User talk:TheParanoidOne/Archive2

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

Deleted image from Dioxin entry

Hello I am still far from expert at this system and take it that your talk page may be used to contact you. I realize you are doing your best to abide by being careful with images. However the image you deleted was from all indications a perfectly good example of fair use of citation of a single chart from a scientific journal article.

The problem seems to be that Wikipedia did not have a clear "category" to put it into. The image you KEPT online, is from EPA so it was under "published by US government" category.

But I could find NO category that said "fair use of a published academic journal article" and Wikipedia did not have any obvious way to add a category, and in fact it looked like just leaving it uncategorized might even be ok. The now-deleted image can be found here:

And is a chart from May 2001 study by Arnold Schecter et. al.,

Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A, 63:1–18

Could you please upload it back and indicate for me what to do next time a fair use inclusion of a single chart, diagram, or figure from a published academic peer reviewed journal is uploaded?


Harel (barzilai at gmail dot com)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Harel (talkcontribs) 22:43, 5 November 2006

Responded. --TheParanoidOne 23:16, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Parham Nassehpoor's deleted foto

Hi Paranoid One,

I have the licence by the foto owner Parham Nassehpoor himself and wrote on 11/28 at referring "missing tag for Parham_Nassehpoor_Persian_Tar_01.jpg":

"Hi, yesterday the owner of the foto sent his permission for a cc-by licence to the German Wikipedia as you can check at Can you transfer it to the English version? Regards, --VulpesE 19:56, 28 October 2006 (UTC)"

But I got no answer. Can you please explain me why you deleted it even before 14 days and can you upload the foto again by this licence?

Regards, -- 19:15, 30 October 2006 (UTC)


Thanks very much for the info. To be honest it was as I clicked the "save" button that I noticed that I had misread the notice, I thought it said it was illegal in England. This might explain why I posted it in the first place, and why I promptly deleted it :-). Thanks anyway, I will read that page as soon as I've finished my Maths... --Aceizace 22:52, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

No problem. :) --TheParanoidOne 22:58, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Deletion summaries

Hi, I have noticed that you often provide only a very short abbreviated deletion summary when you delete pages (like "a7" "nn-bio" and similar). Please keep in mind that most users do not know all of Wikipedia's speedy deletion criteria by heart. Please consider providing a brief "plain English" explanation without relying exclusively on "CSD jargon". Additionally linking to the relevant criteria so people can read it in full can also be useful, for example [[WP:CSD#A7]]. This will help a "layperson" better understand why something was deleted when looking at the deletion log.

Most browsers have a autocomplete or other "form filling" features that allow pre-prepared boil plate texts to be inserted into web forms with just a few keystrokes. This is useful for inserting detailed deletion summaries without having to type out the same things over and over. Please consider looking into it. Thanks. --Sherool (talk) 15:29, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Deleted article Tom Buscaglia: The Game Attorney

Hey Paranoid one...

Why was this article quick deleted? The Article was deleted last August but was completely rewritten in accord with Wikipedia policies and was appropriate for inclusion.

Is there any way for me to retrieve it for my own uses?

Why was there no notice or discussion?

Is there a procedure to challenge your unilateral action?

thb at Gameattorney dot com


Thombusc 06:09, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

"Tom Buscaglia: The Game Attorney" was deleted by myself because it was a redirect to a non-existent page, as mentioned by this deletion log entry. This is a perfectly valid deletion as it matches criteria R1 of Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion.
This broken redirect was created because that article was moved to "Tom Buscaglia" by Ace ofspade (talk · contribs), which was subsequently deleted by Crzrussian (talk · contribs). You will have to ask him/her why it was deleted.
Hope that helps. Let me know if you have further questions. --TheParanoidOne 10:31, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Your deletion of "Tawny-colored-domestic-longhaired-cat.jpg‎"

I took this picture. I uploaded this picture. The image is copyright to me. It is clearly stated in the image's info that I have released the image into public domain. There's your copyright status. Thank you. Teh Rae 03:25, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

AMENDMENT TO EARLIER POST: Deleting images that have copyright clearance for use on Wikipedia

I am a journalist and a lecturer in media law - including copyright issues. I know and understand the law of copyright. I also understand the penalities for breach of copyright. Consequently, when I post an image on Wikipedia, I know what I am doing. I also take cogniscence of Wikipedia's own polices and rules. Why then, when I have taken such care do you and others like you remove images the copyright of which you have no exact knowledge?

Why should I bother continuing to contribute material or even consider consider donating money to a project such as this when someone who obviously knows less than me about copyright interferes in ignorance with my work.

Make no mistake, I am not against anybody editing my work. If someone can add or make better then great. I am also in favour of having all images or text which breach someone else's copyright removed. I am a copyright holder myself and would not want my material stolen - for that is the correct term using copyright material without permission.

I have written to the management (or whatever they call themselves) of Wikipedia about this. I would ask that in future when "patrolling new pages" you do so from an informed position and not one of ignorance. Looking beneath my justifiably irate words, I see that I am not the only one with whose visual material you have interfered. Wikipedia needs to give people such as yourself proper instruction in the laws of copyright before letting loose. Or stop you from interfering at all. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 21:53, November 29, 2006 (UTC)
Apologies: I forgot to add my name. - Brenmar 30 November 11.24am GMT

You'll be delighted to learn that having received a response from the Wikipedia information team, I may now publish the aforesaid picture as they understand it is cleared for us. They admitted that the " licensing section does not appear to have a category for publicity pictures issued for general use, however ... the fair use rationale that should be applied". - Brenmar

64kb long article voting template

Hi, do you have any suggestions for this discussion? --Sadi Carnot 00:41, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


If this image was a photograph of Quanah Parker (d. 1911), it is likely in the public domain. Could you please undelete it for a proper review? ˉˉanetode╦╩ 07:32, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Done. --TheParanoidOne 11:02, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, from the looks of it this image was taken in the 19th century. I'm fairly certain that it is in the public domain. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 11:45, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

TS-MA2mod.00 Moebius Zero on deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of TS-MA2mod.00 Moebius Zero. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 22:45, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

India University Stub Catergory

I was editing Thailand University Stub Catergory using India as a template, and I wrote over the India University Stub Catergory. No malice intended....

-Asfandyar 02:26, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Space tree


A deletion log search reveals you deleted Space Tree on November 25, but I don't see it in the proposed deletion discussion archives. Considering this was a long article that had a lot of work put into it, why was it deleted? If the page was blank or had some problem, looking back in the history should reveal a good copy.

Your reply is appreciated.

--Rgb9000 04:01, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I didn't delete it. In fact, my name doesn't appear anywhere in the deletion log entries for the article. --TheParanoidOne 11:53, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Whoops! Terribly sorry, must have been the entry before or after when I did my search earlier.


Speedy deletion of photos

You recently deleted a picture I posted because I did not include copyright details. I recently uploaded some pictures to the Tenacious D page and I am worried they will be deleted. I am a bit of a n00b and would appreciate some help in citing the copyright, in that I know they have a right to be on the page, but I do not know how to express it properly.

Please respond and help me set the copyright status.

Ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions and someone should be able to direct you towards the appropriate copyright tags. --TheParanoidOne 18:29, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Killer Mike

Your recent edit to Killer Mike (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 07:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of the PROPHIX Post

I believe you recently removed PROPHIX as a wikipedia posting. I would like to discuss why and attempt to put it back on Wikipedia. You can contact me at [removed]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 03:59, 7 January 2007

I did not delete that page, as the deletion log for that page shows. In fact, I haven't ever made an edit to that page either. I have removed your email address above, to stop it being harvested by spambots. --TheParanoidOne 11:04, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of the Ecourier Article

We have a big problem. I just checked and this article is deleted. You deleted it (rightly) because there wasn't any content. However, there was as of a few months ago. You can verify the previous content by looking at the Internet Archive entry [1] Current as of march 2006. It appears the article was deleted for G11 but this was an article describing the facts of the company and in my opinion the administrator acted innapropriately. I have left a message on his talk page steel359 but would appreciate you looking into this as you were the last person to delete the article. Thanks! jaybregman

Your Deletion Review entry is about eCourier. I deleted ecourier which was a redirect to the (then deleted) eCourier, and is therefore a valid deletion under CSD criteria R1. I have no comments to make regarding the deletion of ecourier as I was not involved with it in any way. --TheParanoidOne 10:16, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Brandeis University Images

You deleted this as a "speedy deletion" despite the fact that I clearly indicated on the page that explicit permission was granted by the university and I am awaiting a Wikipedia confirmation number.

In your haste, you have basically vandalized a page that dozens of people have been working on for years. How about now spending some TIME and restore the image and undo the damage you have done?


Alight 22:37, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Replied. --TheParanoidOne 23:20, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, but no hostility was indented. For some reason, people have been whacking various pics in the Brandeis article in the past few weeks and I've been spending way too much time cleaning up the mess. Thanks. Alight 23:28, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


I just posted a picture Don_Hings.jpg and got the tags wrong. While I was revising the tags, you deleted the image. I'm impressed with how speedy you are, but perhaps you could be a tad less speedy and give us n00bs time to read the warnings and help links that Wikipedia gives us. Half an hour is not sufficient, especially when the warnings imply that we have somewhere on the order of days to a week to fix it up. The image was definitely allowable (I happen to be the copyright holder, so I can state that with certainty), but it takes a bit longer than you've given me to figure out the best way to handle it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BlueStraggler (talkcontribs) 23:49, 3 January 2007

Pictures in Giog article

Please undo the deletion of pictures in Giog article, I drawed those pictures myself in Microsoft Paint, of course they do not have copyright. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kakarukeys (talkcontribs) 16:53, 5 January 2007

speedy del of Mohammad Munaf

can you delete Mohammad Munaf so I can move Mohammad Munaf (Iraqi) there? all it is is a redirect page... Timmmy! 11:09, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll do it once you have retargeted all the links that point to the cricketer, as per Special:Whatlinkshere/Mohammad_Munaf. --TheParanoidOne 11:14, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


Could you please un-delete Image:1022.jpg. I took this image, so I am the copyright holder to it. thanks, dictouray —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dictouray (talkcontribs) 00:12, 30 January 2007

Responded. --TheParanoidOne 06:44, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks you. I have the right image tag on it now, right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dictouray (talkcontribs) 05:10, 2 February 2007

Yes. --TheParanoidOne 11:40, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Image:Crestghs.jpg

You deleted a logo of a high school at that I uploaded from the high school's website and which I modeled after another high school's logo in the same town. High School logos have fair use here, don't you think? Would you care to delete this school's logo as well? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MitchGans (talkcontribs) 02:12, 20 February 2007

I deleted this image because it was marked as {{untagged}} for more than seven days, which is one of the criteria for speedy deletion, specifically I4. If you like, I can restore the image and give you a chance to provide the information requested above - ie. source information and an appropriate copyright tag. Let me know if you want me to do this. --TheParanoidOne 23:11, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, that would be most welcome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MitchGans (talkcontribs) 00:02, 22 February 2007

Denílson Pereira Neves

Nice job removing copyrighted photos from wikipedia, I do however have a concern. Please check, when deleting photos and removing them from articles, to see that there wasn't a free photo in the article prior to the (like in Denílson Pereira Neves) addition of the unfree one. Thanks, Yonatan (contribs/talk) 14:42, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Joseph F. (Skip) Ryan

Did you delete the article Joseph F. (Skip) Ryan? Could you explain why? Thanks, Jhuntermar 22:16, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I deleted Joseph F. (Skip) Ryan as it was a redirect to a non-existing page. This is a valid speedy deletion reason. I did not delete the target for the redirect, ie. the article itself. The target (Joseph Ryan) was deleted after a deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Ryan which (from a brief scan through) seems to indicate that it was deleted becuase he wasn't notable enough. Hope that helps. --TheParanoidOne 05:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, that helps. Jhuntermar 22:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Bee GNU/Hurd

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Bee GNU/Hurd, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. mms 20:50, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not TheParanoidOne, but am watching his page. What is the difference between that template and an AfD discussion? --GargoyleMT 22:56, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Timescale and severity. A prod is for something that is most likely an uncontraversial deletion candidate but isn't quite speedy deletion worthy. Due to being uncontraversial, it (in theory) wouldn't warrant a seven day discussion which is what an AFD would be. Though I haven't been around for ages and this may not be correct any more. :) (Oh, and Hi!) --TheParanoidOne 20:30, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Siberian (linguistics)

In the List of Wikipedias, Siberian/North Russian and Сибирской are listed. I wanted to understand what the "Siberian language" is and am very slowly translating it from the Dutch page. I've read through the deletion log prior to establishing the translation as an article & decided to contact the deleters before proceeding. The most recent one, Mangojuice, is on holiday, according to the userpage. In order of most recent deletion to first, there's User:Ronline, User:Mangojuice, you (User:TheParanoidOne), User:Xoloz, User:Alex Bakharev, User:Xezbeth, & User:Everyking. The last change was almost a year ago. Now, Siberian Wikipedia has the 80th most articles at 7 214. I thought you were the last contactable person to delete as an article rather than as a re-direct, so I came here first and want to know how I should approach the others.

It seems there have been many anti-Russian and anti-Siberian people having vehement arguments over this. Siberian seems to be a strong Russian dialect in the infancy of becoming an actual language. This conlang stage though seems very messy & the most vocal constructs of it do not seem to have a "clean political slate". Nevertheless, I would really like to have a Wikipedia article in English to explain the Siberian dialect(s) and some place in Wikipedia to explain the conlang even if it's on only on the dialect's page as a subsection. Hopefully, wherever the conlang is discussed -- I hope an NPOV is used -- the list of Wikipedias can link there instead of to an empty page, which seems unprofessional.

BTW, lately online people've been taking my approach as antagonistic, even though I don't want to hurt or offend anyone. I am not used to the online community any more. Please, give me the benefit of the doubt & try to look at what I mean as a suggestion or a seeking of advice, but not a flame. Thecurran 05:45, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Kiki - Alice Prin

Would you tell me what happened to her image? I found 3 on Alta Vista plus the cover of her memoirs, but on her page here it indicated you deleted a JPG of her. Why? Thank you, Shir-El too 01:51, 21 October 2007 (UTC) Sorry! Found another one. Thanks anyway, Shir-El too 01:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Alice Prin photographs

I also question the deletion of the lead photograph for the Alice Prin article. The other photograph is the one with a questionable status and is likely to be a copyright infringement. Please provide your rationale for the removal and, for the retention of the questionable one. Prefer you to reply here, as it will be watched for a response. 83d40m 01:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Alice Prin photographs (cont'd)

Hello there. It's been quite a while since I've looked at Wikipedia, let alone edited it, so you'll have to refresh my memory. Exactly which image/article are you refering to? Looking at the revision history of the Alice Prin articles, I've never made an edit to it. Please elaborate and I will see what I can do.

(Despite your request, I'm responding here as it seems unlikely that you will still have my talk page watched more than a month after your comment there). --TheParanoidOne 01:25, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Alice Prin photographs (further)

Thanks -- The lead photograph of the article for Alice Prin went missing from the commons on September 10, 2007 and of course, went into a default format on the page. This was a photograph of Prin with a veiled hat, looking backward with her arm forming a triangle below her head. The image had been the lead image of the article since January 2003 and is still among GoogleImages of Alice Prin as an image in our commons, if you want to refresh your memory. I contacted you about this because when it went missing from the commons, the deletion from the commons had your signature.

Once an image is deleted from the commons is there no way to have any dialogue about the removal or reinstatement?

What was amazing to me was that this image was removed when there has been a constant chatter about the copyright infringement of the color image of Prin before the mirror since its insertion in December 2006 -- clearly the photograph is in color and the guidelines I have seen indicate that color was introduced commercially in 1935. That established a probable earliest date and I removed the image once. Guidelines note that photographs prior to 1923 are allowable. The editor who had inserted it argues against the probable date, without documentation, claims it is black and white, and reinserted the image. Not inclined to warring, I reasserted my objection and left it for others to judge.

I think that the image before the mirror deliberately creates a link to a commercial site, which also would be a violation of guidelines. Now a second image from the same commercial site leads the article. It is of a woman holding a jug, also without documentation and, even stating that it is not known who the subject is -- much less its date. Don't know how that can be appropriate for the lead image for an article and I'd even prefer the article without images until the copyrights expire because there are plenty available on the web for readers to pursue without compromising our integrity. There are paintings of Prin that could be used readily for a lead image.

Sorry for the lengthy explanation -- any assistance or advice you can provide would be appreciated. I'll keep checking here for your response. -- 83d40m 15:13, 12 November 2007 (UTC)