User talk:east718/Archive 24

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please contact me on my talk page.

Archives

Current Late 2004 and onwards March 2006 and onwards November 2006 and onwards July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 December 2008 January 2009 February 2009 March 2009 April 2009 May 2009 June–July 2009 August–December 2009 January–June 2010 July 2010 and onwards

Deletion review for User_talk:Posturewriter

An editor has asked for a deletion review of User_talk:Posturewriter. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:24, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Sneagator.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Sneagator.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NanohaA'sYuri^{Talk, My master} 18:05, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Loveless (manga) - Aoyagi Ritsuka.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Loveless (manga) - Aoyagi Ritsuka.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NanohaA'sYuri^{Talk, My master} 20:02, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Loveless (manga) - Agatsuma Soubi.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Loveless (manga) - Agatsuma Soubi.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NanohaA'sYuri^{Talk, My master} 20:05, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Loveless (manga) - Hawatari Yuiko.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Loveless (manga) - Hawatari Yuiko.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NanohaA'sYuri^{Talk, My master} 20:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Loveless (manga) - Shinonome Hitomi.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Loveless (manga) - Shinonome Hitomi.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NanohaA'sYuri^{Talk, My master} 20:19, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Loveless (manga) - Aoyagi Seimei.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Loveless (manga) - Aoyagi Seimei.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NanohaA'sYuri^{Talk, My master} 20:22, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Loveless (manga) - Akame Nisei.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Loveless (manga) - Akame Nisei.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NanohaA'sYuri^{Talk, My master} 20:25, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Lost

I noticed that you were one of the admins who protected Lost (TV series). I recently noticed that there was another series called "Lost", at Lost (2001 TV series). Per WP:NCTV#Additional disambiguation, the first one should really be at Lost (2004 TV series), but the page is protected from moves. Could you assist in this matter?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:08, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I think this should be discussed at Talk:Lost (TV series) or Wikipedia:Requested moves as I think this could be a rather controversial move. In a perfect world, we'd go by WP:NCTV#Additional disambiguation all the time, but I think that this is an instance when we don't, and it should stay where it is. Here's why:

1. The UK or US versions of the 2001 Lost was when it aired, and still as of today, less popular in terms of viewer ratings, reception and critical commentary than the current Lost series.
2. The current Lost series's Wikipedia article also gets more hits than the 2001 Lost article.
3. If Lost (TV series) is moved to Lost (2004 TV series), what do we do with Lost (TV series)? Make a dab page? There's no point because Lost works fine for that. Do we redirect it to Lost (2004 TV series)? If so, again we might as well leave it as it is.

I think a second hatnote pointing to Lost (2001 TV series), as well as Lost is the best thing. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 03:56, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Saraya logo deletion

Dear East718,

I have been working lately on a research article about one of the regional properties and tourism development companies called SARAYA. To make sure that I'm following Wiki guidelines I wanted to test the article on my sandbox section. I was surprised that the logo image was deleted on 13 February 2009 by you. I do understand the concerns behind deleting such an image, however I would really appreciate if you can explain the reason and what exactly shall I do to guarantee no deletion in the future since I'm almost done of the article and looking to publish it on Wikipedia.

Best regards

Loai H.Taha —Preceding unsigned comment added by Loai taha (talk • contribs) 06:10, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of File:AmarilloDusters.png

Can you explain to me why this file was deleted on January 8, 2009? The edit summary states, "(CSD I5: Non-free image that was not used for more than seven days)". Nevertheless, the image appears in the article Amarillo Dusters as of December 30, 2008. The link to the image is still in the article as of March 29, 2009. The image was never removed from the article since there were no edits between these dates. →Wordbuilder (talk) 13:47, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I am still awaiting a reply. This deletion was invalid and should be reversed. →Wordbuilder (talk) 15:30, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi, east appears to be away and hasn't made any manual edits since March 18. It'd probably be faster to ask another admin or to post at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Cheers, --aktsu ^(t / c) 11:19, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I must have misunderstood a bot edit as a manual one. Thanks for the help, aktsu. →Wordbuilder (talk) 13:34, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for File:SSDJafarSwingsTowardSpaid.png

An editor has asked for a deletion review of File:SSDJafarSwingsTowardSpaid.png. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Int21h (talk) 21:02, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Please undo your deletes. At no time did 7 days pass when the material was not being used, and thus the deletion reason is invalid. Int21h (talk) 00:02, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for File:MihaitaConstantinResistingArrest.png

An editor has asked for a deletion review of File:MihaitaConstantinResistingArrest.png. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Int21h (talk) 21:02, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Please undo your deletes. At no time did 7 days pass when the material was not being used, and thus the deletion reason is invalid. Int21h (talk) 00:02, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Welcome Back

East, I´m glad you have recovered from your illness and are contributing once again to make Wikipedia better.

I am hoping you might take a second look at the BLP of Ray Joseph Cormier. It has undergone many changes since it was created in 2006, and being the subject of it, I think how it is currently is the pits and there is nothing I can do about it to improve it. There is so much information to draw on. It survived 2 AfDs in February alone, and if it is not improved to reflect the many references that support it, it may not survive the third attempt to have it expunged.

The problem has been the references. Being pre-internet, they cannot be seen online unless an Editor has a subscription to some pay News site, but some of them can be seen here: [1]

For the last 9 months I have stood guard over it fending off all attackers who never made suggestions for improvement, and there have been many. I have been waiting and hoping a talented Editor with experience in writing BLPs will take a real interest in improving it. Finally, I thanked God so much, a supremely qualified Editor came forward and made an excellent start which can be seen here: User:Sarcasticidealist/Cormier Compare how he re-wrote the Conversion section using the same references. I did mail photocopies of all the original references that support the article to him.

Something major has happened to User:Sarcasticidealist and he has withdrawn from Wikipedia altogether after making so many quality contributions, and cannot be reached by phone or e-mail. I am at a loss to understand why?

My immediate dilemma is, I would like to see the Sarcasticidealist/Cormier version of Conversion in the main article. If I do it, I will be immediately embroiled in disputes over COI. Will you or someone else please help? Peace

DoDaCanaDa (talk) 13:07, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Seizure-inducing Maynard pic

I decided, with you in mind, to check for new pics on Flikr and I hit the mother load with a guy that apparently works with Maynard and license all his stuff CC-BY. Check it. لennavecia 02:37, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

"CSD I5: Non-free image that was not used for more than seven days"

You have deleted a number of images that were used for more than six months with the rational that they "were not used for more than seven days." This is in fact false.

Please restore the logos per Wikipedia's stated legal policies. Ad.minster (talk) 07:49, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean by "legal policies", but there's nothing that applies here, so we'll just skip that. I went through all of the disputed deletions and File:No More Heroes.jpg is the only one that had not been tagged as orphaned for a week. Therefore, it's the only one that has been restored. لennavecia 05:56, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Lolcat deletion summaries

Hi East. I've made a post at a current arbitration case, and I've mentioned a deletion you made in May 2008 of a 'secret' page using a lolcat edit summary. Would you be able to look here and clear up what happened there? Were you using the page and deletion log summaries generated by MiszaBot, or was something else going on there? I'm asking Misza13 about this as well. Thanks. Carcharoth (talk) 09:56, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

718_Bot incomplete model and action; produces make-work

File:Irina_Roublon_ArmsLogo.png seems to illustrate a case where 718_bot has an incomplete model of the WP network semantic. The result is a series of make-work for other editors.

I'm unclear why the conversion done here is essentially (unconditionally) preferred (wrt lossy data, efficiency, or presumed re-use), but whatever gets a bot off. Its design should, however, account for the effects of the replacement, and avoid spreading bother.

In this case the original uploaded .jpg file is a fair-use image. The new file for the image, the .png, by my assessment, properly indicates the history and properly clones the WP:FU claim of fair use licensing. So far so good.

The bot, however, failed, to properly check that, in consequence, the original fair-use image had been orphaned (which I would guess, through the continued action of the bot, is eventually in all cases a certainty), and failed to simultaneously apply the called-for template. Thereafter ensues an editor noticing the orphan, templates, notices, all separated from the causative agent.

It seems to me the issue goes a little deeper: Orfur doesn't seem the correct designation at all — this is an intentional, complete replacement by an alias (when it works right). Orfur is not fit for that case, but rather for the case where an agent deletes the last article's use of an image — one would expect no use of the image through any alias. This latter case bears a surface similarity to the former 718_bot case, but 718_bot introduces a semantic distinction for which no accommodation was provided before deployment. That distinction carries over to a difference wrt the bother it causes editors: the first should be transparent and involve no administrivial make-work, while the second is a matter requiring attention. — Dushenka (talk) 07:50, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Your input needed

As the original blocking admin for Emacsuser (talk · contribs), I thought I should give you a heads up on his latest actions. I've left him an unambiguously-worded warning on his talkpage, noting that I'd seek admin intervention if he keeps re-adding this blog-sourced BLPvio material. //roux   18:25, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of File:Fossil logo.svg

Hello, you are the admin who deleted the File:Fossil logo.svg as it was an orphaned fairuse image. However the reason it was orphaned is because of unnoticed vandalism at the Fossil, Inc. article which removed the image. (check the reversion history). Is it possible to restore the original image description page? I would re-upload the image itself but I do not remember the source information (it's been a long time since I've even thought about this file). Thanks. [|Retro00064|☎talk|✍contribs|] 02:21, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, it just popped in my head that it came from www.brandsoftheworld.com! Sure enough, it did. I can now reupload it myself! [|Retro00064|☎talk|✍contribs|] 23:04, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Spymac

Hey, you deleted this page 16 or so months ago as an expired prod. I'm not 100% sure it deserved the heave ho (in 2007 it wasn't relevant anymore, but it kinda was a few years earlier) but I'd really like to take a looksee at what was there before. Any chance you could throw a copy of the former content into my userspace, or shoot me an email with it? Thanks.--CastAStone/^{/₵₳$↑₳₴₮ʘ№€} 03:18, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Your email is not enabled. It's pasted to User:CastAStone/Spymac. لennavecia 05:40, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Joseph Priestley House

I notice that the system reports that you protected the Joseph Priestley House article on April 17 with an expiration date of April 19. Unfortunately, the article is not protected, and there is a fair amount of anonymous IP users vandalizing it. Comments? Truthanado (talk) 17:41, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

The article was automatically move protected as being Today's Featured Article. Articles from the main page are not protected, as it discourages new editors. لennavecia 14:31, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi there —Preceding unsigned comment added by SofaKingSuper (talk • contribs) 22:12, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand, then what is the point of "protecting an article" that isn't protected? Today's SkyTrain featured article was protected too, but instead it's getting vandalized big time by anonymous IPs. Greg Salter (talk) 01:37, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Again, the article was automatically move protected. Meaning, it cannot be moved to a different title. All featured articles on the main page, with very few exceptions, are left without any edit protection, to avoid discouraging any potential new editors who may use the article as their first edit. This, of course, means the article will see a great deal of vandalism, as it is the most viewed article of the day, but it may also see many first-time edits. This is all explained in the link I provided above. لennavecia 12:18, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Matthias Stormberger

East, why was the Matthias Stormberger article deleted? He was recently featured in a network documentary, and upon running an internet search of the name I've discovered he's gotten a lot of "press". I was amazed to find out there's nothing directly pertaining to him in Wikipedia. I for one would like to see a Wikipedia article on the man and his writings, and was dismayed that whatever was contained in the pre-existing one had been deleted, along with any relevant discussion. What gives? Slik Wiki (talk) 09:06, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

The article was deleted in November 2007 as an uncontested WP:PROD for being "of doubtful importance". If that has changed in the past year and a half, the article is open for recreation. لennavecia 12:24, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm going on strict intuition here as how to proceed, as I've failed to come across any user-friendly directions anywhere on this site. But I would like to thank you, Jennavecia, for responding to my first post in an intelligent and supportive manner. Now pardon me while I save this to the thread (I think), and try to determine if I'm simply wasting my time here or what. Slik Wiki (talk) 02:50, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay, it looks like the spaghetti noodles are sticking to the refrigerator. Jennavecia, I suppose the most intelligent questions to ask you at this point are: 1) If the original data generated by the deleted article and any attendant discussion is available by any known ways & means, and 2) How an article is "recreated". I disagree with you wholeheartedly that there is any question regarding the perceived "importance" of the individual known occasionally if not more often as "Matthias Stormberger". I have come to the conclusion after very little research into the subject that the fundamental question must be whether he existed at all, and if there is any veracity to these writings attributed to him. And if the answers to both of these questions are found to be "yes", then as much importance must be attached to him as was to Nostradamus, if not Jesus Christ

Uhm, well. To be included here, there needs to be significant coverage in reliable sources. So, whether he exists or not (I have no idea who he is or may be) isn't necessarily important as long as he's been discussed in third-party sources. Now, as for your questions. I can retrieve the deleted data for you, if you wish. Most likely, if that is what you want, I will restore the article and move it into a subpage of your user space, such as User:Slik Wiki/Sandbox or something similar. You can work on it there and then request the opinion of myself or others as to whether or not it is ready to move into article space. That said, east isn't around much these days, so if you would like additional help, feel free to drop your questions on my talk page. I know this project can be overwhelming at first, but don't worry, it gets easier as you make your way around. لennavecia 04:31, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Jennavecia, thank you for your consideration in this matter. That would be wonderful if you could do that for me & would be highly appreciated. As far as Matthias Stormberger (AKA Matthias Lang, Muehlhiasl, the forest prophet, etc.) goes, reaction to the name appears to be virtually universal: "Who dat?" Apparently he was an 18th/19th century Bavarian cowherd and seer who predicted with uncanny accuracy & detail the nature, timing, and outcome of World Wars I, II, & III, the Great Depression, etc. Most of his manuscripts were lost to antiquity, burned by the Nazis during their rise to power in the 1930s. There has actually been quite a bit of third-party discussion regarding him--although most of that appears to take the form of simple "parroting"--and both he & his prophecies have been featured prominently in commercially-successful nonfiction and network documentaries. In my view, the bulk of any perceived "importance" attached to him at this point would have to revolve around his highly specific & detailed prophecies pertaining to "the third and final universal conflagration" (ie: World War III), which scholars analyzing his works concluded would kick off sometime between 1990 & 2010. Thanks again, and I will direct any further traffic regarding this issue, if there is any, to your own talk page as per your suggestion. Slik Wiki (talk) 11:51, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

It's in your user space now, at the link above. Let me know if you have questions. :) لennavecia 14:24, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I was hoping to have to not go here, but here goes -- just exactly where in my "user space" is it? I see that I can click on the link at the heading of this discussion and go to a blank, editable recreation page. Are you saying that page is resting somewhere on my own personal space? If so, then where, and how can I access it through my own personal area, without having to come here to east's talk page and click on this link? Also, is the content of the original article irretrievable? I thought it would pop up with the page. Is it gone, so that when you undelete the article you're only left with a blank page, and are forced to start from scratch? I know I'm hopeless--sorry. Slik Wiki (talk) 18:21, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay I am getting there, I think I'm probably good to go. Thanks. Slik Wiki (talk) 18:38, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I missed this on my watchlist before. Apologies. User:Slik Wiki/Sandbox. I'll post this on your talk page as well. لennavecia 19:31, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Regarding company logo of ABS

Hi, I would like to bring your attention to the logo used in the ABS article. This logo is no longer used by ABS, neither in their website or their services nor for the companies affiliated to ABS. The new logo which is being used can be found in the company's website www.eagle.org. The differences are: (1) Removal of the registered trademark symbol, (2) removal of the tagline "AMERICAN BUREAU OF SHIPPING AND AFFILIATED COMPANIES" and (3) simplification of the eagle symbol. Can the present image be edited to show the changes? Or should a new image be uploaded? Please advise. Thanks. ChrysalSnowlax (talk) 04:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Upload a new image, replace all uses of the current image (you can locate all uses by selecting the "What links here" link in the toolbox of the left sidebar), then tag the unused image as orphaned (using {{subst:orfud}}). Let me know if you need any further assistance. لennavecia 04:37, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. I am not sure if the logo given in the website is in the public domain or not. Moreover, in the Terms of use page, the use of the logo has been restricted. However, it is mentioned that personal, informational, communication and educational use of the website is allowed. I've read fair use of images policy but I am not sure if I can upload an image from that website. The logo presently used in the ABS article has been obtained from uscg.mil. However, it is obsolete and needs to be updated. Should I set this aside until a logo is published in any of the public domain websites? Please advise. ChrysalSnowlax (talk) 10:30, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Any use of the logo would be fair use, which is currently allowed on Wikipedia. لennavecia 11:50, 4 May 2009 (UTC)