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Per WP:UP#Deleting your user page or user talk page, user talk pages are simply not deleted, save an exceptional circumstance. The best option would to have your edit(s) suppressed. I can delete revisions using WP:REVDEL, or you can email oversight and have them suppress the revisions. — ξxplicit 18:34, 10 November 2010 (UTC)


How's it going there godmin?? — Legolas (talk2me) 06:26, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, well, look who's returned to Wikipedia. I knew you couldn't stay away! tongue out But eh, same old here. Busywork keeps me around, somehow. — ξxplicit 18:34, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Ugh, I know. I still haven't settled yet. But looks like WP, especially the music articles has changed a lot, for worse I admit. Its demotivating editors with all the imposing of templates, access issues etc. — Legolas (talk2me) 05:34, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
I know how you feel, that's why I stopped writing articles altogether. I only take care of Alicia Keys and Aaliyah, and the new exception, Miguel (singer). Other than that, I don't bother much with article writing. — ξxplicit 06:04, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Same here buddy. I only take care of the Madonna articles now (kinda thankful that Madonna is not releasing anything new now). I'm tired of the Gaga articles and the stuck-up editors around it. Forget all that, I'M MARRIED!!! tongue outLegolas (talk2me) 04:27, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
surprised Congratulations! Who's the lucky lady, Gaga or Madonna? winkξxplicit 23:33, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
evil grin Seeing as both of them have a repertorie of screwing the balls of their men, neither. — Legolas (talk2me) 06:08, 15 November 2010 (UTC)


Assuming that this image is the same one as found here, could you undelete it? We've got OTRS permission. VernoWhitney (talk) 23:40, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Yup, same one. Looks like you'll be able to undelete media files in under 48 hours. smileξxplicit 00:00, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for restoring that, it's tagged now. I now I'm just being a downer, but I keep expecting something to make a horrible turn for the worse and watch it go down in flames like some of the other RFAs I've seen. VernoWhitney (talk) 12:42, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Nah, I think you're fine. Unless you have a copyright violation somewhere we should know of? winkξxplicit 20:13, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Max Adler (actor)

Max Adler (actor) is in fact notable. He's taken a major role in the hit show "Glee". Please undelete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Webshaun (talkcontribs) 04:31, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. As this is a biography of a living person, please make sure to add references to the article. — ξxplicit 06:04, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Spuyten Duyvil (Metro-North station)
Dobbs Ferry (Metro-North station)
Michel Hrynchyshyn
Wheels (New Jersey Transit)
Halsey Street (BMT Jamaica Line)
Stewart Manor (LIRR station)
Jan Martyniak
Bulgaria men's national water polo team
Union Street (BMT Fourth Avenue Line)
Cuba men's national water polo team
Peekskill (Metro-North station)
Malverne (LIRR station)
Williams Bridge (Metro-North station)
Chauncey Street (BMT Jamaica Line)
Mykola Simkaylo
Ukrainian Catholic Eparchy of Kolomyia – Chernivtsi
Dover Plains (Metro-North station)
Kosciuszko Street (BMT Jamaica Line)
Tunisia men's national volleyball team
Gaza flotilla raid
Tanya Chisholm
Michael Ricketts
The Ballad of Little Joe
Cliffjumper (other incarnations)
Unique user
Add Sources
Good Friends (album)
Islam El-Shater
Kang Hye-Mi
Back Home (Westlife album)
Damian Marley
Electronic press kit
United States Senate election in Arkansas, 2010
List of bus routes in Manhattan

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:16, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Image tagging

Sorry I've reverted your tag removal here. The "source" provided is clearly insufficient: to verify the copyright status of a claimed PD-old work, the crucial source information is the original print publication. Only if we know its date and place can we assess whether it's PD-old. Websites that mirror the same image without in turn documenting its provenance are worthless for that purpose. Fut.Perf. 12:14, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Facepalm3.svg Facepalm My bad, I should have inspected the source more closely. I've deleted it, though the Commons file is still showing through. — ξxplicit 23:33, 12 November 2010 (UTC)


Please see the nomination of this article, which you contributed to, thanks.Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nancy Bargar Borock (talk) 13:29, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:WordPerfectX3.png

Half a year ago, you deleted my screenshot of the WordPerfect wordprocessor. The current Wordperfect article does not have a replacement screenshot, so I would like you to restore the image so that I can stick it back in the article. --Munchkinguy (talk) 18:09, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

I've restored the file. Regards. — ξxplicit 19:31, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

re: File:Waffle friedman.jpg

Hi. I'm not entirely clear on why this picture was deleted. This was a picture that I took of the artwork. I feel like it should not have been deleted because it was being used in an appropriate way. Since it was a in a public place, does freedom of panorama play in? Please explain. --Mblumber (talk) 17:23, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. There is no freedom of panorama in the United States for sculptures and artwork, even if permanently installed in public places, so it can't be released under a free license. From the delete arguments of the deletion discussion, consensus was: a) the sculpture was not accompanied with critical sourced commentary, in violation of WP:NFCC#8; b) according to the article, there are sculptures by the same person outside of the U.S. where the freedom of panorama is much less restrictive, where a free image can be created, which means this deleted image violated WP:NFCC#1. Hope that helps. — ξxplicit 23:41, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Usher image

Hi! You deleted File:Usher – 8701 (Australian edition).jpg for lack of licensing information. Would you object if I undelete it and tag it with {{non-free album cover}}, since it's clearly an album cover image? Or was there another problem with the file? Regards, Jafeluv (talk) 00:22, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

No objections from me, go right ahead. smileξxplicit 00:24, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 November 7

You seemed to delete the files but not close the two discussions. Did you just forget. I'd prefer if you did it as only you can provide your proper closing rationale, although I daresay I'd make a reasonable stab. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 00:52, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

On second thoughts perhaps you do this deliberately knowing User:AnomieBOT will close them. You probably close a hell of a lot more of these than me but it seems AnomieBOT was meant for cases were it was forgot not deliberately missed. There may be something I don't know here, but I'd be interested to know the reasoning. Best, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 00:58, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I intentionally left the discussions alone for AnomieBOT to close them. From reading the original bot request, I'd say AnomieBOT was programmed to do the tedious work admins didn't bother with at the time, not just closed missed discussions. I thought both discussions were pretty straight forward, so a closing rationale wasn't needed for either. Would you argue the opposite? — ξxplicit 01:31, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
No, I'm not challenging the decisions. I'm starting to close the odd XfD, and the reason I came here is because is was going to close the one I hadn't commented on. Finding it deleted but not closed I got a little confused – maybe it's just me. I was just curious. So basically you're only closing them manually when offering a rationale. As someone with a good amount of XfD experience, has this way become the norm or is this just how you do it? Rambo's Revenge (talk) 12:04, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Yup, I only manually close the discussions when a closing rationale is warranted. AnomieBOT only closes discussions at WP:FFD and WP:PUF, so those are the only two venues that don't require manual closing for the easy delete decisions. As far as I'm aware, every other venue (WP:AFD, WP:CFD, etc.) always require manual closures. It's definitely a norm in the file-related venues. — ξxplicit 00:04, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

A move request

Hey Explicitboy, can you help me by moving Drowned World Tour 2001 (video) to Drowned World Tour 2001 and correcting the links? Titles should be as simple as possible according to MOS. — Legolas (talk2me) 06:10, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Would this be considered uncontroversial? Since Drowned World Tour 2001 redirects to Drowned World Tour instead of Drowned World Tour 2001 (video), this would probably require a full request move. — ξxplicit 00:04, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Armenian Power

Hey Explict, I read your deletion of article link, but I don't think this page was in that criteria, so I am contacting you on your page about the article Armenian Power, I couldn't find the deletion discussion so I was hoping to talk to you as you were the administrator who deleted it if its necessary to do so. There are a couple references from LA times, and a popular website that provides information about gangs called, also well known authors have references to the gang such as, Luis J. Rodriguez, Wanda Coleman, and James Frey. I was hoping to get your approval to restart the article and get more references and such up in the meantime, thank you. Tremont781 (talk) 00:54, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi there Tremont781, no deletion discussion took place for the article, it was proposed for deletion and went seven days with no objections, hence its deletion. If you'd like, I can restore the article so you can see the content that was originally there and work on it from there. — ξxplicit 01:00, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
That would be great if you could, I appreciate it. Tremont781 (talk) 01:13, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξxplicit 01:18, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you!. Tremont781 (talk) 01:20, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Flood sample.ogg

I would like to fix up the fur for this file if it could be made available. Thank you. Dawnseeker2000 01:11, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done, file restored. — ξxplicit 01:13, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Move request discussion

Could you take a look (and possibly some action) with this MRQ Discussion which has been open nearly a month? I've requested it to be looked at at the move request talk page but no one has done anything so far. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 02:16, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Luntech page

Hello, I just discover that Luntech page had been deleted. I left a message on the page with reason. Thanks in advance for your answer. Best regards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbljeux (talkcontribs) 14:06, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. The article, Lun'tech, was actually deleted by Alexf (talk · contribs). I deleted the broken redirect, Luntech. — ξxplicit 19:11, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


Thank for deleted u-1 (my request) --« CA » What that? 19:31, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

No problem at all. smileξxplicit 19:32, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


it seems my photo has been deleted. can you help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jojomonster (talkcontribs) 09:37, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Sure! Is there anything specific you need help with? — ξxplicit 22:59, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Just Brakes

Hello, I was wondering if you could restore the Just Brakes article. It was recently deleted for some reason or another, but I would like to work on making it more admirable for wikipedia. Thanks! --Monterey Bay (talk) 23:04, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done, it could definitely use some clean up. — ξxplicit 23:18, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

A small request

Hi Explicit, I don't have nothing special to request only to take a look at this file and if it is possible to delete the previous versions that has been uploaded. Thank you in advance.  InfamousPrince  09:12, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. — ξxplicit 20:22, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Rebound therapy

Hi, you deleted my page on Rebound therapy. I had put references and backup information for all statements so cannot understand why you deleted it please advise. I would like to see it reinstated if possible because I believe it was an article of interest to many therapists. My email address is Thank you (talk) 23:22, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξxplicit 23:24, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

File deletion

Hey, your recently deleted an image I uploaded of Loren Legarda and Leandro Leviste due to an improper licence. Could you please advise on the correct licence to add? Thanks in advance, Chipmunkdavis (talk) 06:41, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, for the file File:Leandro Loren Campaign.jpg, you indicated that the image could only be used for non-commercial or educational purposes. Freely licensed images on Wikipedia must allow for commercial use and derivative works. You can read over WP:IUP#Free licenses and WP:ICTIC for further details. — ξxplicit 06:54, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm happy to re-licence it, I only used that licence as it was the one that seemed most appropriate from the dropdown. Which would be the best, and are there any details I need to fill out? Thanks, Chipmunkdavis (talk) 07:15, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
If you took the picture and own the copyright, you're free to license it as you see fit. Other than there, I don't think there are any other issues that you need to address. There's a list of licenses from you to choose from, assuming they apply, of course. — ξxplicit 07:39, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
Hmmm. I didn't take the picture, but I obtained it from the owner of the
picture with full permission to use it. Is it still okay to licence it? Chipmunkdavis (talk) 07:52, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
Ah, that's where it gets tricky. If the person who took the picture releases the file under a free license, we'll need proof. Please have that person email you and explicitly state which license they choose to release the picture under. Then, assuming the license is compatible with Wikipedia, you'll need to forward that email to WP:OTRS at to confirm it. Once that's done, the file will be restored and tagged properly by an OTRS volunteer. A sample of how the email should look can be found at WP:CONSENT. — ξxplicit 08:01, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
Done, thanks alot! Chipmunkdavis (talk) 08:54, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Heidolph File Deletion

Hello, the majority of my images were deleted by you, and I have read the comments. Very confused. I emailed; on 10/20/10 and have heard nothing back. I was told to wait a month. If I wait, will my images just show back up?

  • File:Bullseye.jpg (talk)
  • File:Hei-VAP Precision ML G3B.tif (talk)
  • File:MR Hei Standard.tif (talk)
  • File:PD 5001 SPQuick 2005.tif (talk)
  • File:Polymax 2040.tif (talk)
  • File:RZR 2052 control.tif (talk)
  • File:SilentCrusher S.tif (talk)
  • File:Synthesis 1 Multi Evaporator.tif (talk)

Evaporation Expert (talk) 21:38, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, I'll list one by one and review the problems. File:Bullseye.jpg was deleted by Orphaned image deletion bot (talk · contribs) as the file was tagged with a non-free license and was not used in articles for at least seven days; File:Hei-VAP Precision ML G3B.tif, File:PD 5001 SPQuick 2005.tif, File:Polymax 2040.tif, File:RZR 2052 control.tif, File:SilentCrusher S.tif and File:Synthesis 1 Multi Evaporator.tif were deleted because they were tagged with a non-free licenses and failed at least one of the ten non-free content criteria; File:MR Hei Standard.tif was deleted by Nyttend (talk · contribs) because it lacked a proper license tag. I'm not too sure about the email issue, but you should considered sending them another email for an update. — ξxplicit 23:51, 23 November 2010 (UTC)


I managed to get a checkuser to check if he's a Tony2Trill sockpuppet editing without edit summaries, it came up empty. The checkuser caught several more socks that was dorminant, so it was caught before it started editing. Secret account 00:49, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I was actually just reviewing Prophet101's edits to see if they match up with Tony254trill's edits. Although there is that Usher interest, I find it unlikely that he/she would avoid Kobe Bryant or Raymond v. Raymond for so long, so I'd trust the CheckUser and behavioral evidence to say it's not another sock. Still, Prophet101's edits are problematic... — ξxplicit 00:56, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you !

Invisible Barnstar.png The Invisible Barnstar
Thank you for fixing my coding mistakes with The Supremes grading scheme. Moxy (talk) 07:41, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for the barnstar! No trouble at all, I just came across the categories while patrolling new categories. — ξxplicit 07:54, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

File talk:Chris Atkinson 2006 Rally Australia Dwellingup.jpg

Hi! I noticed that you deleted the file description page for File:Chris Atkinson 2006 Rally Australia Dwellingup.jpg. Would you mind also deleting the talk page File talk:Chris Atkinson 2006 Rally Australia Dwellingup.jpg? It doesn't seem to have any relevance here, since the file isn't stored on this project. I believe I have addressed the concerns in the appropriate place. Thanks! LX (talk, contribs) 10:31, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm thinking maybe explaining the issue on the talk page here on Wikipedia would prevent this from happening in the future? File description pages created here that are hosted at Commons usually fall under F2 of the speedy deletion criteria, but most talk pages aren't eligible for speedy deletion. — ξxplicit 22:17, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Well, I appreciate the consideration. So what would be the correct procedure here – WP:MFD? As I see it, it was a direct response to the deletion of one of the nominator's uploads, and the matter seems unlikely to come up again for this particular image. It's pretty common for files that have been around on Wikimedia projects for a long time to be picked up by websites which fail to comply with the licensing terms. We can't reasonably have local talk pages for all of them on all projects to explain this. LX (talk, contribs) 22:29, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
MFD would probably be the place to go. It's not reasonable to go around all the projects to explain this, yes, but because it was brought up on the file's talk page here on the English Wikipedia, I thought also explaining it here would be beneficial. Because the talk page holds an actual comment discussing the image which may be helpful to future editors who come across the image, I decided against deleting it. — ξxplicit 22:39, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

file deletion: Ken Paxton

I'm not sure why you deleted the photo I upload. The photo is of a person and he gave me permission to use that photo on wikipedia. Was there something more I need to do to make it clear I had permission to use a photo take is owned by a person who gave me permission. It was my first time to upload a photo so I wasn't sure if I filled out the form correctly. Thanks for any help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrstar96 (talkcontribs) 16:02, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. The file File:Ken paxton.jpg was deleted because, at the upload form, you indicated that the file was licensed under a non-free license as well be being a replaceable image, which would violate point one of the non-free content criteria. This automatically tagged the file with {{AutoReplaceable fair use people}}. Could you specify what type of permission the copyright holder gave you? If that person released the image under a free license (for example, a compatible Creative Commons license or if the image was released under the public domain), it could be restored once verified through WP:OTRS. — ξxplicit 22:17, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for answering back. Well the permession he gave me was verbal. He had the photo taken for himself, owns the photo of himself, and it is on his website. I called him and asked if I could use it and told him where I was using it (the wikipedia entry). It is also being used by the Texas House of Representative website (although a sepia version of the photo, why I have the full color version). I believe this makes it a public domain use. Thanks again for any help. Jrstar96 (talkcontribs) 02:42, 25 November 2010

Allowing the use of the image in a Wikipedia article doesn't necessarily make it available under the public domain, the copyright holder must personally release it as such. If he photographer would like to do such, please have that person email you and explicitly state which license they choose to release the picture under—see WP:CONSENT for a sample email. Then, assuming the license is compatible with Wikipedia, you'll need to forward that email to WP:OTRS at to confirm it, while also providing the link to where the file was uploaded (in this case, it would be Once that's done, the file will be restored and tagged properly by an OTRS volunteer. — ξxplicit 09:02, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Page F

I know that awhile back, you deleted User:Us441/Page F as a redirect to a non-existent page. Well, it was a sample redirect to a non-existent page, and that was its only purpose. Us441(talk)(contribs) 22:02, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

I see. Still, the broken redirect shows up at the toolserver and those are deleted under G8. I have to ask, what's the purpose of your subpages Page A through E? — ξxplicit 22:16, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
To show examples of double and circular redirects. Us441(talk)(contribs) 14:20, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia: WikiProject Hospitals

Thanks for your help!


If you are interested in contributing more to articles about hospitals you may want to join WikiProject Hospitals (signup here).

Ng.j (talk) 22:57, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

No problem at all. smileξxplicit 23:00, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


Can you help me with one thing? This little boy here is trying to develop the Madonna awards page for FL here. However, I see that the awards table are not stretching when using a wider screen/monitor. Unlike the the Gaga awards list, the tables stay the same size. Can you point out what is teh mistake if any? — Legolas (talk2me) 13:21, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, what resolution are you using? I have a 1600×900 resolution and the tables aren't stretched on either Gaga's or Madonna's articles. — ξxplicit 23:34, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Even I am also using the same resolution, where the Gaga article gets stretched but the Madonna one doesnot. Purge teh cache? — Legolas (talk2me) 04:30, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Still same old. What browser are you using? Firefox here. — ξxplicit 04:32, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Passing this on

Do you want to delete this one: File:AGyHM-P Gala Dinner.jpg? See also my talk page from October where I explained why the image was non-free. I didn't notice until the other day they had reverted/rollback the deletion tag. I reverted and they just reverted again and left me another message. They are now claiming copyright on the image. Thanks. Soundvisions1 (talk) 00:06, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

The uploader's claims really don't make any sense. "The image doesn't have any author (it's an anonymous photo), so the copyright was owned by the 'Academia de Genealogía y Heráldica Mota-Padilla.'" The photographer being unknown does not transfer the copyright to the institution that owns the photo, nor do they have the ability to legally transfer the copyright to the uploader. Even if that were somehow true, OTRS would be required to verify that with a copy of the legal document. Anywho, it's still license under under a non-free license and has no valid fair use rationale, so out it goes. — ξxplicit 01:28, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Those were my feelings as well. Thanks. Soundvisions1 (talk) 05:12, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Undelete vTiger

Hi, it looks like you deleted the vTiger page for non-notability. Can you undelete it? There's about 400,000 web pages listed on Google that reference vTiger. It's also referenced from a number of pages in Wikipedia. As I understand it, it is one of the most popular open source CRM systems out there ( It's also listed in at least a dozen of the alternate language versions of Wikipedia. Frankly, I find it astonishing that a major open source project would be deleted for non-notability. Tbannist (talk) 14:31, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. — ξxplicit 19:18, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Because you commented at AN/I

You wrote here So please see here. I would really like to get this resolved. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 03:19, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Madonna singles discography

Hi can you come to the talk page of the above article? User:Njsustain (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) was continuously deleting information from the article, stating that "so-and-so song" was not present on the album. I counterpointed this with a number of reliable sources, however, everything fell to deaf ears and the user kept on saying the same BS rubbish. I ultimately warned him that if he doesnot want an ANI to be raised, then please revert his own edit. However, then the user started attacking me directly against my edits and contributions to Wikipedia. From his user page it was pretty clear that he does have some thorn against WP. Not to be outdone with, then the user started writing up about this whole incident in his user page, calling me a "frothing adolescent" (which I laughed actually) and name calling Jimmy Wales etc. I went ahead and removed such content, citing WP:UP#POLEMIC. The user then readded the content, now calling me a crybaby administrater (lol). I mean the user is seriously deluded about something, or has very deep issues regarding WP policies I guess, hence doesnot want to see even basic sources and stuff. What to do in such cases? I havent removed the malicious content from the user space, I will leave it up tp you to take administrative action, since I am a "frothing adolescent". He he. — Legolas (talk2me) 03:49, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Left a note on the user's talk page, and I suggest you both read it. — ξxplicit 05:57, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments Explicitboy. — Legolas (talk2me) 09:12, 30 November 2010 (UTC)


Hi Explicit, I have just noted you removed the files I have uploaded on NHSBT profile. Could I know which is the reason? Many thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:27, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, I removed the files from the NHS Blood and Transplant article because they were deleted. At the upload form, you indicated that the files were licensed under "non-commercial use only", "non-derivative use" or "used with permission". As such, the files were eligible for speedy deletion. Files that are licensed freely must be licensed to be used here on Wikipedia, as well as for commercial purposes (see here and here). If you hold the copyright to the file and would like to license it commercial use, you can re-upload the file under any of the licenses listed in this comprehensive list of copyright tags. — ξxplicit 22:15, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Deleted categories

Despite a bold warning on the CfD page, Category:Music, mind and body has been summarily deleted. This has resulted (per the warning) in the entire loss of categorisation of many music articles. Similarly, the deletion of Category:Musical memes has resulted in unknown losses of musical articles and the review of this category's contents is now impossible. The delete decision seems to have been taken in response to non-specialist comment on the CfD on the validity of (a) psychological and physiological studies and applications of music and (b) the psychological theory of memes and its applicability to music. No consultation was attempted with music projects, psychology and physiology projects or contributing editors, and I consider this deletion - not on any grounds defined on the CfD pages but simply, as I stated, because a small group of CfD activists consider such matters "airy-fairy" or think some articles in those categories are unsuitable - a reportable incident, since damage has been done and work wasted for trivial reasons beyond the remit of the CfD page. I therefore request you undo these deletions pending evaluation and recategorisation of these "lost" articles, and that you engage those editors who have called for this decategorisation to decide upon and implement an alternative means of catgegorising these articles so that they are not completely lost to the category under which they belong. Thanks Redheylin (talk) 22:34, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Will comment at ANI shortly. — ξxplicit 23:26, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Hi, Explicit. Just to notify you that Redheylin has now brought this to DRV.—S Marshall T/C 17:50, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12