User talk:Stifle/Archive 0908d

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rambler Mania(Deleted)

I would also like to challenge you on a deletion. I don't see why it should be deleted. I believe it has good information about the group. It is not promoting the group in anyway. It tells what the group does and how they are important to the school and community. If there is something wrong with it that is fixable, please tell me what I am doing wrong. Please please reconsider putting Rambler Mania backup....Thanks!Penn state football (talk) 00:37, 24 September 2008 (UTC)Dominic —Preceding unsigned comment added by Penn state football (talk • contribs) 18:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Alberto S. Gallerani, M.D.

Alberto S. Gallerani, M.D. should NOT be removed he has written 4 book in plastic surery .. people remove not on fact can you help me with all this I am learning ..Maryann Boger —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.196.14.43 (talk) 21:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. In future, please sign your messages by typing ~~~~ at the end.
Thanks for using my talk page wizard. However, you chose "replying to a warning I left you" instead of "Deleted page" as the reason for contacting me. If you had chosen "Deleted page", you would have arrived at Wikipedia:Why was my page deleted?, which would have explained that Alberto S. Gallerani was deleted after a community consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alberto S. Gallerani. If you feel that the deletion process was not properly followed, please first contact Eluchil404, who actually deleted the page, then follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Deletion review to appeal the deletion if discussion with that user is unsuccessful. Stifle (talk) 09:37, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Robert Bald image

I wish to challenge your deletion of an image.

  • The image's title is Image:robertbald.jpg.
  • I understand that the image was deleted because it was listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images and no reason was advanced within 14 days of that listing for keeping the image.
  • However, I feel this image can be used on Wikipedia.
    • This image is available under the following free license: INSERT NAME OF LICENSE
    • This license is verified by: INSERT WEBSITE OR OTRS TICKET NUMBER
  • I did not provide this reason during the 14-day period while the image was listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because I was on holiday and have returned this very morning. I do not know what free licence this image falls under, but the photograph is one that I own, scanned and posted. Please help.

Please consider restoring this image. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Evenmadderjon (talk • contribs) 09:35, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Robertbald.jpg has never existed. Please specify the exact image name.
Just because you own a particular copy of an image does not mean you own the copyright to it. You must own the copyright if you wish to upload it on Wikipedia under a free license. Who created the image? Stifle (talk) 09:39, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
The image was called RobertBald.jpg The image is a photograph of an engraving by Thomas Dick, after a portrait by Sir John Watson Gordon. I have no idea who owns the copyright. The National Portrait Gallery of Scotland also has a copy of the engraving, but the original portrait seems to be lost.--Evenmadderjon (talk) 11:05, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
I did not delete this image, SkierRMH did. Please contact him if you would like the image restored. Stifle (talk) 11:08, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Ooops, sorry, not sure how I made that mistake. Thanks for your time and keep up the good work. --Evenmadderjon (talk) 11:29, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Wally Bullington article deletion

I noticed that you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wally Bullington as delete. Please move the deleted article Wally Bullington to User:Paulmcdonald/Wally Bullington and add the move to User:Paulmcdonald/deletedcoach so that we may work on improving the content of the article for hopeful reintroduction at a later date. Details of this request are on the AfD discussion page.--Paul McDonald (talk) 11:39, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Done; please note that if you are going to move these back into mainspace in future you should really list them (or at least the first one or two) at DRV in order to gather consensus for the restoration. Otherwise they may be speedied as G4. Stifle (talk) 12:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

SHortcuts

By the way, I am grateful for your work in changing the shortcuts at college football. While we disagree on notability of coaches, I can see that you do add value to the project and to Wikipedia. Thank you!--Paul McDonald (talk) 11:39, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. In case it wasn't obvious I have moved all of the CFB:foo to WP:CFBfoo. I'll leave them for another week or two so that it doesn't generate a massive string of redlinks and then delete the CFB: ones. Stifle (talk) 12:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Football coaches

Thank you for the barnstar. I simply dont understand why they have each been deemed notable by PaulMcdonald and think they should have been listed together in a table. Kittybrewster ☎ 13:47, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

That's okay, I don't understand why you don't think they're notable. But that's Wikipedia, welcome aboard!--Paul McDonald (talk) 15:48, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

William McCracken deletion (and others)

I see that another admin closed out the AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William McCracken. This admin is refusing to move the articles to my user space, and told me to get another admin to do it. Can you please move the articles in question as you did on the other block of coaches? The reason the admin refused to do the move is on my talk page, in case you'd like to see the admin's reasoning.--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I tend to agree with Mangojuice. You've already got 11 articles to work with, show us some improvement to a few of those first. Stifle (talk) 20:28, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Is there a time limit to when the deleted articles can no longer be restored?--Paul McDonald (talk) 21:50, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
No. The Wikimedia developers say that they can't guarantee infinite availability of deleted articles and images, but the likelihood of them being permanently deleted is virtually zero. To give you an example, I just restored and redeleted a page that was gone for nearly four years.
This decision is based on the understanding that you want the pages to work on them and improve them prior to requesting their restoration to mainspace. If, on the other hand, you are going to move them to another wiki (which I would encourage, as some of the information doesn't appear to be available elsewhere) then I will restore them to your userspace for a week or two while you transfer them over (making sure you transfer the history as well so that contributors can be credited).
The reason for this is that in the past, users have requested userfication of various deleted articles, then waited a couple of months for everything to calm down again and moved the articles back into mainspace virtually unchanged, causing a waste of community time to redelete them. I don't expect you're going to do this, so once you show the improvements that you are making on a few of the articles you have, I don't see any objection to transferring the rest. You can always put links to the AFDs for the pages you don't have in your user subpage so that you don't lose track of them, or request me or another admin to give you a list of the deleted pages on which you had contributions. Stifle (talk) 08:36, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Worth considering. Any pointers? I've not really looked at these, but I will.--Paul McDonald (talk) 16:07, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Not really, just show us what you plan to do other than let the articles sit there and I imagine things will work themselves out from there. Stifle (talk) 16:10, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Thomas Muthee

I've been working on it quite a bit and would appreciate it if you would take another look. :) Regards. FangedFaerie (Talk | Edits) 03:57, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

While I'm happy to answer questions, it looks like your question could have been answered and resolved more quickly if you had used my message wizard. It's linked as "Talk" after my name and at the top of my talk page. Why not try it next time?
I've revised my opinion at that page. Stifle (talk) 08:24, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 September 22

Hi. Your TfD nomination at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 September 22 does not link to an existing template; since there's no deletion log, I assume that there must be a typo somewhere. I just thought I'd let you know. Cheers, –Black Falcon (Talk) 04:34, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, fixed it. Stifle (talk) 08:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Wooten (trooper)

I accidentally overrode you since my closer script didn't realize it was already closed. Anyway, I reverted myself, so hopefully nobody notices. :P Cheers, =) --slakr\ talk / 09:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd have liked to delete it, personally, but I think the decision wouldn't survive a DRV. We'll have to get Mr.Z-man to put in something so that the script doesn't close-conflict ;) Stifle (talk) 09:13, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I'd rather just let it stay and let them renom; then someone else can deal with it if it needs deleting. :P --slakr\ talk / 09:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

English Qabalah

OK, I am willing to accept that, but the only content is the summary of a self-published book with an external link to the publisher's site selling the book embedded in the text of the article. Could you please watchlist the articles I note on my talk page? The other editor keeps reverting all generalizations of the article to include other systems which also call themselves English Qabalah. 209.30.129.152 (talk) 12:34, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Replied at your talk. Stifle (talk) 12:36, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Would you be so kind at to nominate it for me? As an IP address, I cannot create the AFD page. The reasons are "non-notable self-published book, no reviews, no third-party sources". 209.30.129.152 (talk) 12:38, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! 209.30.129.152 (talk) 12:43, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Throes of Creation

Stifle,

You deleted the Throes of Creation (a Mud). Is the text saved some where that I could get access to and try to make an entry based on the appropriate criteria?

Thank you for you time,

_-Jo (jo@jsacivil.com)

70.94.46.98 (talk) 12:56, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Did you miss the "Deleted page" option in my message options? If you had noticed it, you would have reached User talk:Stifle/wizard/contentrestore. This says that I will restore the content of deleted pages to registered users with a reasonable contribution history. As you are not a registered user, I am not in a position to provide the content to you at this time. You can appeal the deletion if you wish at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Stifle (talk) 13:05, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

GL1TCHG0R3

Hi, the reason I had tagged it speedy was a Gsearch for the exact term did not return any meaningful results. Even if I search for GLITCHGORE, Google seems to throw up only some Youtube and Myspace links. Thanks. Shovon (talk) 13:15, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

That's fine, but for an article to be speedily deleted under criterion A7, it must lack even any indication as to why the subject may be notable. The threshold is lower than the threshold for inclusion, and I would encourage you to use one of the other deletion processes if you feel the article shouldn't be included on Wikipedia. Stifle (talk) 13:17, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

MC Magazine website

I wish to challenge the deletion of a page that you deleted.

Please consider restoring this article. --Fashionwordvictim (talk) 13:42, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. I am pleased to advise that your request to have the article restored was successful. The article will now be listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion for a five-day review period, during which time members of the Wikipedia community will contribute to a discussion on whether the article should be kept or deleted. You can contribute to this discussion as well at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MC Magazine. Please remember to be civil. The custom at these discussions is to make your point once by placing a bolded word like keep or delete, with your explanation and signature after that. Further comments and replies should be prefixed by comment. Stifle (talk) 14:06, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

CFD message re R3

You really don't understand what I mean. Redoing the redirect page is not simply something I can just redo - the template (which is locked) automatically goes to an "X station, Sydney" page if it exists, and if not, then an "X station, New South Wales" page. That works because of the setup we have for the pages concerning metropolitan area and country area stations which have different prefixes because of a naming convention. I don't care whether it has to be recent or not. It is a misnomer redirect that is completely and utterly uncontested by other editors. The page was created by mistake. I don't want and I should not need a ridiculous AfD to delete what should be a simple administrative move. Please reply here and not on my talk page.

By the way - your talk page messaging system is incredibly annoying and complicated - probably the most annoying I have ever seen on Wikipedia. It is completely unfriendly for ease of navigation and use. Why can't you have one page like everyone else (or link straight to this page - that would have been much simpler!)? JRG (talk) 14:20, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. In future, please consider being more friendly.
I've deleted the redirect under CSD:G6 on the assumption that it is not a controversial issue. If someone contacts me to request the restoration, I will restore it, at which stage you will have to take it to RFD.
I get a great many messages from users. My talk page messaging system is set up to ensure that:
  • Messages I don't want, like RFA thankspam, aren't left.
  • Users can find the answers to very common queries, like finding out why a page was deleted, for themselves.
  • Queries which anyone (or any admin) could deal with are routed to public noticeboards so that they are dealt with without delay if I don't happen to be online.
  • Common requests (like users contesting a speedy deletion that I made) include all the information that I need to act on them
  • Other messages can be left with a minimum of bother.
I'm sorry that you didn't find it useful. All I can suggest is that you bypass it in future by clicking on the link back to User talk:Stifle (this page) and leaving a message in the traditional way. Stifle (talk) 14:32, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review request

I wish to challenge the deletion of a page that you deleted.

  • The page title is Plurality (company).
  • I have read the reason for deleting the page and I feel it was incorrect because I am currently working on data about it. Plurality is a real company, which currently develops the most advanced multicore processor in the world (as I know of), no one (including Intel) is even close to its capabilities. They solved the shared memory problem, which is a huge problem in the world today.

I really don't think the deletion was right.

Please consider restoring this article. Gnumer (talk) 14:38, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Articles on Wikipedia require citations from reliable sources independent of the article subject. Such sources might include news coverage (but not press releases) or academic journals. Do you have any such sources? Stifle (talk) 14:41, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Yes i have. Most of them are in Hebrew but:
The data is taken from their website.
Gnumer (talk) 14:54, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Very well, I'll restore this article and list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion for a community decision. Stifle (talk) 15:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
I think there is enough reliable sources in the page. Gnumer (talk) 09:43, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
You need to make that point at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plurality (company). It won't be seen here. Stifle (talk) 09:51, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

You deleted the page Ser-Rek

I wish to challenge the deletion of a page that you deleted.

  • The page title is Ser-Rek.
  • I have read the reason for deleting the page and I feel it was incorrect because INSERT REASON HERE.
  • The following sources back up my claim:
    1. SOURCE 1 Ser-Rek are two very real person, relevant to the Washington, DC graffiti scene.
    2. SOURCE 2 The information backing up these two persons is published in a book by Roger Gastman.
    3. SOURCE 3 Some of the members of H.O.A. Hoods of Art currently have work on diplay at the Smithsonian Institute of Art.

Please consider restoring this article.

I would also like the reason why it was deleated. Thank you, Xemola Xemola Xemola —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.99.255.42 (talk) 17:33, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. In future, please sign your messages by typing ~~~~ at the end.
Ser-Rek was deleted under criterion 7 (under Articles) of our criteria for speedy deletion because it appeared to be an article about a person which didn't indicate why it was important or significant. Please see WP:BIO for details of what might show notability. If you think that these criteria are met, please explain which one and provide citations from reliable sources to back up your claim, and I will consider undeleting it.
You may alternatively file a deletion review request.
The sources you provided are not specific. Please cite a specific book, website, newspaper, etc., and provide a URL to where I can verify it for myself if possible. Stifle (talk) 19:16, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Marc Lee

I wish to challenge the deletion of a page that you deleted.

  • The page title is Marc Lee.
  • I have read the reason for deleting the page and I feel it was incorrect because INSERT REASON HERE.
  • The following sources back up my claim:
    1. SOURCE 1

Marc Lee is a very important Artist. His works are part in most fames contemporary art museums as well as exhibited in biennales and galleries around the world. His Artworks reflect the visions and limits of our information society in an intelligent and artistic manner. He is doing new media art projects since almost 10 years exceptional successfully. We are dealing with an exponent of that scene of young designers and developers who, in a radical way, exhaust the possibilities of the Internet. As such, they extend the discussion of the new media art much like video art did in the late 80's. As Pipilotti Rist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pipilotti_Rist is the most famous video Artist in Switzerland, Marc Lee is most famous new media artist in Switzerland.

    1. SOURCE 2

Since 26. Feb. 2006 there is the Germen version of Marc Lee at wikipedia http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Lee Please consider restoring this article. Hauil Boshara Hauil Boshara (talk) 18:56, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia can't cite itself. Do you have any sources from newspapers or books? Stifle (talk) 19:16, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Books:

Articles, Newspapers about "Breaking The News - Be a News-Jockey":

Articles about "Loogie.net":


Projects of Marc Lee: http://www.1go1.net/

CV of Marc Lee: http://www.1go1.net/index.php/Main/CV —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hauil Boshara (talk • contribs) 20:16, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Those don't appear to be reliable sources. You can make an appeal against the deletion at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Stifle (talk) 20:30, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Stifle/Archive_0908d&oldid=1139372624"