User talk:Stifle/Archive 0511

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

Undelete Help

Although these images are of the exact same area and both taken by me they are not the same photos used on Panoramio or Google Earth.

Where are the photos now? Are they lost forever? Those photographs were valuable, historic evidence that documented an incredibly dynamic environment that is home to critically endangered species such as the Kemp's ridley Sea Turtle and the Perdido Key beach mouse whose numbers were down to 40 individuals at one recent point in history. Had they not been deleted they would have been used to compare to current photos in order to document and understand how the sand dunes on this unique barrier island form and change over time, how the dunes are used and effected by native species and humans and how we can better protect these CRITICALLY ENDANGERED SPECIES.


Since you are clearly in error regarding this matter there will no doubt be other instances where your overzealous edits have caused irreparable damage to Wikipedia. We can also reasonable assume that because of your actions at least one animal will die prematurely because you have destroyed scientific evidence that would have been used to conserve this natural resource. Joey Eads (talk) 15:53, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

erroneous Sine_Bot post removed

all posts are signed

Joey Eads (talk) 17:43, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but I doubt you'll find much help in getting the images undeleted. They were apparently copyrighted by Google Earth and Panoramio. That you think they were valuable doesn't mean that Wikipedia should host copyright images with false licenses. If you wanted to maintain a copy of them for personal use, you should have done so on your own computer. If you are arguing that the copyrights actually belong to you, then you'll have to provide evidence of that. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information. --Onorem♠Dil 18:15, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

After looking at the history a bit more, I see you are claiming copyright of these images. (My prior involvement was limited to telling you to stop vandalizing a user page while making personal attacks.) I would imagine that if you can show that the copyrights do belong to you, you should be able to convince an admin to undelete them. I don't know anything about Panoramio or Google Earth and how they manage and retain images. Could you possibly retrieve copies from either of them? What happened to your originals? --Onorem♠Dil 18:26, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

People who actually add new content, start new articles and add relevant information to the Wikipedia shouldn't be hindered by people who do not or can not. How are you an admin if you cannot tell the difference between beneficial edits and contributions from vandalism shrouded in pedantic enforcement of 'the rules' ? Joey Eads (talk) 19:20, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm willing to accept that an error has taken place, but IAR and the 5 pillars have absolutely nothing to do with this. The images were deleted because they were thought to be copyright violations. IAR wouldn't have applied in that situation. I can't see the images or their old descriptions, but I notice in another discussion that it says the image descriptions mentioned they were on Google Earth and Panoramio. If you added those descriptions when you uploaded them, that would seems to contradict that it's just the same area but not the same images. Perhaps a message on the deleting admin's talk page explaining the situation could convince them to take another look...though I'd suggest restricting the discussion to Wikipedia policies and not what creatures may or may not live because of an images deletion. --Onorem♠Dil 19:25, 26 April 2011 (UTC) Joey Eads (talk) 20:08, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

  • Can you please (a) tone down the rhetoric, and (b) in order to verify the copyright ownership, specify what type of camera you used to take the photos? Stifle (talk) 16:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
    P.S. the reason you may have had interference from SineBot was because your signature was either manually typed or does not link anywhere. Stifle (talk) 16:56, 27 April 2011 (UTC)


The camera I used was most likely Hewlett-Packard M425. Joey Eads (talk) 22:22, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

As you can clearly see at the bottom of the Panoramio page

  1. REDIRECT [[1]]

© All Rights Reserved by joeyeads -

Clearly an error was made, and I still contend the photos in question are not the exact same photos that are displayed on Google Earth.Joey Eads (talk) 23:06, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

  • The files are now restored. Thank you for your patience.
    For future reference, this would probably have been avoided if you had responded to the warning messages at the time. Stifle (talk) 08:43, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
    • Yeah, I tagged them for deletion a good two years ago I think. I'm not 100% sure about Panaramio anymore, but I know for fact Google Earth copyrights their screen shots and satellite imagery. If they were his images, he most likely didn't correctly tag them the way they should have been. Then again, I barely remember this. — Moe ε 22:58, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Can you clarify please?

Hi - User:TreasuryTag is using this edit ([2]) that you made as justification for not notifying me of a deletion (See Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2011_April_24#File:Vampire-queen.jpg) - this runs counter to the instructions at WP:FFD - can you clarify please? Exxolon (talk) 21:44, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

  • It was what I remembered at the time. Perhaps it may have changed since. Stifle (talk) 08:45, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Examiner.com

Hi. I think you blacklisted Examiner.com. I had cited to it for a quote that I used here in the Dave Ross article. Can this be put back in? Thanks for any help! -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:05, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

  • It was blacklisted after community dicussion, not just one persons say so. Niteshift36 (talk) 23:27, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

OK, but this reference was to an article by a journalist. Can you whitelist it, please? -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:42, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Most articles on examiner.com are by random people, not journalists. Please follow-up the request at WT:WHITELIST, the usual venue, to avoid fragmenting of discussions. Stifle (talk) 08:46, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

OK, I moved it to WT:WHITELIST. Please let me know if I need to do anything else. Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:56, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

User:Christianity922's subpages

Hi Stifle. I ran across this user as they edited one of their subpages, and saw that you had a note to them on their talkpage almost a year ago warning them about impending deletion as NOTWEBHOST...but they are still there (or there are new ones). I wasn't able to turn up a reply from them, either on their talkpage or in your archives. Did anything come of that? Was there a MFD associated with it?

Thanks! Syrthiss (talk) 12:40, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

  • I think one of them got MFDed but I never did get back to the others. I did suggest that the main issue was that he was making edits to userspace only, and not to the encyclopedia. I'll have a hunt through to see if there's anything stale or virtual-reality, and nominate those. Stifle (talk) 08:49, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

On dispute resolution

Hello, Stifle.

The question I am going to ask might be very irritating, but please bear with me, okay?

Pretend you made a change to an article; then someone reverted you; then he immediately sent you a message that says "your change was against a pre-established consensus between me and someone else, please joint discussion". What would you do?

Thanks in advance. Fleet Command (talk) 06:51, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Join the discussion, in the first instance at least. Stifle (talk) 08:50, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
(Ahem!) Thank you, Stifle. You are very courteous indeed. However, the person in my scenario (call it Person B) didn't choose your method. He chose to give a curt reply and revert the revert. (Back to his own lovely status.) The other involved person (Person R) tried to talk to him, reason with him but Person B remained completely silent. What should Person R do here? Fleet Command (talk) 10:43, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Requesting outside opinions would be the next step, via WP:RFC. Stifle (talk) 15:04, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, but it is sought through Mediation Cabal. Still silence! (Oh, and I have your talk page on my Watchlist.)Fleet Command (talk) 07:17, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Either/or :) Stifle (talk) 07:53, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 May 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:10, 3 May 2011 (UTC)


Ok, Sorry

Ok, dear Stifle, I am very sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rirunmot (talkcontribs) 14:34, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Request

Dear Stifle, I hereby lodge a formal complaint against User:Kwamikagami, for using extremely inappropriate words (please see here). This person must be sanctioned against. Incidentally, I was not aware of the earlier discussions regarding the name change at issue (I was only aware of this). Kind regards, --BF 12:06, 7 May 2011 (UTC).

St Edmund Campion Catholic School Webpage

Hello Stifle, I have noticed a lot of whitewashing going on on this page. I have checked the sources being blanked they are all verifiable via the links. Can you please warn or block this action by LastEnglishKing or alternatively protect the page contents. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeebios92 (talkcontribs) 12:57, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

As the message at the top of my page notes, I do not get involved in third-party disputes. Please report to WP:ANI or use dispute resolution. Stifle (talk) 15:45, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 May 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:36, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Can you review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tyler Young?

Hi! You closed the deletion discussion for Tyler Young; after I read through the deletion discussion, article history, and information about User:ElmerBront, it became clear that he wrote the article about himself, and loudly defended the article in the deletion discussion without disclosing his identity. I looked at Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Deletion review, and while I believe the article "should have been deleted but wasn't", I can't tell whether I'm supposed to bring this up on your talk page or go to deletion review or what. Could you advise? Thanks! 76.121.171.194 (talk) 07:51, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

If you feel that I did not follow deletion processes correctly in arriving at my decision not to delete the article, you can list at deletion review. Stifle (talk) 11:26, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Requesting extraordinary action against vandalism

Hello, Stifle

On 11 May 2011, 121.54.54.34 extensively vandalized Template:Nokia phones; he didn't disfigure it, but rather pulled a very nasty prank: He completely changed the face of the template, inserting totally bogus piped link. (The link looked blue but went to an irrelevant article like Mail, Paper, Tire, etc.)

I have sent a warning notice to him but I don't think this is enough. I would like to ask you for an extraordinary warning; give him a warning that he do not fail to notice even if he wanted to: Please block him for six hours or so. The block would have been expired the by time he returns but I think it will serve much better than any other form of warning.

Fleet Command (talk) 14:40, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Per WP:BP blocks are not meant to be punitive or used to make a point, so I will unfortunately be unable to accept this request. The correct action, which you duly took, was a level 4im warning. Stifle (talk) 11:10, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Huh? Not punitive? You admin guys block vandals and violators of 3RR or 1RR! Is that not punitive? Oh, anyway, I thought the block here would be preventative. Fleet Command (talk) 11:35, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Could you take a look please

Hello, Stifle, sorry to bother you at your talk page, but could you please take a look at my request. The article is being declined at DYK because of the sourcing. Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:53, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Replying over there. Stifle (talk) 11:11, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Just to know

Hello, Stifle, sorry to disturb you, but in a discussion with Gill , it was noticed that you closed a DRW [3] concerning a page you on which you already voted DELETE in a precedent AFD [4] as:

  • Delete as having no independent coverage in the literature. Stifle (talk) 12:59, 13 February 2009

Is it commonly of do so? --CuccioLia (talk) 18:20, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't know. However, as the DRV in question was being speedy-closed due to the nominator being banned, I can't see any possible impropriety. Stifle (talk) 15:04, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Request for interview

Hey Stifle. Gregory Kohs, a freelance reporter for Examiner.com who covers wikis as his news beat, is very interested in interviewing you for an Examiner article that he is writing about how the Examiner.com domain came to be "blacklisted" on the English Wikipedia. He is obtaining an interview with a senior employee of Examiner and, in order to keep the article balanced and factual, he would also like one or more points of view from the Wikipedia team that manages the blacklist. You may contact him by telephone (at 484-NEW-WIKI), or by e-mail at ResearchBiz@gmail.com. He asked that I contact you this way because he did not want to log in to English Wikipedia due to a ban on his account here. Regards, Lara 23:29, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Mr. Kohs should contact the Foundation press contact address. I will email him inviting him to do so. Stifle (talk) 09:14, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 May 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:16, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Undeletion following AfD

An article you deleted following an AfD has been restored (not by me). Is it possible that you could restore the old version of the Talk page. The detail for the Talk page seems to be:

  • 12:56, 11 June 2009 Stifle (talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Lukaszyk-Karmowski metric" ‎ (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lukaszyk-Karmowski metric)

This is probably not very important but it might be helpful to have the old discussion. Melcombe (talk) 16:03, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Done, although in future you will find you will get requests like this completed more quickly at WP:REFUND. Stifle (talk) 09:13, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Whitelist req

Bzuk (talk · contribs) has posted a request at WP:Whitelist for a webpage to be whitelisted. I see you are active with these requests. I'd allow the request myself, but I don't understand all the code etc to do this. Maybe you'd oblige? Mjroots (talk) 19:51, 21 May 2011 (UTC) If you are able to help, it would be greatly appreciated. I have added the link to the request that was originally made at the Whitelist forum. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 15:02, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I'll have a look. Stifle (talk) 10:20, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your involvement, i have clarified a point about the reliability of the article on the request form FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:28, 25 May 2011 (UTC).

The Signpost: 23 May 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:31, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Question about deleting other's comments

An editor deletes other user's comment, which does not have any bad words but just disagree. I know users can put back to older version, but will this editor still be qualified as en Editor? This is about User_talk:Discospinster, the editor deleted my comments twice and gave no reason.thanks. --Yeahsoo (talk) 21:58, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

As noted in my /FAQs, I do not get involved in third-party disputes. Please discuss your issues with the editor concerned, or seek a third opinion or other dispute resolution. Stifle (talk) 07:58, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:English

Ambox warning pn.svgTemplate:English has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Colonies Chris (talk) 13:39, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 May 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 20:26, 31 May 2011 (UTC)